“Civil War” comments on important political issues

What if the two biggest states, California and Texas, both seceded from the United States and caused another American civil war? That’s what “Civil War” explores. But, unlike what the trailers marketed it isn’t necessarily an action-packed war film. The film rather is more of a political commentary on the effects of war on normal citizens. 

The movie is a bit slow in the first half as we are introduced to four journalists who plan to  go and visit the White House to meet the president before he is killed or captured by the seceding forces called the Western Forces. We get to see not just commentary on war but also very interesting commentary on the role of journalists in society. But, all of this can easily turn into a bore quite quickly as it’s a long stretch without any action and only this type of commentary. 

The second half is more of an action war film as we see the Western Forces attack and raid the White House. It had amazing visuals and really encapsulated the chaos of being down in a battlefield. The gunshots were a bit too loud at moments but this may vary from theater to theater.

The movie is a bit difficult to follow as important details are skipped through very swiftly. For example they only quickly state that California and Texas seceded and formed the Western Forces, which is the whole premise of the film, through a short speech by the president that’s very easy to miss.

Overall, the movie was an excellent film on journalism and the dangers of war. It does have action but really isn’t an action war film like the way it was marketed which may throw people off when first watching. It’s a solid “Oppenheimer”-like film with a spectacular ending.