I Really Wish Civil War Did A Better Job Explaining What Started The War

Alex Garland’s dystopian war thriller Civil War provided a riveting narrative about journalists embedded at the front of a new war between the states, but I wish it had given just a bit more detail about how the new Civil War started. The heavy thriller marks production company A24’s most expensive project yet, and Civil War‘s ambitious and controversial storytelling matches the significant investment. Kirsten Dunst, Cailee Spaeny, and Wagner Moura star as two photojournalists and a reporter, respectively, who are headed to the final battleground of the now-well-worn conflict in the United States, Washington, D.C.

At the ending of Civil War, the conflict comes to a bitter conclusion, as Nick Offerman’s rogue dictatorial president was killed by soldiers from the Western Forces. It’s made clear that the president defying the Constitution and claiming a third term was among the chief factors that sparked the Civil War, but that still doesn’t clarify what led him to take such action, or what conditions existed in America prior. While I can respect Garland keeping the story focused on the journalists and not the war that they covered, I wish I had a bit more information about the conflict.

Civil War Not Explaining The Origin Of The War Hurt The Movie

It Provided Small Details, But No Real Backstory

Civil War provides some clues throughout its runtime as to why and how the new Civil War began, but it never explicitly discusses the origins of the war, or how the lines came to be drawn where they were when the movie began. In some ways, not explaining any of the war’s backstory ended up hurting the movie. I found myself asking “why” at many different moments during the movie’s main action; after watching the movie a second time, I realized that while wondering about the backstory, I was missing out on other key moments and themes.

In not providing any details about the war’s origins, Civil War also missed out on enhancing the backstories of the central characters as well. Kirsten Dunst’s Lee Smith is a renowned war photographer by the time the events of Civil War take place, but relatively little is revealed about the other characters’ histories. By digging into the origins of the war, the movie could have provided some intriguing insight into how Cailee Spaeny’s Jessie or Wagner Moura’s Joel came to be on the front lines, and where they might stand in regard to the conflict.

Alex Garland’s Reasoning For Not Explaining Civil War’s Backstory Isn’t Satisfying

The War’s Origins Don’t Matter For The Story He’s Telling

Alex Garland has been very open about what story he was attempting to tell with Civil War; it’s about the journalists, the people who are documenting the war, and as such they are neutral observers. The point that Civil War is trying to make is related to the consequences of polarization and division, and it very intentionally takes no political stance in order to keep the focus on the journalists. To Garland, what matters for the sake of Civil War is how these characters react and interact in the final days of a war that is all but exhausted, and what caused that war simply doesn’t matter.

While Garland’s desire for political neutrality is admirable in that context, that isn’t a satisfying reason to provide virtually no details about the war that the entire story centers around. Wanting to understand how something that has never felt more possible came to be is a perfectly natural line of thought for any American watching the movie, and Garland’s refusal to address it feels borderline stubborn. It acts as a point of frustration for myself and many others who enjoyed Civil War.