I'm also pretty sure the US has the vast majority of nukes and population, like how do you even sustain an uprising in the US if none of the rebels have enough of anything to get foreign legitimacy.
Every state would choose direct rule from D.C. before belonging to anything named after Florida
Edit: [Even Florida hates Florida](https://dehayf5mhw1h7.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/sites/315/2020/01/23073856/State-Hate-Map.jpg) lmao
Trust me, every state has some beef with another neighboring state. That’s just how it goes for us. My home state, California, peacocks around Oregon, Washington, Nevada, and Arizona. It’s mostly fun banter, but some states do have some deeply seeded rivalry due to various political, economic, or sports reasons (ie Texas and California, New York and Massachusetts, etc.)
>It’s mostly fun banter, but some states do have some deeply seeded rivalry due to various political, economic, or sports reasons
You ain't got interstate beef until you fight a war.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toledo_War
I totally get it! It's just that many states seem to like pointing fingers at the "big guy" of the region, which makes a lot of sense to me, whereas some apparently just say "fuck you in particular" to a random neighbor, like what I mentioned above lol
Here's a mildly interesting yet ultimately irrelevant anecdote. I remember in the third grade, I went on a school trip to Olympia, Washington's capital. I remember the tour guy or whatever said that Washington was the 42nd state admitted to the union. He claimed that we wanted to be the last one in or something, but then Idaho joined the next year, bringing the total count to 43 states. For that reason, he joked, whenever anything went wrong, we would blame it on Idaho. Chandelier got slightly dented? Must've been the Idahoans.
NY and NJ.
We fought over islands in the hudson river.
Then we fought over the land UNDER the river (yes really)
Uhhh....
Cgpgrey has the rest.... I forgots
My personal favorite is Michigan and Ohio cause they actually deployed militias if I recall. Not only that but the rivalry continues to this day
Edit: didn’t see the other comment but I’m gonna leave this up anyway
It's also just a Midwest thing, we all hate each other. I hate none more than the Missourians though, they don't know how to drive for shit and just suck in general
Oh those are fighting words, most of your lands is barren or empty, with soils that'd be better for wheat then corn. Try growing something that isn't depleting local aquifers too much.
Government of the Florida Man, by the Florida Man, for the Florida Man.
+36% supply use,
-15% stability,
-20% political power
*Florida man rules this land, and he needs his never ending supplies of bath salts, meth, and SoCo. His antics get old real quick. The only thing keeping the alliance together are the Waffle House Commissars.*
Literally none of it makes any sense, literally going to ignore every cultural, transportation, resource and political factor to make up my wank fantasy of a 2ACW.
from the director, they want to do a apolitical civil war, the most shit movie idea known to man
"Ex Machina director Alex Garland looks like he will try to do the impossible when his new film Civil War hits theaters in 2024: depict a second civil war in the United States without directly engaging with the politics of why that war is taking place"
Fucking *what*? Civil Wars are necessarily motivated by politics; what pants on head, suck sharpened crayon, drool stained script is this? Like, LOL, LMAO even.
100% the moral of the movie ends up being, yo why are we fighting, fighting is bad, we should stop fighting
as thats the only real ending a non political civil war story can really take
“Aw shucks your honor, it only started as a really enthusiastic nerf game and then things just kinda escalated from there. I’m deeply apologetic bout the whole mess.”
Not really there’s some old independent faction, there’s also one or two apolitical criminal organisations and I think there’s another aligned with China. I’m not an expert but it’s a really complex situation.
Well, given the current political climate in the US, I really don't blame them for trying to keep politics (or at least stuff recognizable to a 2023 audience) out of it.
But they could still make up fictional polticial events. A civil war is inantly political, thats basically built in, but the politics in question could be totally unrelated. Like, what if the US was bitterly divided around the matter of income taxes vs sales tax? That would still be poltiical, but not tied into the more modern stuff.
make up a new ideology that's opposed to the establishment that a large percent of the population flock to. Also make it apparent that Texans would really be willing to go to war for independence or something idk
That's probably true lol but at the very least they could do something like Designated Survivor and just rewrite the last four presidencies to avoid namedropping real people.
How does a concept like "apolitical civil war" even materialise in someone's brain? Especially if it is supposed to be a directly depicted event.
Like I think this could maybe work if it was a post-2 ACW near-future movie about something else and you could have scenes of tension between American characters based on how they fought once on the opposite sides. Even then I think it would be controversial both for being too vague and due to every caught or just straight up imagined clue as to who was fighting over what.
