Uncategorized
https://blacknerdproblems.com/civil-war-review/
Alex Garland’s Civil War presents a near-future dystopian United States at a time when the United States exists, in reality, as an increasingly dystopian colonial empire at the precipice of collapse. It uses the presently divisive state of American politics to draw audiences in to watch a movie about how much more divisive it can be. It’s a very polished and well-designed movie that delivers a masterclass on neutrality during wartime at a time when, in reality, neutrality enables widescale oppression and terrorism. It talks about any number of things but doesn’t explain anything.
Civil War follows a crew of journalists documenting the potential final days of the United States as we know it. The United States is now divided into four factions. Texas and California have seceded from the country to form the Western Forces and are gathering troops to take on the US military. The journalists are heading to the last stronghold of the federal government, Washington, DC – as it is planned to be besieged by the Western Forces.
There aren’t too many plot holes in this movie, but the ones that exist are looming and overshadow any of the intensity, sentimentality, and emotion this movie wants to leave audiences with. Like, ‘Why is this conflict even happening?’ At no point in the movie does it become clear how these two states (which have no grounded explanation for a political allegiance or alliance) would agree to a coup. We’re given a little information from an interview with the President (played by Nick Offerman) with a quickfire session of questions about a third term and drone strikes on American soil (which already happened IRL). We can start and stop right there, but we’re not.
Civil War follows Lee, Joel, Sammy, and Jesse as a ragtag group of journalists en route to the last real news story left. Joel (played by Wagner Moura) and Sammy (acting legend Stephen McKinley Henderson) are reporters who explore the nature of asking the questions that make people think rather than coming to the door with their own biases. Lee (Kirsten Dunst) and Jesse (Cailee Spaeny) are photojournalists, looking to take the picture that makes people ask questions in place of asking the questions themselves.
The art of journalism lies in its integrity. That ‘integrity’ is achieved by leaving a bias behind and seeking ‘the’ truth. Not one truth. Not ‘your’ truth. A universal truth. That truth is missing from this movie. It’s a piece of fiction, so we shouldn’t go looking for the answers to life in it. However, the movie is grounded in and was marketed as (blame the trailers for that) a reality so close to our own that it comes as a slap in the face of the audience’s intelligence to be faced with the absence of that truth. Instead, we follow the inaction and neutrality of their profession. Through the lens of journalism, Civil War dodges every truth about the ties between politics and war. It treats them the way we would a natural disaster, without any real questioning as to why it ever came to pass. It gets chalked up to some phantom dictatorial event that led to a President’s third term (and the disbanding of the FBI) and never explored beyond that.
The performances are great, so many great actors in a small cast make it easy for them to play. Jesse Plemons as a nationalist xenophobe in rose-colored glasses makes the skin crawl in the best way. That man plays no games in any role. Another thing it does well is go hard for neutrality using the ‘intimate distance’ of photography. Lee digs for the shocking, impactful image that can define a moment while Jesse looks to capture the capturing of that same moment. Civil War does well with defining the distance some people have to the urgent issues they are facing. Some of the strongest scenes of the movie are punctuated by stills ‘taken’ by Lee and Jesse during climatic moments.
Parables around things like neutrality are damning as the film hit theaters while an active genocide, global collusion to empower the genociding forces, mass protests, increased police violence, and the least believed-in American political candidates in an election year are all front and center in the public consciousness. More damning still is that despite a theme exploring the relationship between the ‘intimate distance’ of photography and the neutrality of journalism throughout the movie, it still finds time to highlight Black characters being brutalized onscreen with greater detail than most.
Despite everything it pretended to bring to the table with the trailer, Civil War has no teeth. In its attempt to be a sounding board to the times, it ends up being kind of oblivious as a piece of media. There’s a scene early on where a Black man is being beaten, restrained, and set on fire with Lee standing a few feet away clicking pictures. It left me with a feeling in the pit of my stomach. An ache and pang I’ve felt when I’ve seen police violence enacted on civilians surrounded by throngs of people with phones who outnumber the police. The look in the eye of someone who knows they can get away with murder because of the inaction or neutrality of others brings me to this Max Eastman quote every time: “People who demand neutrality in any situation are usually not neutral but in favor of the status quo.” Civil War feels so much like a demand for neutrality, lest we lose our blessed, stable ‘normality’.
