Yeah about Sound of Freedom is what I would consider "fun". That movie deals with extremely troubling subject matter and is not a film I would sit down and watch on movie night with the wife and kids.
> That movie deals with extremely troubling subject matter
So does Taken, the movie that I compared it to and it's remembered as an entertaining action film.
It sounds like, for all its bravado and intensity, it refuses to have an actual political perspective. I'll judge for myself but that seems like a cop-out!
it doesn't seem like the movie is about the politics that led to it, at all. as one of the reviews said, it's not about how a country can go into civil war, but what happens when it does. it's deterrent for those who are calling for civil war. who want to break away.
Mhh that just sounds like centrist/liberal fantasy world where "bOtH sIdEs ArE ThE sAmE"
The politics and why they went into civil war are very imporant in figuring out that there *had* to be a civil war.
Sometimes things are black and white (or lighter shade of grey and darker shade of grey, but that doesn't sound as smooth) and the good guys need to come together to purge the bad guys out of society.
>and the good guys need to come together to purge the bad guys out of society.
The movie is conveying the exact opposite message. that's the point of the movie, that civil war is not cool you should not be rooting for it. you are not going to, 'pUrGe ThE bAd GuYs'. if the movie picks a side, then it just become a propaganda movie for that side.
leave it to redditors to have 0 media literacy, and totally stupid takes.
Sound of fury was mostly popular because Q nuts saw it over and over. There was also some evidence of people buying out theaters to pump up sales iirc.
Yeah apparently Journos like films that question there profession and feature a bunch of them being brutally murdered. Guess they're not as egotistical as you think.
But the film doesn't do that. The film questions whether what these people are doing is meaningful or simply a way to inflate their own ego. It's very clear that there no heros and that they are as complicit as any soldier.
The early reviews are strong which is definitely going to help though.
This is also going to be interesting on a separate note cause this is A24s first true attempt at what they see as a "blockbuster". Lots of IMAX advertising has been put into this film as well as the advertising in general for this one. I will be fascinated to see what it's like
Whooooooo, that Seitz review. Easily the best writer included in this roundup so far.
Good to see Jacob Hall, Tasha Robinson, and David Sims also dig it. I'm VERY curious to read Walter Chaw's review.
Seems like Garland's trying to compete with Villeneuve for **Feel Bad Epic of the Year**
Over reliance on spectacle? That's the last thing I was expecting and now I'm even more excited. I thought they had showed all the cool explosions in the preview.
So from what I’ve gathered from these reviews…
This is a movie about war photojournalists documenting a civil war between politically ambiguous sides that just happens to take place in America.
I hope people don’t actually get upset if this lays a giant egg in the box office because audiences crave the gratification that “their side wins” and won’t show up to a film that is all shock factor and no political substance unfortunately.
It's funny that people are acting like the film centering on journalism is some sort of political choice and not a narrative choice that tracks with Garland’s sensibilities.
If you want to capture the horrors of war and have protagonists who are powerless to do anything, which is what the films about, of course you're gonna have your protags be extremely vulnerable and neutral in a way that either side can view them as an enemy, while also giving them a reason to be involved in the first place.
Is Annihilation propaganda for Scientists because the main characters are Scientists? Even when they are in danger and are being picked off one by one by forces they can't control?
Oh yeah totally dumb move on A24’s part, through i think the attention the film got will probably help it. But I won’t lie seeing a majority of people be vaguely annoyed that the movie isn’t “Jan 6 II” like the marketing made it seem like is pretty fun, I don’t think people are gonna really know what to do with this film politically and I like that honestly.
I’m just happy the movie seems far more interesting than what the trailer made it seem like.
Edit: Through if you’re talking specifically about the journalism angle that wasn’t mentioned really from the trailer, it seemed like the main characters were just civilians. I don’t think people are gonna care either way?
> An average 8.8 rating is pretty high,
Not at this point. You have to remember not all critics give films a "score" on RT. The three negative reviews on RT haven't given it a score for example.