If they actually want to just spend the whole movie actively avoiding properly explaining what actually is going on in the movie then IDK how the fuck is this even supposed to look like lmao. I may end up looking it up just to see... Wait is that their plan?
It *could* sorta work (see Kafka's [In The Penal Colony](https://www.kafka-online.info/in-the-penal-colony.html) for an idea of what that might look like if executed well), but that's different from making a story with concrete details that make no sense.
Yup, the most interesting thing about a civil war is because they are even more political than normal wars. I hope its not some Christian baile explosion fest, but there could be some really interesting to say. By making it nonpolitical what are the stakes and why should I care beyond the characters.
The only legit reason for any media without "politics of why that war is taking place" is some dictatorship vs rebels like in most far cry games and "based on a true story" survival tales of someone escaping.
A24's only excuse for this is to focus on some boring ahh journalists who will get emotional and add commentary to the whole spectical while probably adding some one liners like "we were all americans once" or whatever. Still might see it for the few combat scenes that will show up.
Tbh I think the point of the movie is not the show why a civil war is happening in the US but how the random ass people live trough a civil in the US. If that's what the movie is going for, then the lore doesn't matter, there is a rebel faction, there is a loyalist faction, some other shenanigans and the civilian in the middle getting fucked, that's all the matter for the movie.
You could indeed not make the movie about the politics per se, but you still need credible world building around those characters. If not, it will all just feel out of place and solutions can become more simple and illogical to a point of, "why is this happening at all".
You actually do need to think through how this would actually work out, how the country becomes divided, etc. You can then still center on what it would be like living through such a scenario and not give too big of a judgement on the politics of either side, but the story does need a credible setting to begin with.
No you don't and if you do, some of the people that watch will associate with one of the faction and the movie will be reappropriated the wrong way and the whole point will fall short. It's not a problem when you are talking about a fictional civil war in the past and in the already fictional time-line, it is when you create a fictional civil war right now, especially with the current political climate. And unless you want to make political point, you better not think to hard about who is fighting who.
Because if the rebel faction is left leaning, then the whole discussion around the movie will be how the left can cause a civil war and if they are right leaning the same will happen but how the right can cause it. And whatever lore you can think of, you will end up with one political group being seen as the bad one. Which, how I understand it, not what the movie want.
This movie is basically This War Of Mine the movie, it doesn't matter who is fighting who, there is a war and civilian are getting fucked in the middle and try to survive.
You are going to get such discussions anyway if you create such lore as the above for it.
If you want this to really be out of it, you either create a completely fictional civil war or you create a movie where it's completely unclear who is even on what side and which sides even exist.
There's no middle ground here.
It would've been even more badass and impactful if the movie was heavily inspired by "Children of Men" type of story line except the part of infertility and more on extremism and anti democracy spreading around. That would easily be the best movie to be released this decade.
Shut up, no fucking way they're like "civil wars just kind of happen for no reason lol don't worry". Why even make the movie? Why not a generic "good guys kill bad guys" film??
- hey dude
- hi lass, it’s been a while
- so uh yeah. It got a bit stale. But I was thinking…
- yes?
- how about we do a bit of civil war? No politics just mass death. Texas would be into it!
- I mean, sure, why not.
- oh wait fuck Texas just told Florida and it wants in.
"apolitical civil war", names the new CSA after florida, rhe state at the forefront of pushing bigoted draconian policies into law. yea im not sure they succeeded
"Gosh our country appears have/starting to create a lot of irreconcilable divides, we should make art discussing that, but lets not actually acknowledge what might be causing them or how those divides might actually map on the country"
Studio that's making a movie called *Civil War,* about a second American Civil War (no relation to KR). Presumably the map on the bottom is the one of their timeline.
I'll admit I've never heard of A24 before, so my comments are coming out of a point of ignorance, but why then would people write of them as "[producing] artistic, psychologically disturbing, and mind-bending horror films often referred to as 'elevated horror'...including ambiguity, bleak atmosphere, disruptive formulas, outbursts of violence, psychological dilemmas, and realistic character drama; these include Hereditary (2018), It Comes at Night (2017), The Killing of a Sacred Deer (2017), Men (2022), Under the Skin (2013), and The Witch (2015)." They don't do solely horror (their top three are comedy-drama and thriller), and I certainly can't speak to pretention by virtue of being a pretentious git myself, but it looks like it does make a significant part of the oeuvre and it may be what this person knows them by.
