>"I was born in a small village. I was still a child when we were raided by soldiers. Foreign soldiers. Torn from my elders, I was made to speak their language. With each new post, my masters changed along with the words they made me speak. With each change, I changed, too. My thoughts, personality, how I saw right and wrong. Words can kill."
Skull face’s plan was moron level but would’ve been somewhat decent if the vocal cord parasites were to kill everyone EXCEPT the English speakers. But Gen Xer nips love to half assedly virtue signal against anything American.
In so far as ending war and poverty? No not really. A globalized one world government, one world culture would be spiritually pretty dissatisfying, but would remedy territorial and ethnic conflicts.
I feel so sad this can’t be done completely unironically in current year. There’s even homosexuals complaining about Hulk Hogan head butting and spitting on the USSR flag
Idk anything about this movie but I’m trying to pick up the plot through context clues itt? Do they really make it a point that they’re from Hong Kong? Kinda funny the writers to be so unaware of regional cultural differences. Hong Kongers are just behind South Koreans as de facto Americans culturally. Did they just pick Hong Kong because the name sounds chinky ?
it's not a movie where the causes of the war are important. people here can't conceptualize a war film without knowing which side they are meant to "root" for so they are sperging out. the main focus is exploring what it means to be a war reporter in a war zone and what the impacts of a civil war actually are.
it's implied that Fat Damon is a member of the Florida Alliance, the third side of the civil war (not the President or the Western Forces) which gets the least attention in the film, meaning him being the most evil is another part of the film trying to make the politics irrelevant.
the film is clearly similar in its intent to Ingmar Bergman's "Shame".
>turns out he was just asking this because he wanted to know what state they were from >he was ok with all them because they were US citizens born and raised in US states >however, he didn't like the foreign chinese guys, so he killed them
Gayest bait and switch from a trailer I've ever seen.
The biggest mistake this movie made was being too scared to take any side at all. If they had just leaned hard left or hard right it wouldve made it worth talking about. Instead they pussyfooted around everything in a desperate attempt not to make ANYBODY mad. How absurd to make a movie called CIVIL WAR as palatable and tepid as possible, with almost no message at all beyond a vaguely implied "hate bad". It's the worst kind of slop. It's not hard hitting, it wont inspire anybody or change anybody's mind about anything at all because it's too scared to make any kind of argument at all. It's a wet noodle of a film.
I cant believe that was their intention because dont think it did that effectively at all. They just did what war photographers do in any conflict. Even the kid taking dunst's picture at the end didnt strike me as particularly cold blooded at all. It's literally what dunst would have done if the situation was reversed and would have wanted her to do. It had 0 impact whatsoever. The only thing that could've been a sloppy attempt to make this journo-bad argument was the final scene when the dude asks the president for a quote, but if your counter argument would be that the journo should've done something to save him then that's just unrealistic. At no point was any journalist trying to twist or spin the truth, so I fail to see how you can make the argument that the movie was anti-media.
>he forgets the scene of Dunst in the bathtub regretting every single prize-winning photo she ever took
It's like you weren't even watching, as evidenced by your post. Did you forget about all the scum journos celebrating the jihad bombing back at their posh NY hotel too?
>he forgets the scene of Dunst in the bathtub regretting every single prize-winning photo she ever took
How is that anti-journalist? Everybody who sees war has some level of PTSD and it doesn't mean she regrets being a journalist just because memories give her the sadness. >Did you forget about all the scum journos celebrating the jihad bombing back at their posh NY hotel too?
Yes. I forgot most of this movie as soon as it ended.
the message of the movie is that any real civil war would be horrendously and senselessly violent and cruel
you wanting the movie to "take a side" is emblematic of the infantile, sheltered mindset that encourages or thinks of civil war as a reasonable option
there are no sides when some opportunistic predatory psycho kills and rapes members of your family just because society has broken down into chaos and the violence done upon you and your family will just be another statistic in the end
taking a side would be legitimizing one side as having the right to wield violence against the other
a real civil war would not be some "we're le based taking out the traitors!", most people would be living in absolute terror and for what? because your little trump daddy wasn't allowed to steal an election in a free and fair election? get a grip and a girlfriend you loser
>there are no sides when some opportunistic predatory psycho kills and rapes members of your family just because society has broken down into chaos and the violence done upon you and your family will just be another statistic in the end
It did not show this. You had to make up an exciting scenario in your mind because the movie was so lacking.
And just because I want a movie to take a side doesn't mean I am on any particular side or that I want the movie to speak for me. But you probably have a tough time understanding nuance so I wont bother trying to explain that to you.
you must have autism to interpreted my scenario as having been in the film
civil war is bad
point is if you're a person that fantasizes in any way about civil war or encourages it, you are a psycho who is supporting a state of society where senseless violence and cruelty would skyrocket. It would not just be democrats and minorities in cities suffering, every neighborhood in america would be schismed with innocents dying
>I wanna see a good movie = I WANT ACTUAL CIVIL WAR
Yeah okay, buddy.