There was such an opportunity for this movie to talk about substantive and pervasive concerns. Instead, it sits like a status quo parable at a time when the status quo is so harmful. Maybe it came out at a bad time. Maybe it isn’t self-aware enough to know that. Maybe folks tried to capitalize on real-life pain and suffering to make a point they weren’t equipped to make. Either way, this movie comes across as a feckless attempt to say…something… and misses the mark.
Want to get Black Nerd Problems updates sent directly to you? Sign up here! Follow us on Twitter, Facebook, Youtube, and Instagram!
The post The Truth has No Teeth: ‘Civil War’ Review appeared first on Black Nerd Problems.
Alex Garland’s Civil War presents a near-future dystopian United States at a time when the United States exists, in reality, as an increasingly dystopian colonial empire at the precipice of collapse. It uses the presently divisive state of American politics to draw audiences in to watch a movie about how much more divisive it can be. It’s a very polished and well-designed movie that delivers a masterclass on neutrality during wartime at a time when, in reality, neutrality enables widescale oppression and terrorism. It talks about any number of things but doesn’t explain anything.
Civil War follows a crew of journalists documenting the potential final days of the United States as we know it. The United States is now divided into four factions. Texas and California have seceded from the country to form the Western Forces and are gathering troops to take on the US military. The journalists are heading to the last stronghold of the federal government, Washington, DC – as it is planned to be besieged by the Western Forces.
There aren’t too many plot holes in this movie, but the ones that exist are looming and overshadow any of the intensity, sentimentality, and emotion this movie wants to leave audiences with. Like, ‘Why is this conflict even happening?’ At no point in the movie does it become clear how these two states (which have no grounded explanation for a political allegiance or alliance) would agree to a coup. We’re given a little information from an interview with the President (played by Nick Offerman) with a quickfire session of questions about a third term and drone strikes on American soil (which already happened IRL). We can start and stop right there, but we’re not.
Civil War follows Lee, Joel, Sammy, and Jesse as a ragtag group of journalists en route to the last real news story left. Joel (played by Wagner Moura) and Sammy (acting legend Stephen McKinley Henderson) are reporters who explore the nature of asking the questions that make people think rather than coming to the door with their own biases. Lee (Kirsten Dunst) and Jesse (Cailee Spaeny) are photojournalists, looking to take the picture that makes people ask questions in place of asking the questions themselves.
The art of journalism lies in its integrity. That ‘integrity’ is achieved by leaving a bias behind and seeking ‘the’ truth. Not one truth. Not ‘your’ truth. A universal truth. That truth is missing from this movie. It’s a piece of fiction, so we shouldn’t go looking for the answers to life in it. However, the movie is grounded in and was marketed as (blame the trailers for that) a reality so close to our own that it comes as a slap in the face of the audience’s intelligence to be faced with the absence of that truth. Instead, we follow the inaction and neutrality of their profession. Through the lens of journalism, Civil War dodges every truth about the ties between politics and war. It treats them the way we would a natural disaster, without any real questioning as to why it ever came to pass. It gets chalked up to some phantom dictatorial event that led to a President’s third term (and the disbanding of the FBI) and never explored beyond that.
The performances are great, so many great actors in a small cast make it easy for them to play. Jesse Plemons as a nationalist xenophobe in rose-colored glasses makes the skin crawl in the best way. That man plays no games in any role. Another thing it does well is go hard for neutrality using the ‘intimate distance’ of photography. Lee digs for the shocking, impactful image that can define a moment while Jesse looks to capture the capturing of that same moment. Civil War does well with defining the distance some people have to the urgent issues they are facing. Some of the strongest scenes of the movie are punctuated by stills ‘taken’ by Lee and Jesse during climatic moments.
Parables around things like neutrality are damning as the film hit theaters while an active genocide, global collusion to empower the genociding forces, mass protests, increased police violence, and the least believed-in American political candidates in an election year are all front and center in the public consciousness. More damning still is that despite a theme exploring the relationship between the ‘intimate distance’ of photography and the neutrality of journalism throughout the movie, it still finds time to highlight Black characters being brutalized onscreen with greater detail than most.