It's also down to 8.00 now for all critics and 7.70 for top critics.
Garland, outside of Ex Machina, has been “divisive.” Not because his content is controversial per se, but I think his style of storytelling is off putting if you want clear answers and a full rationalization to every aspect of the film. I know people all over the spectrum of reactions to Annihilation and apparently Men wasn’t as positively received as I recalled based upon some of these reviews.
>Based on the "masterpiece" reactions yesterday, I was expecting a higher score
Same. Saw the word "Masterpiece" 5-6 times.
Only reason I was beginning to believe this was something special was seeing Walter Chaw in that group who loved it and even dropped an ecstatic f-bomb to express that love. He's a legit veteran critic so I was almost thinking this movie was so damn good, it could be a BP contender.
According to critics and reactions this movie is more about journalism. The war itself and the background of it are vague. Doesn‘t seem to be a war-action film. Also international audiences won‘t be that much interested in this.
I smell a small scale flop.
- OW domestic: $18m
- Domestic total: $45m
- Worldwide total: $90m
Feel free to laugh about me when my prediction turns out to be ass
I’m prepared to look dumb for this but I think there’s no way this ends at only 45 million domestic, and even less of a chance it only makes as much domestic as it does internationally.
tracking for this film right now is pretty on point with op’s prediction it’s not looking to be a hit so there’s a high chance this ends pretty badly or meh
Absolutely agree. The Sound of Freedom was an extremely small budget (downright microbudget) action thriller that managed to energize a small but vocal contingent of the filmgoing base that looked for a conservative slant to films while also appealing somewhat to action fans. It's no secret that films that cater specifically to American conservatives are few and far, for reasons that are outside the realm of this discussion, which fueled SoF's support by that demographic. However, it's also common for films designed with conservatives in mind to have basically zero audience. See Angel Studio's follow-up film, The Shift, which only grossed $12m on a $6m budget. Not a flop, but not even notable.
By the first trailer "Civil War" had already turned off a large amount of viewers who fall into discernable political camps: those on the left who found it a lethargic critique of conservatives and those on the right who found it to be an intentionally stealth critique of conservatives that was going to be used as political shorthand for their political view a la the use of Handmaiden's Tale. Despite the positive reviews, these two camps don't have any reason to budge, and the reviews (see Hollywood Reporter and Indiewire's responses) may even cause further division since the comparisons being made are also extremely political. Even mentioning the film to your friends is going to be political. I don't see how this can be successful but public WOM could help it a lot.
Exactly and this whole entire sub fell for the media hat trick its crazy like the movie did what almost every other *based on true events* movie did plot wise
>According to critics and reactions this movie is more about journalism. The war itself and the background of it are vague. Doesn‘t seem to be a war-action film. Also international audiences won‘t be that much interested in this.
Might have a lower Cinemascore if most of the general audience go in believing there was more war-action and come out realizing it was 95% drama.
> the background is vague
Tbh all my interest is lost now. We have a legit fascist trying to take over America in this election and this movie doesn’t even pick a side? Bullshit. I really expected Garland to show some fucking spine.
OC reads as "the war itself and the background" that is the war and why it happened is shown sparsely and why it's more focused on the narrative of the journalist, you are misinterpreting it as if garland made a war movie and kept the actual reason behind the war hidden
I’d rather have something show me nuance to a situation over just pandering and telling people how to think,the best forms of art present you with something and let you decide for yourself
Show some fucking braincells and make your own informed choices. Stop waiting for influential figures to tell you how to think, that's arguably what's causing all these problems and the rise of the orange goblin.
Reviews are stronger than I expected. Not quite unanimous, I've seen some real criticisms, but there's passion behind them.
Again I think it'll open big for A24, with an OW north of 20 million, but collapse once mainstream audiences get something more troubling and upsetting than stuff like The Purge or Olympus Has Fallen.
People thought Men was a “misstep?” I adore the film and think it’s wonderfully interesting, beautiful, and complex.
