Civil War Is A Stupid Movie

Marge Stamm 20 Jun 2025

Civil War is a Stupid Movie - A Look at the Buzz

There's been quite a bit of talk swirling around the movie "Civil War," and, you know, some of it gets pretty heated. People have very strong feelings about it, and that's just how it goes with films that try to make you think, or at least try to make you feel something. A lot of folks out there are wondering if this film really delivers on its promises, or if it just misses the mark entirely. It’s almost like everyone has a different idea of what a movie like this should be, and that leads to all sorts of interesting conversations.

This film, directed by Alex Garland, has certainly gotten people chatting, and a good many of those conversations lean into the idea that "Civil War is a stupid movie." It’s interesting, too, how a single piece of art can bring out such a wide range of reactions. Some people found it to be a real accomplishment in filmmaking, while others, well, they felt it was a complete miss, maybe even a bit of a waste of time. So, what makes a movie fall into the "stupid" category for some, yet be seen as something quite special by others? It's a question that gets tossed around a lot when a film like this arrives.

We're going to take a closer look at some of the things people are saying about "Civil War," especially those thoughts that suggest "civil war is a stupid movie." We'll explore why some viewers found it abrasive or uncomfortable, and why others felt it lacked a clear message. It’s a bit like peeling back the layers of an onion, trying to get to the core of why this particular movie sparks such varied opinions. There's a subreddit, for example, just for talking about A24's 2024 movie "Civil War," and the comments there show a real mix of feelings, some asking for "more and less lol comments," which just goes to show the range of views.

What's the Fuss About "Civil War"?
Is "Civil War" Really Missing the Point? - Why "civil war is a stupid movie" might be the thought
How Does "Civil War" Feel to Watch?
Where Does "Civil War" Go Wrong with Characters? - The "civil war is a stupid movie" character problem
What About "Civil War"'s Story and Structure?
Could "Civil War" Be a Road Movie? - How this impacts "civil war is a stupid movie" thoughts
What Makes a Movie "Stupid"?
Why Do Some Folks Call "Civil War" Stupid? - A look at "civil war is a stupid movie" arguments

What's the Fuss About "Civil War"?

When "Civil War" first came out, there was a lot of chatter, as you might expect. People were curious, and naturally, they wanted to see what Alex Garland had put together this time. Some folks, as a matter of fact, really felt that this new film was a big cinematic accomplishment. They might have pointed to the way it looked or the way it made them feel while watching. It was seen by some as a work that stood out, a movie that did something different. Yet, others held a very different view, suggesting that "Civil War" was, well, not so great. It’s like two completely separate conversations happening about the very same thing, isn't it?

The director, Alex Garland, even spoke out about some of the main criticisms leveled at his movie. He suggested that some people who were reviewing the film were perhaps not quite grasping its full intent, or maybe they were missing the whole point of it. This idea that critics might be misinterpreting a film is not exactly new, but it always adds another layer to the discussion. It makes you wonder, then, if the film's message was just too subtle for some, or if the audience simply brought different expectations to the theater. So, the "fuss" is not just about the movie itself, but also about how it's being seen and talked about by everyone.

Is "Civil War" Really Missing the Point? - Why "civil war is a stupid movie" might be the thought

Some people have voiced concerns that "Civil War" doesn't seem to have a clear political stance, and that, in a way, bothers them. They feel that a movie with such a powerful title should probably take a side or at least explore specific ideologies. But, you know, the film's approach is apparently to not be specifically political, and that’s a bit of a twist for some viewers. It’s almost as if the movie is saying, "I'm not here to tell you what to think about politics, just to show you something." This lack of a clear ideological leaning can make the film feel a bit uncomfortable or even abrasive for some people, and that could be why some think "civil war is a stupid movie." They might hate that it doesn't subscribe to any particular viewpoint, because, well, we often like things to be neat and tidy, especially when it comes to big topics.

The idea that the film is "missing the point" is something that director Alex Garland himself brought up, suggesting that some reviewers weren't quite getting what he was trying to do. He seemed to feel that there was a deeper purpose to the movie that was being overlooked. This perspective really adds to the conversation around why some might label "civil war is a stupid movie." If the film's goal was to be something other than overtly political, and that goal wasn't widely understood, then there's a disconnect. It's like, the film has a message, but it’s not being heard in the way it was intended, which can be frustrating for both the creators and some audience members. So, the question of whether it's missing the point becomes a central part of the discussion.

How Does "Civil War" Feel to Watch?

Watching "Civil War" can be a rather intense experience for some, apparently. It's been described as a film that feels abrasive and can make you quite uncomfortable. This isn't because it's pushing a particular political idea, but more because it seems to hold back from doing so. That can be a strange feeling for a viewer, as we often look for a clear stance or a message to latch onto in stories like this. When a movie doesn't quite commit to one side or another, it can leave you feeling a bit unsettled, like something is missing. It’s like being in a conversation where no one really takes a firm stand, which can be a bit frustrating, to be honest.

Some folks have also said that the movie just doesn't seem to know what it is, in a way. This feeling of uncertainty about the film's identity can contribute to a sense of unease while watching. You might find yourself wondering, "What exactly am I supposed to take away from this?" or "What kind of story is this trying to tell?" This kind of narrative ambiguity can be a turn-off for some viewers, making the experience less enjoyable. It's almost as if the film itself is searching for its own purpose, and that search can be a bit jarring for the audience. So, the overall feeling of watching it for some is one of discomfort and a lack of clear direction.