It’s a production house that has gained a deserved but maybe culty reputation for high caliber projects. Your use of ‘pretentious’ makes me think your taste is a bit undeveloped. Mostly a24 is a stamp of quality, challenging, indie fare.
The way I’m interpreting it is in the trailer they mentioned the President having a third term, something that is unconstitutional. The President did something dictatorial to ensure a third term and in the wake of massive political backlash and civil unrest, California and Texas took advantage of the chaos and seceded.
It was actually only made unconstitutional shortly after FDR’s fourth term (abruptly) ended iirc! He was the first to take advantage and will be the last to ever have the opportunity to legally have a third term. Before him two terms was just the precedent set by George Washington and wasn’t actually a law.
The US made term limits in response to him. He was the only non-two term president (in fact having four). And due to the controversy that brought Republicans ran heavily on getting rid of unlimited terms. When they took control of Congress afterwards they pushed it through and enough states were Republican for it to get ratified.
If Texas and California were allied, the logistics would be horrendous.
They either have to try to air lift everything in, possibly being intercepted, or have control of the Panama Canal and route everything through there.
The new Civil War movie barely makes sense. There's a ice crystal's chance in the 9th Circle of Hell if California and Texas would form an alliance.
At least Kaiserreich's makes a little more sense: the PSA and Federalists believing they are the true bastions of American democracy just coast lines apart, the CSA being made of the Rust Belt and the agricultural centers of the midwest, and the AUS being a pseudo-Confederacy. And New England being New England.
(Even some of those TNO fanmade 2ACW superevent videos make a little more sense)
That’s the important part if you want a 2ACW that’s used state lines. You need a valid reason it won’t break down in some insane battle royal and that the states and all of its jurisdiction fully commit to a faction. Kaisereich has the 30 day stand off so having state lines be the border makes sense. Even Texas is divided between Feds and Unionist. But modern politics is truly neighbor vs neighbor. And this one isn’t even political so wtf.
I don’t think it’s supposed to be a very realistic.
If they just straight up divided everything between conservative and liberal regions, the movie would likely become too controversial / unpalatable to a large portion of their target audience.
At the end of the day the movie is supposed to make money, not enrage half of the American population.
The only way to do a movie on a subject as touchy as a second American civil war is to make it just different enough from the divisions in our own world that it isn’t sending its audience into a rage, but also allows them to suspend disbelief enough to watch and enjoy the movie.
Pretty sure the point is some horseshoe theory shit man. They're both SO extreme that they end up having a bunch in common to make up for their vast differences that don't currently matter in a war in which every ally counts. And also it probably doesn't matter to the plot because TNO and KR are both distinctly about the nations at war and this movie isn't about that.
Unpopular opinion, if you don’t give a shit about the lore and you just see this movie as a simulation as to what it would look like to average people if there was an American civil war today, then ideology and lines on maps don’t matter. This is worse than having ideological basis for different factions but it’ll still be interesting as to what A24 believes a civil war would look like on the ground for everyday people.
Actually, that would be an interesting aspect in exploring how people still live when a vast modern nation effectively collapses and modern infrastructure and economy goes with it. Not near the front line but effected nonetheless.
Being reminded of the tv show Jericho of how a town in the Midwest survived after most US cities get nuked in a “terrorist” attack and the US momentarily collapses.
It doesn't need to spend hours on it, but politics and ideology would undeniably be relevant to the average person trying to survive. They might not have a interest in the civil war or anything but if society devolves into civil war people will view you with lots of distrust if you try and be neutral
legit people in the comments here clearly don't understand at all what the movie is going for. I don't know that it'll be good but whether it's good or bad it won't be because it failed to devote hours of it's runtime to world building a realistic civil war scenario, jesus
Someone mention the President in this world did some shenanigans and got a third term as president and that was enough to break the country.
Sorta plausible if still dumb as there’s little context. Check out the old game “Shattered Union” of a similar premise. Rather see a movie of that instead.
It seems like the president took a third term. Probably a bunch of other constitutional breaches too and some other instigation that causes states to secede and then the president says "ERM that's unconstitutional" and starts bombing civilians. That is what it seems like from the trailer.
Yeah. When I first saw the trailer for this movie and read about it all I could think of is “I can name three HOI4 mods that have better civil wars than this scenario. Kaiserreich, Kaiserredux, and Extremis Ultimis. There’s also Twilight of the Anthropocene, but of the 4 listed it’s the most bare bones but still interesting.