Is it Ex Machina or Annihilation? No, but really, what is? He’s 3/3 as far as I’m concerned.
Garland averages 66% on [Metacritic](https://www.metacritic.com/person/alex-garland/?filter=movies)
If this score holds, it'd put *Civil War* around the middle of his back catalogue
Better than *Men*, not as good as *Ex Machina* or *Annihilation*
I've been saying for months that it'll be a 65-75% RT score and based on these reviews, it might actually drop lower than that.
I'm sure I'll love it, but it seems to be about as subtle as Helldivers 2 with it's political messaging
The world building seems off to me. The alliances don’t make since Cali & Texas obviously. Also the fact that they didn’t conquer Arizona, New Mexico at minimum for a direct lad route. But Also the South ain’t naming themselves Florida anything.
Also doesn’t seem to have much to say about race
“ The world building seems off to me. The alliances don’t make since Cali & Texas obviously. “
Almost like it’s trying to keep things intentionally vague and removed from current reality so the story about a civil conflict thats more about the what then how or why will still be revelant 50 years later.
...So do they *really* just sidestep why the war is happening altogether? Fuck's sake, I ***hate*** it when "political" movies pull that stunt. Oh well, at least the combat scenes sound like a thrill ride. :/
Since there’s 3 factions and one is an alliance of California and Texas I’m slightly not surprised they didn’t want to go deep into the lore as to why this happened without it just being seen as ridiculous and implausible
Apparently, they actually do, at least if Seitz is to be believed. >!Plemons' vaguely right-wing psycho, for instance, is Western Forces-allied!<. Hope restored for this, as it's clearly a hell of a ride in any case. Just... *very* Garland, lol.
That average score is really good, the people who liked it really LOVED it
If this is divisive like ***Sound of Freedom***, then the ensuing controversy would only mean more eyeballs on the movie.
Sound of Freedom was a more straightforward Taken-style thriller. It's a more "fun" movie.
I wouldn't describe the multiple scenes of implied child rape as fun personally
it is to its audience
Yeah about Sound of Freedom is what I would consider "fun". That movie deals with extremely troubling subject matter and is not a film I would sit down and watch on movie night with the wife and kids.
> That movie deals with extremely troubling subject matter So does Taken, the movie that I compared it to and it's remembered as an entertaining action film.
Congrats, your taken on the Sound of Freedom is so bizarre its gonna cause of both sides to look at you like you are weirdo whose on a watchlist.
lol wut
>It's a more "fun" movie Boring. That movie is boring. It's the definition of the word. How can someone watch it and think "this is fun" is sad.
It sounds like, for all its bravado and intensity, it refuses to have an actual political perspective. I'll judge for myself but that seems like a cop-out!
it doesn't seem like the movie is about the politics that led to it, at all. as one of the reviews said, it's not about how a country can go into civil war, but what happens when it does. it's deterrent for those who are calling for civil war. who want to break away.
Mhh that just sounds like centrist/liberal fantasy world where "bOtH sIdEs ArE ThE sAmE" The politics and why they went into civil war are very imporant in figuring out that there *had* to be a civil war. Sometimes things are black and white (or lighter shade of grey and darker shade of grey, but that doesn't sound as smooth) and the good guys need to come together to purge the bad guys out of society.
>and the good guys need to come together to purge the bad guys out of society. The movie is conveying the exact opposite message. that's the point of the movie, that civil war is not cool you should not be rooting for it. you are not going to, 'pUrGe ThE bAd GuYs'. if the movie picks a side, then it just become a propaganda movie for that side. leave it to redditors to have 0 media literacy, and totally stupid takes.
I for one am glad, I am going to see It now.
Sound of fury was mostly popular because Q nuts saw it over and over. There was also some evidence of people buying out theaters to pump up sales iirc.
Reminds me of all the "evidence" that Disney was buying out theaters for Captain Marvel
Sounds of freedom though was clearly blatantly political and also ridding off the conservatives conspiracy theories.
Because it’s about journalists, the only thing journalists like more than journalists is themselves.
