Year: 2024

Runtime: 109 minutes

Director/Writer: Alex Garland

Starring: Kirsten Dunst, Wagner Moura, Stephen McKinley Henderson, Cailee Spaeny, Nick Offerman, Jefferson White, Nelson Lee, Evan Lai, Sonoya Mizuno

By Morgan Roberts

“Our mission is to report these horrors of war with accuracy and without prejudice. We always have to ask ourselves whether the level of risk is worth the story. What is bravery, and what is bravado? Journalists covering combat shoulder great responsibilities and face difficult choices. Sometimes they pay the ultimate price.” – Marie Colvin

In Alex Garland’s latest film, “Civil War,” the filmmaker explores the horrors of war from the perspective of the journalists who document it. The film follows photojournalist Lee (Kirsten Dunst) and Joel (Wagner Moura) as they plan to travel from New York City and Washington D.C. to interview the president before his ultimate downfall. Joining the pair is veteran journalist Sammy (Stephen McKinley Henderson) and young photographer Jessie (Cailee Spaeny). 

The film is complicated, though not apolitical. It is a political statement to say that the killing of civilians is bad. It questions what human cost is acceptable and what is considered to far. The film personally reminded me of real-life journalist Marie Colvin. Colvin covered wars across the world, including the Sri Lankan Civil War where she would lose her eye. Despite witnessing the worst of humans, Colvin continually put herself in harm’s way to report what people were enduring; to make sure the world was not turning away from those suffering during war. Colvin would be killed in Syria in 2012 along with photojournalist Rémi Ochlik. 

Time and again, the film focuses on what press enduring during conflict. How they put themselves in harm’s way to ensure that people know what is actually happening. To me, this makes for a stronger film. Rather than focusing on the megalomaniacs who start wars, or the many opportunists who exploit the pain and suffering of others, we are following the people who are documenting the events. The complicated, harrowing events. 

It is the performances of the film that aid it in its examination of existence in a war zone. Spaeny, who was in last year’s “Priscilla”, demonstrates the naivety and optimism of young journalists. She gives layers to Jessie who is eager in capturing the history unfolding before her eyes, yet still having to process the horrors of war. The film gives character actor Henderson an interesting role; as the most senior journalist Sammy has seen it all. And still, Henderson manages to give Sammy a kindness we as an audience need. While levelheaded, he manages to be pragmatic without being alarmist. He brings a calming presence in the most heightened moments. 

Moura portrays who you picture when you hear the word “journalist.” Joel is calm, collected, witty, charming. Yet, taking that idea as the foundation, Moura pushes Joel further. There are moments which break Joel, and Moura ensures those moments are portrayed with the same assiduousness as his more relaxed moments. But, the film belongs to Dunst. Dunst has always been able to command a film. She disappears in each role while having the familiarity that comes with working in film since the early 1990s. Dunst as Lee is powerful and complicated. There are times she moves through the world numbed with pessimism, defeated by current events, and other moments coming alive at her work. 

The quartet work incredibly well together. You feel their camaraderie. They greatly care for each other, both the characters and the actors. Everyone brings their A game and, in turn, giving their fellow actors the space they need for their performances. The best duo is Dunst and Spaeny. Like Lee seeing something in Jessie, it is evident that Dunst saw something in Spaeny – Spaeny would book “Priscilla” thanks to Dunst and her relationship with filmmaker Sofia Coppola.  That relationship between the actors being mirrored, in some fashion, in the character gives the film a heart it greatly needs.  We need some hope in order for us to invest in the film. 

“Civil War” is by no means perfect. From some of the issues of the journalists not having bullet proof vests or earplugs, to some of the narrative choices, mainly the way in which the foreshadowing “pays off,” in a way, towards the end of the film. 

That said, even though the film is complex and challenging, it is a powerful film in its viewpoint. Centering on journalists in conflicts forces us to examine humanity from the lens of objectivity. It is a rich film that has a lot to say. Not everything will feel true, but it will force its audience to reflect on how we consume conflict and how we react to it. It is not an easy task, but we can at least recognize the courageous work of journalists who force us to confront the horrors of war.