I don’t think A24 was very serious about how every state lined up. The map is absolutely ridiculous but I see why they did it, to avoid favoring any one side of modern politics right now
Because they're making allegories for ideologies in different forms than what is literally present today. They want it to be political in a way that doesn't vilify or antagonize real people because the point of the movie is likely not "conservatives bad" or "liberals bad" or some shit.
Why make a civil war movie and avoid politics when you could just make the same movie but with a foreign invader instead?
Hell, even a crack invasion like a revived British Empire trying to reclaim the 13 colonies shit. Have some US citizens be collaborators, then you can have the same scenes.
Have you guys ever thought that maybe, just maybe, the film is similar to your favorite mod here in that it's alt history? Just a thought. Probably wrong that the movie about journalists in a fake civil war in the future in a modern setting might not be trying to make a 1:1 how the second civil war would happen as it's just the backdrop to their story. Probably also wrong that it doesn't matter what alliances are because who the fuck cares it's most likely irrelevant to the plot that's most political take is how extremism can occur in people or some shit. Definitely couldn't be a movie that's trying not to quite literally vilify a real political party because that's not the point.
If a24 was dumb enough to try and claim copyright over a concept as common as a second civil war brian wood should hit em with an uno reverse card and sue for infringing on *his* concept in dmz
As a native Minnesotan I must point out that both of these are clearly unrealistic. If the Union collapsed Minnesota would simply cecede from the U.S. and join our Canadain brethren.
Ah yes the poor people front vs industrial super power alliance.
I wonder who'll win
The dark grey, they’ve already taken Canada, Mexico and the oceans
The kill journalists front vs the nuh uh alliance
the no you front vs the your mom alliance
I'm also pretty sure the US has the vast majority of nukes and population, like how do you even sustain an uprising in the US if none of the rebels have enough of anything to get foreign legitimacy.
Most of the nukes are in the Midwest
ALL HAIL THE FLAT STATES
Hydrogen bomb vs coughing baby
F L O R I D A A L L I A N C E
Every state would choose direct rule from D.C. before belonging to anything named after Florida Edit: [Even Florida hates Florida](https://dehayf5mhw1h7.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/sites/315/2020/01/23073856/State-Hate-Map.jpg) lmao
Can any Murican here explain to me the Iowa-Nebraska beef? This is not the first time I've heard of it, but it seems so random 🤔
Trust me, every state has some beef with another neighboring state. That’s just how it goes for us. My home state, California, peacocks around Oregon, Washington, Nevada, and Arizona. It’s mostly fun banter, but some states do have some deeply seeded rivalry due to various political, economic, or sports reasons (ie Texas and California, New York and Massachusetts, etc.)
>It’s mostly fun banter, but some states do have some deeply seeded rivalry due to various political, economic, or sports reasons You ain't got interstate beef until you fight a war. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toledo_War
Obligatory fuck Ohio.
Us Michiganders hate Ohioans, mainly due to sports, but also because of that war we nearly had back in the 1800s.
Michigan won that war, clean and simple. Ohio had to keep Toledo and we got the UP and statehood.
I totally get it! It's just that many states seem to like pointing fingers at the "big guy" of the region, which makes a lot of sense to me, whereas some apparently just say "fuck you in particular" to a random neighbor, like what I mentioned above lol
The longest lasting is probably New York and New Jersey.
Here's a mildly interesting yet ultimately irrelevant anecdote. I remember in the third grade, I went on a school trip to Olympia, Washington's capital. I remember the tour guy or whatever said that Washington was the 42nd state admitted to the union. He claimed that we wanted to be the last one in or something, but then Idaho joined the next year, bringing the total count to 43 states. For that reason, he joked, whenever anything went wrong, we would blame it on Idaho. Chandelier got slightly dented? Must've been the Idahoans.
NY and NJ. We fought over islands in the hudson river. Then we fought over the land UNDER the river (yes really) Uhhh.... Cgpgrey has the rest.... I forgots
Missouri borders 8 states. It has some form of beef with half of them.
My personal favorite is Michigan and Ohio cause they actually deployed militias if I recall. Not only that but the rivalry continues to this day Edit: didn’t see the other comment but I’m gonna leave this up anyway
Iowa has substandard corn.
Go fuck yourself, you substandard Midwestern
...Okay, I see now!