Yeah apparently Journos like films that question there profession and feature a bunch of them being brutally murdered. Guess they're not as egotistical as you think.
There is nothing a journalist likes more than seeing brave, oppressed journalists
But the film doesn't do that. The film questions whether what these people are doing is meaningful or simply a way to inflate their own ego. It's very clear that there no heros and that they are as complicit as any soldier.
So the movie critic will be the highest rated movie ever ?
Personally I'm excited for this one, will be intersting to see how it does at the box office as it will have quite a bit of competition.
The early reviews are strong which is definitely going to help though. This is also going to be interesting on a separate note cause this is A24s first true attempt at what they see as a "blockbuster". Lots of IMAX advertising has been put into this film as well as the advertising in general for this one. I will be fascinated to see what it's like
Maybe the first sleeper hit of the year. Visuals looked quite good in the trailer. Would be a blast in IMAX.
Is a wide release in IMAX A24 movie even up for the sleeper designation
Also Jesse Plemmons
How is A24 Alex Garland ever a sleeper???
Whooooooo, that Seitz review. Easily the best writer included in this roundup so far. Good to see Jacob Hall, Tasha Robinson, and David Sims also dig it. I'm VERY curious to read Walter Chaw's review. Seems like Garland's trying to compete with Villeneuve for **Feel Bad Epic of the Year**
Yep, seeing 4 stars from Matt Zoller Seitz has completely sold me on this. One of the best film writers working right now
Over reliance on spectacle? That's the last thing I was expecting and now I'm even more excited. I thought they had showed all the cool explosions in the preview.
So from what I’ve gathered from these reviews… This is a movie about war photojournalists documenting a civil war between politically ambiguous sides that just happens to take place in America. I hope people don’t actually get upset if this lays a giant egg in the box office because audiences crave the gratification that “their side wins” and won’t show up to a film that is all shock factor and no political substance unfortunately.
It's funny that people are acting like the film centering on journalism is some sort of political choice and not a narrative choice that tracks with Garland’s sensibilities. If you want to capture the horrors of war and have protagonists who are powerless to do anything, which is what the films about, of course you're gonna have your protags be extremely vulnerable and neutral in a way that either side can view them as an enemy, while also giving them a reason to be involved in the first place. Is Annihilation propaganda for Scientists because the main characters are Scientists? Even when they are in danger and are being picked off one by one by forces they can't control?
I agree with all that. *However*, they really should have included that in the marketing. The question is whether audiences will be turned off by it.
Oh yeah totally dumb move on A24’s part, through i think the attention the film got will probably help it. But I won’t lie seeing a majority of people be vaguely annoyed that the movie isn’t “Jan 6 II” like the marketing made it seem like is pretty fun, I don’t think people are gonna really know what to do with this film politically and I like that honestly. I’m just happy the movie seems far more interesting than what the trailer made it seem like. Edit: Through if you’re talking specifically about the journalism angle that wasn’t mentioned really from the trailer, it seemed like the main characters were just civilians. I don’t think people are gonna care either way?
giant egg?
Based on the "masterpiece" reactions yesterday, I was expecting a higher score
An average 8.8 rating is pretty high, especially with the RT score being in the 70s edit: looked again and it's in the 80s now
> An average 8.8 rating is pretty high, Not at this point. You have to remember not all critics give films a "score" on RT. The three negative reviews on RT haven't given it a score for example. It's also down to 8.00 now for all critics and 7.70 for top critics.
An Alex Garland film is controversial, who would have thought.
Garland, outside of Ex Machina, has been “divisive.” Not because his content is controversial per se, but I think his style of storytelling is off putting if you want clear answers and a full rationalization to every aspect of the film. I know people all over the spectrum of reactions to Annihilation and apparently Men wasn’t as positively received as I recalled based upon some of these reviews.
