Filmmaker Alex Garland recently
discussed the premise of his film "Civil
War," which portrays a scenario where the states are united in an
effort to bring down a fascist president. Garland explained that this narrative
challenges viewers to consider a scenario where political polarization is set
aside for a greater cause, stating, "If
you cannot conceive of that, what you're saying is that your polarized
political position would be more important."
 |
| From left: Alex Garland, Nick Offerman, Cailee Spaeny, Wagner Moura, Kirsten Dunst, Jesse Plemons and Jojo T. Gibbs attend the Los Angeles premiere of A24's 'Civil War' at the Academy Museum of Motion Pictures on April 2. MONICA SCHIPPER/GETTY IMAGES |
In "Civil War," a team of journalists rush to Washington, D.C., to document the conflict as American citizens battle each other, while rebel forces converge on the White House. One surprising element in the film is the alliance between California and Texas, typically seen as politically opposed states.
Garland explained the deliberate
choice to unite these two states, stating it was done partly to avoid viewers
falling into reflexive, polarizing positions. However, he emphasized that the
main reason was to explore the character of the president in the film, played
by Nick Offerman, who has taken extreme measures such as disbanding the FBI,
using air strikes on American citizens, and serving as a three-term leader.
Garland further elaborated on the
significance of uniting California and Texas in the film, explaining, "Then it's saying that two states that have a
different political position have said, 'Our political difference is less
important than this.' And then the counter to that is if you cannot conceive of
that, what you're saying is that your polarized political position would be
more important than a fascist president.
Which, when you put it like that, I would suggest, is insane. That's an insane position to hold. So it's sort of an oblique commentary and I think that's how the film works in general. It's not explaining this stuff but it's also not avoiding this stuff."
Offerman noted that the
collaboration between California and Texas, forming the Western Forces in the
film, serves several purposes. One is to immediately establish that the film is
not meant to represent the current world as it is. Additionally, it reflects
the idea that in today's world, anything is possible and can happen quickly.
Garland originally wrote the story
in 2020 and finds it surreal to release it now, just six months before a major
2024 election. He commented on the sense of déjà vu, noting, "I think the film was written really not just
about this country, about a weird state we're in to do with division and
polarization and extremism, the things that flow from populism. At the moment I
wrote it, I don't think I imagined it would take four years to get to this
point, but also if it did take four years, that things would be so similar."
The film stars Kirsten Dunst, Wagner Moura, Stephen McKinley Henderson, and Cailee Spaeny as war journalists. Despite its intense subject matter, the cast downplays concerns that the film could incite real-life violence or political reactions.
Dunst emphasized that the film is
meant to spark conversations and allows the audience to interpret it in their
own way. She described it as non-partisan, leaning more towards being an
anti-war film.
Moura expressed his hope that the
film wouldn't incite violence, as that goes against its message. He clarified
that the film doesn't have a political agenda and can't be labeled as liberal
or conservative. Instead, it highlights the dangers of polarization and its
potential to lead to social conflict, which is problematic for democracies.
Offerman added that despite the online chatter before its release, the film is actually intelligent and well-crafted, making it difficult for anyone to legitimately criticize. He also mentioned that any comparisons between his character and Donald Trump never arose during filming, as the film is unrelated to real-life factions or politicians. He commended Garland for keeping the story free from real-life political references.
Offerman highlighted the film's
approach of appealing to a wide audience by avoiding overt political
references. He likened it to a great novel that is accessible to everyone,
encouraging viewers to consider the implications of heading towards war and to
reconsider the direction of the country.
Moura shared that the film had a
personal impact on him, prompting him to reach out to people with different
political beliefs and listen to their perspectives. He emphasized the
importance of dialogue and finding common ground, noting that differences in
political views should not lead to hate but should instead be opportunities for
discussion and understanding.
0 Comments