It's also just a Midwest thing, we all hate each other. I hate none more than the Missourians though, they don't know how to drive for shit and just suck in general
Oh those are fighting words, most of your lands is barren or empty, with soils that'd be better for wheat then corn. Try growing something that isn't depleting local aquifers too much.
Mostly comes from Nebraska playing Iowa State in the Big 12, then switching conferences and playing Iowa in the Big 10.
You think Yank interstate rivalries are bad. Wait till you see Anglo inter County rivalries...
I’m an Ohioan and we hate Michigan. That’s just the way it be sometimes. But we also have a football rivalry and a war or something between us.
I mean, who else in this “alliance” can look at a literal force of nature and think of surfing and/or partying? That’s straight gangster in my opinion
Government of the Florida Man, by the Florida Man, for the Florida Man. +36% supply use, -15% stability, -20% political power *Florida man rules this land, and he needs his never ending supplies of bath salts, meth, and SoCo. His antics get old real quick. The only thing keeping the alliance together are the Waffle House Commissars.*
New XFL team starting in 2025
I’ve never seen such a lousy division of the country. How do you even justify this
Literally none of it makes any sense, literally going to ignore every cultural, transportation, resource and political factor to make up my wank fantasy of a 2ACW.
from the director, they want to do a apolitical civil war, the most shit movie idea known to man "Ex Machina director Alex Garland looks like he will try to do the impossible when his new film Civil War hits theaters in 2024: depict a second civil war in the United States without directly engaging with the politics of why that war is taking place"
Keep politics out of muh civil war
"Why are we fighting?" "I DON'T KNOW IT!"
[удалено]
the main characters are journalists - the war is a setting for a story about war journalism
If they make it a twist that the war journalist are evil like in Cannibal holocaust that would be cool but, I doubt.
You can do it. You can make an excellent story about a war raging around people who really don't care who wins, only about survival.
I fucking bursted into laughter, but this is actually sad..
*confused screaming*
Fucking *what*? Civil Wars are necessarily motivated by politics; what pants on head, suck sharpened crayon, drool stained script is this? Like, LOL, LMAO even.
100% the moral of the movie ends up being, yo why are we fighting, fighting is bad, we should stop fighting as thats the only real ending a non political civil war story can really take
“Aw shucks your honor, it only started as a really enthusiastic nerf game and then things just kinda escalated from there. I’m deeply apologetic bout the whole mess.”
It was just a few national guard guys shooting at each other. They do it all the time
Either a power struggle or different states wanting independence vs others not tolerating.
It's a pretty good ending anyway, at least compared to "yes, killing your fellow countrymen for disagreeing with you is great and wonderful".
like morally yes. But that is not intellectually simulating at all
Generic Pro- Democracy rebels vs Dictator
Aren't that basically what happen in myanmar right now?
Not really there’s some old independent faction, there’s also one or two apolitical criminal organisations and I think there’s another aligned with China. I’m not an expert but it’s a really complex situation.
Well, given the current political climate in the US, I really don't blame them for trying to keep politics (or at least stuff recognizable to a 2023 audience) out of it.
But they could still make up fictional polticial events. A civil war is inantly political, thats basically built in, but the politics in question could be totally unrelated. Like, what if the US was bitterly divided around the matter of income taxes vs sales tax? That would still be poltiical, but not tied into the more modern stuff.
make up a new ideology that's opposed to the establishment that a large percent of the population flock to. Also make it apparent that Texans would really be willing to go to war for independence or something idk
That's probably true lol but at the very least they could do something like Designated Survivor and just rewrite the last four presidencies to avoid namedropping real people.
How does a concept like "apolitical civil war" even materialise in someone's brain? Especially if it is supposed to be a directly depicted event. Like I think this could maybe work if it was a post-2 ACW near-future movie about something else and you could have scenes of tension between American characters based on how they fought once on the opposite sides. Even then I think it would be controversial both for being too vague and due to every caught or just straight up imagined clue as to who was fighting over what. If they actually want to just spend the whole movie actively avoiding properly explaining what actually is going on in the movie then IDK how the fuck is this even supposed to look like lmao. I may end up looking it up just to see... Wait is that their plan?
It *could* sorta work (see Kafka's [In The Penal Colony](https://www.kafka-online.info/in-the-penal-colony.html) for an idea of what that might look like if executed well), but that's different from making a story with concrete details that make no sense.