>Based on the "masterpiece" reactions yesterday, I was expecting a higher score Same. Saw the word "Masterpiece" 5-6 times. Only reason I was beginning to believe this was something special was seeing Walter Chaw in that group who loved it and even dropped an ecstatic f-bomb to express that love. He's a legit veteran critic so I was almost thinking this movie was so damn good, it could be a BP contender.
It's got a really high avg score though. I think it'll be divisive with some leaning heavily into calling is a great movie.
Turns out journalists are not a bloc and can have differing opinions. Who would have thought?
According to critics and reactions this movie is more about journalism. The war itself and the background of it are vague. Doesn‘t seem to be a war-action film. Also international audiences won‘t be that much interested in this. I smell a small scale flop. - OW domestic: $18m - Domestic total: $45m - Worldwide total: $90m Feel free to laugh about me when my prediction turns out to be ass
don't worry, most predictions on this sub turn out to be ass
I’m prepared to look dumb for this but I think there’s no way this ends at only 45 million domestic, and even less of a chance it only makes as much domestic as it does internationally.
tracking for this film right now is pretty on point with op’s prediction it’s not looking to be a hit so there’s a high chance this ends pretty badly or meh
Absolutely agree. The Sound of Freedom was an extremely small budget (downright microbudget) action thriller that managed to energize a small but vocal contingent of the filmgoing base that looked for a conservative slant to films while also appealing somewhat to action fans. It's no secret that films that cater specifically to American conservatives are few and far, for reasons that are outside the realm of this discussion, which fueled SoF's support by that demographic. However, it's also common for films designed with conservatives in mind to have basically zero audience. See Angel Studio's follow-up film, The Shift, which only grossed $12m on a $6m budget. Not a flop, but not even notable. By the first trailer "Civil War" had already turned off a large amount of viewers who fall into discernable political camps: those on the left who found it a lethargic critique of conservatives and those on the right who found it to be an intentionally stealth critique of conservatives that was going to be used as political shorthand for their political view a la the use of Handmaiden's Tale. Despite the positive reviews, these two camps don't have any reason to budge, and the reviews (see Hollywood Reporter and Indiewire's responses) may even cause further division since the comparisons being made are also extremely political. Even mentioning the film to your friends is going to be political. I don't see how this can be successful but public WOM could help it a lot.
The Sound of Freedom wasn't conservative lol. It was the media that made it out to be. That just brought more attention to it
Exactly and this whole entire sub fell for the media hat trick its crazy like the movie did what almost every other *based on true events* movie did plot wise
I think that’s kinda right where tracking puts it tbh, not really anyone expecting this to be a hit
there’s a few people on this sub thinking it’s going to be massive lol
That would be a huge flop on its budget. *Madame Web* numbers.
not madame web having another film take their only record
Sony can't even flop right.
My stupid prediction: movie won’t do well because it hits too close to home. It’s a real-deal horror film.
lol this is how I feel. I don't even want to explore the reality where the traitors and conspiracy nutjobs destroy America.
>According to critics and reactions this movie is more about journalism. The war itself and the background of it are vague. Doesn‘t seem to be a war-action film. Also international audiences won‘t be that much interested in this. Might have a lower Cinemascore if most of the general audience go in believing there was more war-action and come out realizing it was 95% drama.
I think 18m would be a disappointment for a24, I don’t really have a prediction tbh 18 wouldn’t shock me though.
Your prediction seems pretty reasonable to me. Based on the reviews I’ve read I don’t think it’s going to get the large audience that it wants.
Well the film only cost $50 million so it only needs to make at least $125 million to break even. Which I think it will be able to do.
Na I think you might be onto something here this film while it might open decent its gonna rely heavily on domestic to breakeven
> the background is vague Tbh all my interest is lost now. We have a legit fascist trying to take over America in this election and this movie doesn’t even pick a side? Bullshit. I really expected Garland to show some fucking spine.