Where Does "Civil War" Go Wrong with Characters? - The "civil war is a stupid movie" character problem

One of the points that comes up quite a bit when people talk about "Civil War" is the way the characters are put together. Some viewers have mentioned that the character development feels very, very minimal. It's like, you don't really get to know the people on screen in a deep way, which can make it hard to connect with their journey or care about what happens to them. If you're watching a story unfold and the people in it feel a bit like sketches rather than fully formed individuals, it can certainly take you out of the experience. This lack of connection to the characters might make some feel that "civil war is a stupid movie" because a good story often relies on strong, relatable people.

However, there's another side to this character discussion. Some people strongly disagree with the idea of minimal character development. They actually believe that the four main characters in "Civil War" do have a good amount of depth, especially when you consider the movie as a whole. They might point to specific moments or interactions that reveal more about who these people are, even if it's not done in a very traditional way. It's a bit like different people seeing different things in the same painting, isn't it? What one person perceives as shallow, another might see as nuanced or just presented in a less obvious manner. So, the argument about character depth is really quite subjective, and that's something to think about.

What About "Civil War"'s Story and Structure?

When we look at how "Civil War" tells its story, some folks have found it to be a bit disjointed. There's a sense that the movie, as a whole, might be completely shallow in its broader message, even if some parts of it are quite strong. It's like, the individual pieces might be well-crafted, but they don't quite come together to form a truly deep or meaningful picture. This can lead to a feeling that the movie is failing to communicate something important, even if it tries hard to do so. The maker of the film, Alex Garland, seems to understand how to use visuals and powerful images, but some feel that the overall narrative just doesn't quite land with the impact it could have.

There are also comments about specific moments or lines that can pull a viewer right out of the film. Someone mentioned hating when "stupid lines" do that, and that it happened multiple times in "Civil War." This suggests that even if the movie has some good parts, these jarring moments can really break the spell. It's like, you're really into the story, and then something happens or is said that just feels off, and suddenly you're thinking about the movie as a movie, rather than being lost in its world. This kind of experience can definitely make someone lean towards the idea that "civil war is a stupid movie," because those little breaks in immersion can add up.

Could "Civil War" Be a Road Movie? - How this impacts "civil war is a stupid movie" thoughts

One way to look at "Civil War" is to see it as, essentially, a road movie. This means the story follows a group of people as they travel from one place to another, and their experiences along the way are what drive the plot. The quartet of characters in this film witnesses all sorts of terrible things and plunges into dangerous situations as they make their journey. This kind of structure gives the director, Alex Garland, a handy way to show different parts of the world they're moving through and the challenges they face. It’s a pretty common way to tell a story, actually, letting the journey itself be the main event.

However, even with this road movie structure, opinions differ quite a bit on its effectiveness. Some might argue that while it provides a framework for showing intense events, it doesn't necessarily lead to a deeper story or more meaningful character development. If the journey feels more like a series of disconnected events rather than a cohesive arc, then the "road movie" aspect might not save it from criticism. For those who feel "civil war is a stupid movie," this format might even highlight what they perceive as a lack of focus or a clear destination, beyond just getting from point A to point B. It’s like, the vehicle is moving, but where is it really going, you know?

What Makes a Movie "Stupid"?

When someone calls a movie "stupid," it can mean a lot of different things. Sometimes, it means the plot doesn't make much sense, or the characters do things that just don't feel real or believable. Other times, it might be about the dialogue, like when lines feel forced or just plain silly. For some, a "stupid" movie is one that doesn't challenge them at all, or one that feels like it's trying too hard to be clever but falls flat. It’s really quite a broad term, and what one person finds to be a flaw, another might not even notice or might even enjoy. So, the word "stupid" often reflects a personal reaction to a film, rather than some universal truth about it.

A movie might also be called "stupid" if it has moments that pull you out of the story, as we talked about earlier. If you're watching and suddenly you're thinking, "That's just ridiculous!" or "Why would they do that?" then the movie has lost its grip on you. This can happen with a poorly placed joke, a scene that doesn't fit, or a character's action that seems completely out of character. These little breaks in immersion can really add up and make the whole experience feel less engaging. It’s like, the film loses its magic, and then it’s just a bunch of actors on a screen, which can be a bit disappointing, to be honest.

Why Do Some Folks Call "Civil War" Stupid? - A look at "civil war is a stupid movie" arguments

So, why do some people specifically say "civil war is a stupid movie"? Well, for one, there's that feeling that the movie doesn't quite know what it wants to be, as we discussed. If a film feels unsure of its own identity, it can come across as muddled or unfocused to the audience. This lack of a clear purpose can be frustrating for viewers who prefer a more straightforward narrative or a film with a distinct message. It’s like, you go to see a story, and you expect it to have a beginning, middle, and end, and maybe a point, and if it doesn't quite deliver on that, it can feel, well, a bit pointless.

Another reason some might use the phrase "civil war is a stupid movie" ties back to the character issues. If the people in the story don't feel real or don't develop much, it's hard to get invested. Someone even said, "I wanted more and less lol comments," which suggests a desire for more substance or perhaps a more serious approach to the content. The idea that the only moral seems to be an incomplete thought in the source text also hints at a perceived lack of depth or clear takeaway. And, of course, the subjective annoyance with characters, even if balanced by arguments for lots of exposition and character development, can make a film feel less enjoyable for some. Ultimately, whether a movie is "stupid" or not often comes down to personal taste and what a viewer expects from their cinematic experience.

The 6 Simple Machines in Action: Real-World Examples - Revolutionized

Civil

Civil Engineering Building Construction

Celebrity Buzz

Civil War Is A Stupid Movie