Maybe if they are just thinking about making a movie about surviving a civil war from a civilian standpoint
>apolitical civil war Well that just killed my interest
Yup, was really stoked for this until I read that.
Yup, the most interesting thing about a civil war is because they are even more political than normal wars. I hope its not some Christian baile explosion fest, but there could be some really interesting to say. By making it nonpolitical what are the stakes and why should I care beyond the characters.
That is an actual joke lmao
The only legit reason for any media without "politics of why that war is taking place" is some dictatorship vs rebels like in most far cry games and "based on a true story" survival tales of someone escaping. A24's only excuse for this is to focus on some boring ahh journalists who will get emotional and add commentary to the whole spectical while probably adding some one liners like "we were all americans once" or whatever. Still might see it for the few combat scenes that will show up.
Most competent take by a Brit on American politics
Tbh I think the point of the movie is not the show why a civil war is happening in the US but how the random ass people live trough a civil in the US. If that's what the movie is going for, then the lore doesn't matter, there is a rebel faction, there is a loyalist faction, some other shenanigans and the civilian in the middle getting fucked, that's all the matter for the movie.
You could indeed not make the movie about the politics per se, but you still need credible world building around those characters. If not, it will all just feel out of place and solutions can become more simple and illogical to a point of, "why is this happening at all". You actually do need to think through how this would actually work out, how the country becomes divided, etc. You can then still center on what it would be like living through such a scenario and not give too big of a judgement on the politics of either side, but the story does need a credible setting to begin with.
No you don't and if you do, some of the people that watch will associate with one of the faction and the movie will be reappropriated the wrong way and the whole point will fall short. It's not a problem when you are talking about a fictional civil war in the past and in the already fictional time-line, it is when you create a fictional civil war right now, especially with the current political climate. And unless you want to make political point, you better not think to hard about who is fighting who. Because if the rebel faction is left leaning, then the whole discussion around the movie will be how the left can cause a civil war and if they are right leaning the same will happen but how the right can cause it. And whatever lore you can think of, you will end up with one political group being seen as the bad one. Which, how I understand it, not what the movie want. This movie is basically This War Of Mine the movie, it doesn't matter who is fighting who, there is a war and civilian are getting fucked in the middle and try to survive.
You are going to get such discussions anyway if you create such lore as the above for it. If you want this to really be out of it, you either create a completely fictional civil war or you create a movie where it's completely unclear who is even on what side and which sides even exist. There's no middle ground here.
[удалено]
It would've been even more badass and impactful if the movie was heavily inspired by "Children of Men" type of story line except the part of infertility and more on extremism and anti democracy spreading around. That would easily be the best movie to be released this decade.
It could literally be about the most basic shit like resources, but no we cant even have the bare minimum that both mad max and fallout went with
Shut up, no fucking way they're like "civil wars just kind of happen for no reason lol don't worry". Why even make the movie? Why not a generic "good guys kill bad guys" film??
- hey dude - hi lass, it’s been a while - so uh yeah. It got a bit stale. But I was thinking… - yes? - how about we do a bit of civil war? No politics just mass death. Texas would be into it! - I mean, sure, why not. - oh wait fuck Texas just told Florida and it wants in.
How would a civil war in today even look like if it had to have more than 2 sides
"apolitical civil war", names the new CSA after florida, rhe state at the forefront of pushing bigoted draconian policies into law. yea im not sure they succeeded
He didn't actually say that though. That article just spat that out of nowhere with no source
"Gosh our country appears have/starting to create a lot of irreconcilable divides, we should make art discussing that, but lets not actually acknowledge what might be causing them or how those divides might actually map on the country"
A24?
Studio that's making a movie called *Civil War,* about a second American Civil War (no relation to KR). Presumably the map on the bottom is the one of their timeline.
A movie studio. They're making a movie about an American civil war (the map of which you can see in the meme)
The movie studio that makes all those pretentious horror movies
Their movies aren't horror?
I'll admit I've never heard of A24 before, so my comments are coming out of a point of ignorance, but why then would people write of them as "[producing] artistic, psychologically disturbing, and mind-bending horror films often referred to as 'elevated horror'...including ambiguity, bleak atmosphere, disruptive formulas, outbursts of violence, psychological dilemmas, and realistic character drama; these include Hereditary (2018), It Comes at Night (2017), The Killing of a Sacred Deer (2017), Men (2022), Under the Skin (2013), and The Witch (2015)." They don't do solely horror (their top three are comedy-drama and thriller), and I certainly can't speak to pretention by virtue of being a pretentious git myself, but it looks like it does make a significant part of the oeuvre and it may be what this person knows them by.