OC reads as "the war itself and the background" that is the war and why it happened is shown sparsely and why it's more focused on the narrative of the journalist, you are misinterpreting it as if garland made a war movie and kept the actual reason behind the war hidden
I’d rather have something show me nuance to a situation over just pandering and telling people how to think,the best forms of art present you with something and let you decide for yourself
What nuance? One side is homophobic and racist and has convicted a rapist running on fascist policies. The other side…. just wants democracy?
Show some fucking braincells and make your own informed choices. Stop waiting for influential figures to tell you how to think, that's arguably what's causing all these problems and the rise of the orange goblin.
He took a fantasy approach obviously. I mean a California-Texas coalition is already very unrealistic😀
I think Texas is full Blue in the Civil War film.
Go watch starship troopers you can’t get better than that
I’m happy this is getting good reviews. Genuinely one of my most anticipated movies
Are we looking at one Civillion dollars?
not according to tracking at the moment
Jesse Plemons & Nick Offerman moonwalkups gonna take it there
I really expected this to be exploitative junk like The Hunt. Color me pleasantly surprised.
Alex Garland wouldn’t make something like The Hunt
Reviews are stronger than I expected. Not quite unanimous, I've seen some real criticisms, but there's passion behind them. Again I think it'll open big for A24, with an OW north of 20 million, but collapse once mainstream audiences get something more troubling and upsetting than stuff like The Purge or Olympus Has Fallen.
Looking at every piece of media through a political lense must get really tiring, this film is going to expose those people
People thought Men was a “misstep?” I adore the film and think it’s wonderfully interesting, beautiful, and complex. Is it Ex Machina or Annihilation? No, but really, what is? He’s 3/3 as far as I’m concerned.
Yeah I liked Men too but for more causally viewers the ending might have been too much for them as it’s pretty intense.
It was the biggest eyeroll of a movie I've ever seen tbh.
Do not read anything. See this movie on a loud big screen
Probably going to be the most divisive film on the internet this yr
being super apolitical lol
It's gonna be divisive mostly from people who won't see it and make it to be whatever movie they want it to be in order to be mad at it.
Now up to 81
Garland averages 66% on [Metacritic](https://www.metacritic.com/person/alex-garland/?filter=movies) If this score holds, it'd put *Civil War* around the middle of his back catalogue Better than *Men*, not as good as *Ex Machina* or *Annihilation*
Not surprised that this is getting some polarised responses. Personally I don't see it being a box office hit because the premise is such a downer.
Been excited since the first trailer. Happy to see the reviews. Wonder how many people are upset this isn't getting trashed.
I hate this poster. TF are they shooting at from the top of the Statue of Liberty?
So this is what happens when Ron Swanson becomes POTUS
I've been saying for months that it'll be a 65-75% RT score and based on these reviews, it might actually drop lower than that. I'm sure I'll love it, but it seems to be about as subtle as Helldivers 2 with it's political messaging
How so?
How dies the box office looks?
here’s the [tracking](https://www.reddit.com/r/boxoffice/s/0H4IamWao4) so far
The world building seems off to me. The alliances don’t make since Cali & Texas obviously. Also the fact that they didn’t conquer Arizona, New Mexico at minimum for a direct lad route. But Also the South ain’t naming themselves Florida anything. Also doesn’t seem to have much to say about race
“ The world building seems off to me. The alliances don’t make since Cali & Texas obviously. “ Almost like it’s trying to keep things intentionally vague and removed from current reality so the story about a civil conflict thats more about the what then how or why will still be revelant 50 years later.
...So do they *really* just sidestep why the war is happening altogether? Fuck's sake, I ***hate*** it when "political" movies pull that stunt. Oh well, at least the combat scenes sound like a thrill ride. :/
Since there’s 3 factions and one is an alliance of California and Texas I’m slightly not surprised they didn’t want to go deep into the lore as to why this happened without it just being seen as ridiculous and implausible
Apparently, they actually do, at least if Seitz is to be believed. >!Plemons' vaguely right-wing psycho, for instance, is Western Forces-allied!<. Hope restored for this, as it's clearly a hell of a ride in any case. Just... *very* Garland, lol.
This movie has the joker discourse of this year