Despite everything it pretended to bring to the table with the trailer, Civil War has no teeth. In its attempt to be a sounding board to the times, it ends up being kind of oblivious as a piece of media. There’s a scene early on where a Black man is being beaten, restrained, and set on fire with Lee standing a few feet away clicking pictures. It left me with a feeling in the pit of my stomach. An ache and pang I’ve felt when I’ve seen police violence enacted on civilians surrounded by throngs of people with phones who outnumber the police. The look in the eye of someone who knows they can get away with murder because of the inaction or neutrality of others brings me to this Max Eastman quote every time: “People who demand neutrality in any situation are usually not neutral but in favor of the status quo.” Civil War feels so much like a demand for neutrality, lest we lose our blessed, stable ‘normality’.
There was such an opportunity for this movie to talk about substantive and pervasive concerns. Instead, it sits like a status quo parable at a time when the status quo is so harmful. Maybe it came out at a bad time. Maybe it isn’t self-aware enough to know that. Maybe folks tried to capitalize on real-life pain and suffering to make a point they weren’t equipped to make. Either way, this movie comes across as a feckless attempt to say…something… and misses the mark.
Want to get Black Nerd Problems updates sent directly to you? Sign up here! Follow us on Twitter, Facebook, Youtube, and Instagram!
The post The Truth has No Teeth: ‘Civil War’ Review appeared first on Black Nerd Problems.
Ellen Shope-Whitley By Rayna Reid Rayford ·Updated April 24, 2024
How did a former hip-hop journalist without a bachelor’s degree land one of the most exclusive positions working for America’s first Black president?
The post Deesha Dyer Shares Journey From Community College To Coveted Career At The White House In New Book appeared first on Essence.
With so many X-Men characters from the Fox film franchise returning in Deadpool & Wolverine, can we expect to see Famke Janssen’s Jean Grey among them? Janssen previously stated she would not be back for the forthcoming film, but now she’s singing a more uncertain tune. Here’s what she had to say when speaking to the folks at Comic Book about a potential comeback as the host of the Phoenix Force in Deadpool & Wolverine:
I don’t know. I doubt it, but you never know. I mean, I didn’t expect to come back after dying as Jean Grey. I came back as the Phoenix [in 2006’s X-Men: The Last Stand], and I came back in flashback scenes in The Wolverine, and then in Days of Future Past.
It’s now been a decade since the actress portrayed Jean in Days of Future Past, which came out in 2014. Her role was recast with Sophie Turner for the pair of X-Men prequel films, X-Men: Apocalypse and Dark Phoenix. Nevertheless, fans have wanted to see the original Jean return ever since the altered timeline undid her death at the end of X-Men: The Last Stand. Why bring her and other dead X-Men back if not to use them in something down the line?
So far, the non-Hugh Jackman actors confirmed as coming back for Deadpool & Wolverine are all relatively minor players. We’re talking characters like Deathstrike, Pyro, Sabretooth, and Toad. But what about the main X-Men cast themselves? Patrick Stewart keeps hinting there’s more Professor Charles Xavier in his future. James Marsden has made similar hints about returning as Cyclops. Last year, Halle Berry showed off a photograph of herself in Storm’s signature white hairdo. If all of them return, then we imagine Jean Grey is coming back to the fold as well. We’re crossing our fingers for this Phoenix to rise from the ashes.
The post Could X-MEN’s Famke Janssen Return as Jean Grey in DEADPOOL & WOLVERINE? appeared first on Nerdist.
Content warning: gun violence.
When Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse came out last year, one of the concepts that it “introduced” was this idea of canon events (introduced insofar as codifying as a narrative storytelling mechanisms within the universe, not so much the concept of a canon event itself). The death of a loved one. The death of a cop figure. Certain fights with certain villains. Universal constants. Things that even across reality were steadfast and true.
And it got me thinking about my canon events. The incidents that shaped me as a person, that ingrained so deep into my being that they became a touchpoint for every action, whether consciously or unconsciously. And specifically, it brought up a particular incident, back in the late 2000’s (by which I mean 2007ish).