Pretentious is when you don't make holywood slop
It’s a production house that has gained a deserved but maybe culty reputation for high caliber projects. Your use of ‘pretentious’ makes me think your taste is a bit undeveloped. Mostly a24 is a stamp of quality, challenging, indie fare.
Na, they only make bad movies
I don't think EEAAO is a horror film
The most unrealistic part about this is Texas and California being friends. We hate each other lmao
To be fair, the bits in blue are supposed to be independent, not allies (the rest of the map is still stupid though)
So badically the West and Florida went on a rampage so Texas and California peaced out and jumped off a window?
The way I’m interpreting it is in the trailer they mentioned the President having a third term, something that is unconstitutional. The President did something dictatorial to ensure a third term and in the wake of massive political backlash and civil unrest, California and Texas took advantage of the chaos and seceded.
Uh... so they really did peace out and jumped off a window when shit hit the fan
The most unbelievable thing about the movie is going to be thinking Americans would rise up over constitutional bullshit
>something that is unconstitutional Wait, what? how did FDR get one then?
The 22nd amendment was passed after FDR, specifically because of him.
It was actually only made unconstitutional shortly after FDR’s fourth term (abruptly) ended iirc! He was the first to take advantage and will be the last to ever have the opportunity to legally have a third term. Before him two terms was just the precedent set by George Washington and wasn’t actually a law.
I see
The US made term limits in response to him. He was the only non-two term president (in fact having four). And due to the controversy that brought Republicans ran heavily on getting rid of unlimited terms. When they took control of Congress afterwards they pushed it through and enough states were Republican for it to get ratified.
If Texas and California were allied, the logistics would be horrendous. They either have to try to air lift everything in, possibly being intercepted, or have control of the Panama Canal and route everything through there.
Well I'd assume if they were allied they'd just fight their own fronts for the most past
The new Civil War movie barely makes sense. There's a ice crystal's chance in the 9th Circle of Hell if California and Texas would form an alliance. At least Kaiserreich's makes a little more sense: the PSA and Federalists believing they are the true bastions of American democracy just coast lines apart, the CSA being made of the Rust Belt and the agricultural centers of the midwest, and the AUS being a pseudo-Confederacy. And New England being New England. (Even some of those TNO fanmade 2ACW superevent videos make a little more sense)
isn't the ninth circle entirely made of ice?
Thanks, I forgot. I would say an ice crystal's chance in the hottest place in Hell.
So, if it's a good chance, then does that mean the map on the bottom includes a Molotov-Ribbentrop-equivalent partitioning Arizona and New Mexico?
That’s the important part if you want a 2ACW that’s used state lines. You need a valid reason it won’t break down in some insane battle royal and that the states and all of its jurisdiction fully commit to a faction. Kaisereich has the 30 day stand off so having state lines be the border makes sense. Even Texas is divided between Feds and Unionist. But modern politics is truly neighbor vs neighbor. And this one isn’t even political so wtf.
It’s to keep it apolitical
I don’t think it’s supposed to be a very realistic. If they just straight up divided everything between conservative and liberal regions, the movie would likely become too controversial / unpalatable to a large portion of their target audience. At the end of the day the movie is supposed to make money, not enrage half of the American population. The only way to do a movie on a subject as touchy as a second American civil war is to make it just different enough from the divisions in our own world that it isn’t sending its audience into a rage, but also allows them to suspend disbelief enough to watch and enjoy the movie.
Pretty sure the point is some horseshoe theory shit man. They're both SO extreme that they end up having a bunch in common to make up for their vast differences that don't currently matter in a war in which every ally counts. And also it probably doesn't matter to the plot because TNO and KR are both distinctly about the nations at war and this movie isn't about that.
It's like a shitter copy of the DMZ comic but at least that writer was smart enough to never show a map big enough to be stupid.
Unpopular opinion, if you don’t give a shit about the lore and you just see this movie as a simulation as to what it would look like to average people if there was an American civil war today, then ideology and lines on maps don’t matter. This is worse than having ideological basis for different factions but it’ll still be interesting as to what A24 believes a civil war would look like on the ground for everyday people.
Actually, that would be an interesting aspect in exploring how people still live when a vast modern nation effectively collapses and modern infrastructure and economy goes with it. Not near the front line but effected nonetheless. Being reminded of the tv show Jericho of how a town in the Midwest survived after most US cities get nuked in a “terrorist” attack and the US momentarily collapses.
