MovieChat Forums > Civil War (2024) Discussion > Subtle lib propaganda

Subtle lib propaganda

posted 6 months ago by joseph (25)
50 replies | jump to latest

- President is in his third term, reference to Trump supposedly
- President abolished the FBI, reference to Trump supposedly
- Antifa massacre referenced, inference is that antifa were attacked without provocation
- The only real bad guys seen on screen are three white dudes killing people for not being American enough and killing a guy for being Chinese
- All of the press team is minority and/or women
- Black woman is who kills the president

Disappointing from Garland

[–] mobocracy (891) 6 months ago

If you asked people who were historians or political scientists what would likely cause an American civil war in the present era it would end up being things related to present day political divisions, barring some external conflict or natural disaster. It's not going to be about the designated hitter in baseball, Taco Bell vs. Chipotle, Ford vs. Chevy.

This makes it easy to project your own contemporary political conflicts into this movie, even though the movie doesn't do anything at all to explain the nature of the conflict or how Texas and California wind up in a dominant alliance against the Federal government.

[–] nte1igentwon (956) 2 months ago

The President conducted airstrikes on civilians, was in a third term, and disbanded the FBI. One would assume those are the actions of a tyrant. If you can't piece together the cause, I don't know what to tell you.

[–] mobocracy (891) 2 months ago

It's kind of up to the viewer, though, to connect the dots between those actions and the underlying cause of the civil war. Sure, airstrikes on civilians, unconstitutional third terms, and dismantling Federal law enforcement are likely to validate a civil war, but they're also more or less predictable actions during a civil war.

And its not like a normal President just woke up one day and decided to carpet bomb Pittsburgh or disband the FBI and a civil war resulted. It happened because of some other underlying political conflict which was never discussed or revealed in the film.

I'd argue that the order of events was more like disbanding the FBI, claiming a third term, and then bombing civilian populations as part of civil war. But the kickoff is some kind of political conflict the film doesn't reveal.

[–] Kendricks (2239) 6 months ago

Watched it last night. Not subtle at all, but less on the nose than usual leftist movies these days.
Still a shit movie one way or another. It was like the fever dream of a leftist who imagines civil war without having any clue about anything.

[–] joseph (25) 6 months ago

Yeah, maybe less on the nose is a good way to describe it, but at least more subtle than a lot of other movies these days.

[–] Kendricks (2239) 6 months ago

*cough* Don't Look Up *cough*

[–] TheArgentinian (7058) 6 months ago

Interesting how you associate all of those things with Trump and Republicans.

[–] joseph (25) 6 months ago

Interesting how you want to pretend to be unaware of a debate that basically anyone with even a passing knowledge of politics and cultural issues in the entire western world, and certainly the U.S., knows ...

[–] TheArgentinian (7058) 6 months ago

what debate?

[–] emori (3661) 6 months ago

It was very obvious that president was trump-like figure who usurped power and went on third term. And then few states rebelled and went to war to kick him out.

What I didn't like is that they created new flag with two stars. While mission should have been to kick out usurper and return to normalcy.

[–] tlm555 (52) 3 months ago

you're so damn demented

[–] nte1igentwon (956) 2 months ago

Cry harder. Fascism can come from the left or the right.

[–] MoviesStillSuck (518) 2 months ago

Nothing subtle about it. This film is an absolute mess, and the liberal point of view is front and center.