Warfare

Warfare (A-) is only 95 minutes long, not counting the end credits, and it was over in less than an hour and a half. It's been a long time since I've seen such a short movie, so I couldn't believe it at first.

The reason why I thought it was short was that the whole movie was tense, and it really was like a nightmare and I hoped it would end soon. When it really ended very quickly, I was relieved.

This is very different from the average war movie. It is more like a clip from most war movies because it only takes place in one location and tells the story of a small team being attacked and trying to evacuate.

There is no background explanation and it quickly gets to the point. The story is told very efficiently, and the photography and sound effects make people feel like watching a documentary, which is very real.

This film is not to discuss the right and wrong of war, nor is it to shape the image of the US military, but just to show how soldiers survive in real wars.

Most American movies always make people feel that they value individualism, but this one emphasizes collectivism. In war, there are really no superheroes, and the only way is for soldiers to help each other.

This is fully demonstrated in the film. Everyone is trying to protect other comrades around them, and every action is completed by collective cooperation. The film shows in detail how soldiers communicate in war, and they obey the orders of their superiors and are well-trained.

Because it is just a small team and there are no large-scale war scenes, each character is equally important and the time given is almost evenly distributed.

However, even so, Will Poulter and Charles Melton are more impressive because they play leaders who are responsible for issuing orders and making decisions. In particular, even though Charles Melton does not have many scenes, he seems to be firm and powerful in every line, and can be regarded as the most handsome character in the film.

I originally thought that Joseph Quinn would have a remarkable performance in this film, but he was injured after just a few hits, and then he was just responsible for lying on the ground and screaming from beginning to end. LOL Most of the heart-wrenching screams in this film were contributed by him.

The main reason is that this character looked very cool when he first appeared, and I thought he would be a powerful person, but I really didn’t expect that he was just responsible for crying.

Of course, this is a true story, adapted from the memories of people present. The sound effects artist chose to put this character’s scream at the maximum decibel, probably because other soldiers remembered that he screamed the loudest.

Because I have never been able to remember Joseph Quinn’s face, I always hope that he can play some memorable roles, but this time I only remember his screams. I hope that Fantastic Four can finally make me remember him.

The editing and sound effects of the film are really outstanding, adding to the tension while watching, making people feel uneasy throughout the whole process, not knowing where the danger will come from.

I think this way of not explaining the background and only directly presenting the cruelty of war is also quite effective, allowing the audience to deeply experience the despair and fear of every soldier present.

Of course, there are also some close-ups of broken limbs and bloody shots.

Alex Garland's new film this year, the war film Warfare (previously translated as The Last War ) produced by A24, was officially released in North America on April 11. It has received good professional reviews and word of mouth, and achieved a box office of 9 million US dollars in the first weekend.

As a serious movie with a budget of only 20 million (obviously there will be no publicity), this result is already quite good.

The film has two directors, in addition to Garland, the other one is Ray Mendoza.

Why did Ray Mendoza co-direct the film? Because it chronicles his personal experiences as a Navy SEAL. He and Garland also wrote the screenplay for the film.

Ray Mendoza was the team's communications officer. The script of the film is based on the memories of the commandos who survived the battle. Garland and Mendoza did not make any changes or dramatizations to the real story during the script writing and filming process.

Mendoza said that when he and Alex were writing the script, it was more like a daily therapy session than learning how to write.

Garland is not only an excellent writer, but also a great listener. Garland would delve into the details and emotional core of the story, and the questions he asked were often more insightful than those of the therapists Mendoza had consulted.

This experience was a real comfort to him because he felt truly heard and understood.

After the film was released, it was unanimously considered to have realistically restored the breathtaking scenes of the battle at that time, and even made the audience feel a kind of claustrophobia as if they were trapped in the battlefield.

According to Mendoza's recollection, during the filming of the film, there was a scene that recreated the scene in which he rescued his comrades.

During the filming process, he instantly recalled the scene at that time, forcing him to pause the filming, walk out of the set, and burst into tears.

This film allows the audience to feel as if they are at the cruel scene of war, thus providing the most convincing presentation and expression of war, especially the memories and psychological trauma that war brings to soldiers.

Thank you Alex Garland (I mean Ray Mendoza) for scaring me shitless again. Leaving the theatre with PTSD. 😇

I feel like this film was made without the intent of expressing any message / ideology other than honouring their memories of that event.