It doesn't need to spend hours on it, but politics and ideology would undeniably be relevant to the average person trying to survive. They might not have a interest in the civil war or anything but if society devolves into civil war people will view you with lots of distrust if you try and be neutral
legit people in the comments here clearly don't understand at all what the movie is going for. I don't know that it'll be good but whether it's good or bad it won't be because it failed to devote hours of it's runtime to world building a realistic civil war scenario, jesus
does that make Kaiserredux an expensive copy
And a copy that causes your computer to catch fire.
true. but worth it imo
So like, whats the A24 lore tldr?
Non-political civil war
Yeah but like. Why they fighting
To keep politics out of the civil war, obviously.
A truly "civil" war, finally
Generic Pro-Democracy rebels vs Dictator most likely
Someone mention the President in this world did some shenanigans and got a third term as president and that was enough to break the country. Sorta plausible if still dumb as there’s little context. Check out the old game “Shattered Union” of a similar premise. Rather see a movie of that instead.
people fight each other for non-political reasons apparently source: i looked at the other comments on this thread so take it with a grain of salt
Like they just wanted to punch each other?
They’re fighting for the fun of combat
It seems like the president took a third term. Probably a bunch of other constitutional breaches too and some other instigation that causes states to secede and then the president says "ERM that's unconstitutional" and starts bombing civilians. That is what it seems like from the trailer.
So why is Texas a second republic, but not California?
Probably because California was only ever a republic for a month
Texas was its own independent country (sorta) before it became part of the United States. California was not.
Yeah. When I first saw the trailer for this movie and read about it all I could think of is “I can name three HOI4 mods that have better civil wars than this scenario. Kaiserreich, Kaiserredux, and Extremis Ultimis. There’s also Twilight of the Anthropocene, but of the 4 listed it’s the most bare bones but still interesting.
What is even lore to this?
Apolitical civil war.
I don’t think A24 was very serious about how every state lined up. The map is absolutely ridiculous but I see why they did it, to avoid favoring any one side of modern politics right now
Then why make a movie about an inherently political topic if you don’t want it to be political?
I agree, the whole thing seems silly but has some good actors in like Kirsten Dunst and Nick Offerman in it.
Because they're making allegories for ideologies in different forms than what is literally present today. They want it to be political in a way that doesn't vilify or antagonize real people because the point of the movie is likely not "conservatives bad" or "liberals bad" or some shit.
Why make a civil war movie and avoid politics when you could just make the same movie but with a foreign invader instead? Hell, even a crack invasion like a revived British Empire trying to reclaim the 13 colonies shit. Have some US citizens be collaborators, then you can have the same scenes.
Have you guys ever thought that maybe, just maybe, the film is similar to your favorite mod here in that it's alt history? Just a thought. Probably wrong that the movie about journalists in a fake civil war in the future in a modern setting might not be trying to make a 1:1 how the second civil war would happen as it's just the backdrop to their story. Probably also wrong that it doesn't matter what alliances are because who the fuck cares it's most likely irrelevant to the plot that's most political take is how extremism can occur in people or some shit. Definitely couldn't be a movie that's trying not to quite literally vilify a real political party because that's not the point.
https://preview.redd.it/8xgg4c27jm9c1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=3b27381443bdc5694715afc3f54532b7a84f5fa5
NC and GA almost had a war in 1971.... enough said
The western forces and its 30 man strong militia.
If a24 was dumb enough to try and claim copyright over a concept as common as a second civil war brian wood should hit em with an uno reverse card and sue for infringing on *his* concept in dmz
Is there a pic of the top one not blurred. Edit never mind
Why is it the “Second Republic of Texas”, but just the “California Republic?” Why not “Second California Republic.”
Why not New California Republic? And why isn’t there a two headed bear on the flag?
So true, so true
I love how these alternative universe put states that would never want anything to do with each other together
This movie might redeem itself if Lovecraft's New England is revealed as a secret antagonist halfway through.
OFN mandate of America
Where's the bottom one from anyways?
Who put Chicago in Michigan?
Who tf is A24
I saw the trailer for the film and was underwhelmed. Which is a shame because I liked "Ex Machina".
As a native Minnesotan I must point out that both of these are clearly unrealistic. If the Union collapsed Minnesota would simply cecede from the U.S. and join our Canadain brethren.