2 months ago
Anonymous
you were implying it was a bad film because it didn't take a side, when it taking a side would be incredibly moronic
2 months ago
Anonymous
By "take a side" I obviously dont mean it in the meta sense of liberal or conservative. But having at least SOME characters on a particular explicitly defined side within the world of the movie wouldve been better for the movie. It wouldve given some perspective which this movie severely lacked. Its whole purpose was to be meta, to make you feel like this is imminent or in fact is happening right now. It was cheap and it had nothing to say for itself at all, because none of the characters had anything to say for themselves.
2 months ago
Anonymous
"perspective" in a civil war doesn't matter when it comes down to your innocent sister getting shot in the head because of a stray bullet or some psychopath. Civil war is not some lofty, abstract thing about ideals ans the reasons to fight for one side or the other. For 99% of people all it means is violence and death and that the side they're on is purely coincidental by where they happened to be living when civil war broke out
Go on, tell me your way to portray sides in the movie without it, in any way, relating to the meta sense of liberal or conservative in current America
the movie made a very deliberate choice to not validate civil war schizos in any way
You know the black Boogaloo Boys guy in the film? That's you. Spoiler: he cries like a b***h and dies because he was a moron who thought he was invincible because he knows what trigger discipline is from Cinemaphile memes. >inb4 block of text
Thanks for proving your IQ is lower than a Black person's.
The kind that asks why Alex Garland's own government is still jailing Julian Assange (for doing investigative journalism), in collusion with the anti-American USG.
Budget of $50 million. It's projected to make $20 million opening weekend. Yeah, I guess you're right. It's flopping. But A24 doesn't care, they will make back their expenditures with MaXXXine this summer.
>BuT I WaS BoRn HeRe!!
The kind that doesn't wear fruity Elton John glasses.
¿Que?
White
>"I was born in a small village. I was still a child when we were raided by soldiers. Foreign soldiers. Torn from my elders, I was made to speak their language. With each new post, my masters changed along with the words they made me speak. With each change, I changed, too. My thoughts, personality, how I saw right and wrong. Words can kill."
Skull face’s plan was moron level but would’ve been somewhat decent if the vocal cord parasites were to kill everyone EXCEPT the English speakers. But Gen Xer nips love to half assedly virtue signal against anything American.
Murdering English would solve 90% of the West's problems.
In so far as ending war and poverty? No not really. A globalized one world government, one world culture would be spiritually pretty dissatisfying, but would remedy territorial and ethnic conflicts.
>white only
>black guy stealing
everytime
I feel so sad this can’t be done completely unironically in current year. There’s even homosexuals complaining about Hulk Hogan head butting and spitting on the USSR flag
it was stupid back then too but the boomers weren't old and senile yet
As if the anti-white agenda hasn't been rampant since the 50's
Non
>the kind that lines his clothes with tannerite
So what was the right answer?
Being from Florida, Missouri, or Colorado were acceptable. Hong Kog was not.
Any of the 50 U.S. states.
He killed the Hong Kong fricking shits, so there wasn’t a right answer.
Idk anything about this movie but I’m trying to pick up the plot through context clues itt? Do they really make it a point that they’re from Hong Kong? Kinda funny the writers to be so unaware of regional cultural differences. Hong Kongers are just behind South Koreans as de facto Americans culturally. Did they just pick Hong Kong because the name sounds chinky ?
The movie doesn't try to be realistic at all. California and Texas are on the same fricking side.
it's not a movie where the causes of the war are important. people here can't conceptualize a war film without knowing which side they are meant to "root" for so they are sperging out. the main focus is exploring what it means to be a war reporter in a war zone and what the impacts of a civil war actually are.
it's implied that Fat Damon is a member of the Florida Alliance, the third side of the civil war (not the President or the Western Forces) which gets the least attention in the film, meaning him being the most evil is another part of the film trying to make the politics irrelevant.
the film is clearly similar in its intent to Ingmar Bergman's "Shame".
>it's implied Fat Damon is part of the Florida alliance
Back up your claim.
israeli american
Is there only a cam version out online?
>turns out he was just asking this because he wanted to know what state they were from
>he was ok with all them because they were US citizens born and raised in US states
>however, he didn't like the foreign chinese guys, so he killed them
Gayest bait and switch from a trailer I've ever seen.
The biggest mistake this movie made was being too scared to take any side at all. If they had just leaned hard left or hard right it wouldve made it worth talking about. Instead they pussyfooted around everything in a desperate attempt not to make ANYBODY mad. How absurd to make a movie called CIVIL WAR as palatable and tepid as possible, with almost no message at all beyond a vaguely implied "hate bad". It's the worst kind of slop. It's not hard hitting, it wont inspire anybody or change anybody's mind about anything at all because it's too scared to make any kind of argument at all. It's a wet noodle of a film.
If you were paying attention, you noticed this was a film that was depicting journos as scum profiting off of misery.