It was relayed to me that the boyfriend of my friend thought I was “the type of kid who’d shoot up a school.” This person had never met me before. This person who I would never meet in any capacity. And yet this person somehow managed to lodge a sentence that has been stuck in the back of my skull cap for several years to come.
You know the stereotypes I’m sure. The quiet, unassuming kid. Kept to himself. We talked about it in media all the time back then. It’s Pearl Jam’s Jeremy, a blending of a suicide and school shooting. It’s Warren from Empire Records in the final act. It’s Jimmy in one of the heavier episodes of Static Shock. It’s Jonathan in Buffy the Vampire Slayer in Earshot.
It was a time where we lived in the shadow of Columbine and Virginia Tech. Or rather the immediate shadow of Columbine and Virginia Tech. Twenty-five years later, we are still living in the shadow of Columbine. Fourteen years, still haunted by Virginia Tech. And those are just the two that happened to happen in April and the two that got me thinking about that single sentence fragment.
“The type of kid who’d shoot up a school.”
And somehow, the worst part of all of this is not the fact that it was said to me, but that it was said so casually and also by more than one person throughout the years.
I am in fact an introvert. I get overwhelmed by crowds of people, and I know that I am not inclined to violence, but not everyone knows me and nor do I expect everyone to know me, but that assumption is a wild one. The image painted, a terrifying one.
Hearing this dark future projection changed something in me. It did not break me, it steeled me in a way. I fashioned a resolve, a determination. I’m going to be undeniably better than the shadowy outline you see of me. I’m going to rise above this nonsense accusation. I’m going to be a better person out of sheer spite that someone would ever say that to me.
Now the public image of a shooter has certainly changed over the years. The conversation has become intertwined with talks of mental health. And I remember that shift well. I remember going to a 3AM showing of The Dark Knight Rises, getting home at 6AM, and then waking up a couple hours later to see that there was a shooting in a movie theater in Aurora, Colorado. Claims of being “The Joker.”
In 1988, Alan Moore penned The Killing Joke, one of the most iconic Batman stories for better or for worse, that detailed the sequences of events that broke the man who became the Joker. It was just one bad day. And maybe that is true in the world of comic books, where everything is in a heightened state of everything, where your name has an undue influence on whether you end up a villain or a hero.
But it’s just never one bad day. I can’t believe that a person can break that easily. Although, I can believe that the actions taken on a day can have a ripple effect. I can believe the actions have consequences that are permanent and heartbreaking. And I choose to believe that we can still choose to be better even when faced with horrors, both internal and external.
The mass shooting is both a trope and a dark reality we still reckon with. It’s the school shooting in the season 1 finale of The OA. It’s every cop and other type procedural as a kid or adult rages against a system, or a group, or an individual. It’s incels and MRAs and anti-establishment types.
It’s the news headlines. It’s the perpetrated violence of bullying. It’s the misconception that all of this could be mitigated with one good person at the right place at the right time with the right tool (in some cases, a gun. In some cases, proper deescalation training). It’s the sadness of knowing someone thinks you could be something awful. It’s the grit of trying to prove them wrong even though they never met you…and probably never will.
I have a bookmark buried somewhere with a quote from Edith Wharton: “There are two ways of spreading light: to be the candle or the mirror that reflects it.” And most days, I chose to be a beacon, a lighthouse, a stalwart source of maybe a foolish ideology that ‘it didn’t have to be like this.’ But there are also days where I choose conflagration, a cacophony of “how dare you place me anywhere in the vicinity of those people” and “what possessed you to say such a terrible thing to a person.”
When people think of that “that type of person” it has changed in some ways and in some ways it hasn’t at all. I can’t speak to the conditions of what it takes to break bad. I can only say that back in the late 2000s, someone said something so cruel and so callous that I haven’t forgotten and have made it a point to be a better person to spite them, specifically.
Want to get Black Nerd Problems updates sent directly to you? Sign up here! Follow us on Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, and Instagram!
The post It’s Never Just One Bad Day appeared first on Black Nerd Problems.