Not saying it fully succeeded in doing that — truthfully it’s impossible to do so. Everyone brings their own view of the world into what they make.

Also felt like Alex Garland has been evading making any point on politics since Civil War , which this “irresponsibility” and nihilism made a lot of Americans & people actually living in the US anxious and agitated.

That I totally get.

But I truly believe that realism has its merits, while I understand that ideology is more easily masked and subtly embedded in realist style of filmmaking (and thus, harder to detect).

I understand that it has already been and should be critically analysed. But I think this film has every right to be made, to be told in this form, and to be viewed by spectators (in IMAX preferably lol).

It’s just that the release had the worst possible timing…

Inspired by a certain big V's strong recommendation, and the visual impact created by the close-up of a wounded soldier with a face like cracked mud on the poster, I had high expectations for Warfare .

However, the viewing process went from oppression to fatigue, and finally fell into an emotional "numbness".

The film does pursue the creation of atmosphere, especially in local scenes, trying to restore the claustrophobic and chaotic feeling of the battlefield.

Although the special effects are rough, the oppressive photography language and noisy sound effects complement each other to create a "body immersive" on-site experience.

However, this immersion gradually turned into a monotonous roar — the continuous wailing of the wounded was processed in a long-winded manner, lacking rhythm changes, and the emotional tension was diluted, even causing sensory fatigue.

The director clearly intended to imitate the rhythm of Sicario , but lacked restraint and layers.

The rhythm was both sluggish and lacked dramatic high points, making it difficult for people to enter the emotional state.

The whole film almost completely abandoned the soundtrack, further suppressing the emotional guidance, as if "reality" had become a reason to sacrifice the audience's emotional investment.

It is particularly regrettable that although there are two local Iraqi translators and guides in the film, and even one of them died in a very tragic way (disemboweled, limbs scattered, one leg even lying at the gate of the courtyard for a long time, suspected to be crushed by an armored personnel carrier), these scenes that could have triggered strong emotional fluctuations were not used effectively.

The director used the camera to pass by lightly, the shock was wiped out, and the emotional resonance failed to form.

Instead, it became alienated and indifferent in the continuous tinnitus sound effect.

The description of the US military recruits only stayed on the facial expressions, lacking the panic and clumsiness at the specific action level, and it was difficult to outline the real struggle of people in extreme situations.

All of these make people miss the entrance to understand the characters and generate empathy.

It is worth affirming that the only bridge in the film that really makes people "hear the war"—the moment when the jet plane flew over the street at low altitude, bringing sonic booms and air waves.

This section is not only impressive on the technical level, but also finally triggered a real emotional resonance, which is a rare highlight of the whole film.

The film ends with a comparison of real people, intending to return to documentary reality, but due to the lack of exposition and narrative emptiness, it becomes a mechanical conclusion like a data card.

Coupled with some slightly deliberate "political correctness" settings (such as changing the prototype of the signalman from white to a person of color), the overall context seems stiff and unnatural.

Warfare wants to be close to the battlefield and wants to be real, but it forgets that the most important thing about war movies is not just the deafening sound and the messy details on the ground, but the connection between characters, fate and fear — that is, resonance.

After watching the trailer, I thought it was going to be a blockbuster movie.

I didn't expect it to be a documentary about saving a soldier.

But having said that, this movie is boring.

But the value lies in authenticity, not just taken from the prototype character.

It also focuses on what the real battlefield is.

Blood, cruelty, smoke, screams.

It's not like the Americans we saw before, killing many enemies with guns in seconds.

It is not a comprehensive suppression brought by high technology (the two low-altitude hurricanes by fighter jets were a bit pretentious).

There will be casualties in war, and brotherhood is precious in such circumstances.

The scene of sending the wounded into the armored vehicle and everyone risking their lives to protect them was very moving.

But I have to say two things in a sarcastic way.

First, the Americans let two local puppet soldiers rush in front.

In the end, one person was blown into two pieces (I don’t know if that’s right), the lives of puppet soldiers are not lives?

The second is that while I was monitoring, someone threw a grenade in. This shows that the Americans are still careless.

This film also wants to explain from a certain perspective, because there are still places where civilians live.

All the Americans did not start a big fight, they were against the war but they were just white lotuses.

The ending is the same as the American Civil War , a group photo to highlight the topic.

Those who want to watch exciting movies, please quit.