I cant believe that was their intention because dont think it did that effectively at all. They just did what war photographers do in any conflict. Even the kid taking dunst's picture at the end didnt strike me as particularly cold blooded at all. It's literally what dunst would have done if the situation was reversed and would have wanted her to do. It had 0 impact whatsoever. The only thing that could've been a sloppy attempt to make this journo-bad argument was the final scene when the dude asks the president for a quote, but if your counter argument would be that the journo should've done something to save him then that's just unrealistic. At no point was any journalist trying to twist or spin the truth, so I fail to see how you can make the argument that the movie was anti-media.
>he forgets the scene of Dunst in the bathtub regretting every single prize-winning photo she ever took
It's like you weren't even watching, as evidenced by your post. Did you forget about all the scum journos celebrating the jihad bombing back at their posh NY hotel too?
>he forgets the scene of Dunst in the bathtub regretting every single prize-winning photo she ever took
How is that anti-journalist? Everybody who sees war has some level of PTSD and it doesn't mean she regrets being a journalist just because memories give her the sadness.
>Did you forget about all the scum journos celebrating the jihad bombing back at their posh NY hotel too?
Yes. I forgot most of this movie as soon as it ended.
the message of the movie is that any real civil war would be horrendously and senselessly violent and cruel
you wanting the movie to "take a side" is emblematic of the infantile, sheltered mindset that encourages or thinks of civil war as a reasonable option
there are no sides when some opportunistic predatory psycho kills and rapes members of your family just because society has broken down into chaos and the violence done upon you and your family will just be another statistic in the end
taking a side would be legitimizing one side as having the right to wield violence against the other
a real civil war would not be some "we're le based taking out the traitors!", most people would be living in absolute terror and for what? because your little trump daddy wasn't allowed to steal an election in a free and fair election? get a grip and a girlfriend you loser
>there are no sides when some opportunistic predatory psycho kills and rapes members of your family just because society has broken down into chaos and the violence done upon you and your family will just be another statistic in the end
It did not show this. You had to make up an exciting scenario in your mind because the movie was so lacking.
And just because I want a movie to take a side doesn't mean I am on any particular side or that I want the movie to speak for me. But you probably have a tough time understanding nuance so I wont bother trying to explain that to you.
>It did not show this.
How do you think knock-off Matt Damon got all this bodies into the mass grave? Thanks for proving you're a paid anti-shill.
you must have autism to interpreted my scenario as having been in the film
civil war is bad
point is if you're a person that fantasizes in any way about civil war or encourages it, you are a psycho who is supporting a state of society where senseless violence and cruelty would skyrocket. It would not just be democrats and minorities in cities suffering, every neighborhood in america would be schismed with innocents dying
>I wanna see a good movie = I WANT ACTUAL CIVIL WAR
Yeah okay, buddy.
you were implying it was a bad film because it didn't take a side, when it taking a side would be incredibly moronic
By "take a side" I obviously dont mean it in the meta sense of liberal or conservative. But having at least SOME characters on a particular explicitly defined side within the world of the movie wouldve been better for the movie. It wouldve given some perspective which this movie severely lacked. Its whole purpose was to be meta, to make you feel like this is imminent or in fact is happening right now. It was cheap and it had nothing to say for itself at all, because none of the characters had anything to say for themselves.
"perspective" in a civil war doesn't matter when it comes down to your innocent sister getting shot in the head because of a stray bullet or some psychopath. Civil war is not some lofty, abstract thing about ideals ans the reasons to fight for one side or the other. For 99% of people all it means is violence and death and that the side they're on is purely coincidental by where they happened to be living when civil war broke out
Go on, tell me your way to portray sides in the movie without it, in any way, relating to the meta sense of liberal or conservative in current America
the movie made a very deliberate choice to not validate civil war schizos in any way
>"Yeah, well, a white one, fellow burger."
bong
A REAL AMERICAN BROTHER
The kind with trigger discipline, Fudd
lol you'd be the first to die in a shit hits the fan scenario
>Me? I'd just give them a sarcastic look.
You know the black Boogaloo Boys guy in the film? That's you. Spoiler: he cries like a b***h and dies because he was a moron who thought he was invincible because he knows what trigger discipline is from Cinemaphile memes.
>inb4 block of text
Thanks for proving your IQ is lower than a Black person's.
>You know the black Boogaloo Boys guy in the film?
Implying I watch goyslop lol
The brown kind.
The kind who wants to ban the 2nd amendment
As-salamu alaykum, brother. I'm an Uber-American. Please give me a 5 star rating, inshallah. Eid mubarak.
“The kind who doesn’t want to get shot and thrown in a mass grave.”
*stabs you and throws you in a river*
>A real American
>And a real human being
>being
>being
The cool kind, TKD thoughbeit
The kind that asks why Alex Garland's own government is still jailing Julian Assange (for doing investigative journalism), in collusion with the anti-American USG.
Looking forward to this movie flopping so the shill threads will away. Shalom have a nice shabbos
Budget of $50 million. It's projected to make $20 million opening weekend. Yeah, I guess you're right. It's flopping. But A24 doesn't care, they will make back their expenditures with MaXXXine this summer.
>The one who's born in Oakland, butthole.
The kind that crushes beer and eats pussy.
Just repeat whatever he says but in a moron voice
>south american, I've came here to make a study on obesity and diabetes