How Chinese People View the American Movie“Civil War”
We have selected the top-rated comments on Chinese socials to answer this question.
Even before its premiere in mainland China on June 7th, the movie “Civil War” was already a topic of discussion on Chinese social media, especially regarding the scene where American militia kill a journalist from Hong Kong, China.
Produced by the American company A24 and directed by the renowned Alex Garland, the film intentionally leaves the cause of the civil war ambiguous, starting with the presumption that a nationwide conflict is on the horizon for America. The story follows four journalists who, in their quest for breaking news, travel to the White House to interview the President. Along their journey, they witness massacres, gunfights, and the deaths of their colleagues. They pass through tranquil towns before eventually arrive at Washington, D.C. In the final moments of the movie, the two surviving journalists ask the President one last question, followed by the president’s assassination, bringing the film to a close.
As of the time of publication by The China Academy, the film has received a rating of 6.4 out of 10 on the Chinese movie community site Douban, with over 41,932 reviews.
In the context of ongoing conflicts within and outside the United States, how do Chinese viewers, who have grown up alongside China’s rise, perceive “Civil War”? We have selected representative comments to provide insight.
Identity Crisis in the Civil War
One of the most revealing scenes for Chinese audiences in the film occurs when the group of journalists encounters local militia. Upon being asked where the Chinese journalist is from and receiving the reply “Hong Kong,” the militia member exclaims, “Oh, China,” and then pulls the trigger, killing the journalist.
Chinese netizens commented:
@一只出格君 (Upvotes: 1840): “Thinking pessimistically: A Chinese person was shot dead by soldiers on the spot. Thinking optimistically: The U.S. recognizes Hong Kong as part of China.”
@传音效 (Upvotes: 116): “Many seem fail to grasp that ‘nationality’ is an internal consensus formed by external recognition… A yellow-skinned person within the Chinese cultural sphere is seen as Chinese by outsiders, regardless of their political views.”
@Aclockworkchen (Upvotes: 107): “When Plemons says, ‘What kind of American are you?’ it truly is the moment of the year.”
@Aclockworkchen’s view is echoed by Mr. Shao Shanbo, a former member of the Commission on Strategic Development in Hong Kong, who describes the scene as “quite enlightening in understanding the challenges Hong Kong is facing.”
In his movie review published in Hongkong’s mainstream newspaper, Shao commented: “Right before this scene, another American journalist is also killed for coming from a politically incorrect place (northern Florida). One of the journalists pleads with the militia, ‘We are all Americans,’ to which the militia replies, ‘What kind of Americans?’.
This scene is arguably the most shocking and unsettling part of the film. It most effectively reflects the underlying reason for the ‘Civil War’ in the U.S.: the severe political fragmentation caused by identity divisions within American society.”
Does Civil War Need a Reason
Chinese audiences have also shared their thoughts on the director’s deliberate omission of the reasons behind the civil war in the film:
@nakedgun (Upvotes: 529): “Does the cause of war necessarily have to be explored? Just like the brief dialogues with both warring sides in the film, conflicts are often triggered by unconscious violence, discrimination, deep-seated prejudices, and extreme left or right stances. The absurdity of war is thus continuously replayed throughout history.”
@Xieirse (Upvotes: 164): “The movie highlights an important point: don’t just watch without reflection. Everyone, like the journalist Jess, keeps watching unconsciously, continuously accepting what is assigned for them to watch, and participates in producing more material to be watched without reflection. To be removed from reality and placed as onlookers, people ultimately lose the ability to truly engage in public life and neglect their responsibility to take action.”
Mr. Shao Shanbo, mentioned earlier, also noted:
“Whether it’s the ‘civil war’ in America or the anti-extradition bill protests that escalated into street riots in Hong Kong in 2019, a significant portion of society—possibly even the majority—may have their own opinions on these events but do not necessarily consider them their own problems. This phenomenon is frightening, yet it represents the harsh reality. For modern society, regardless of the system, but especially for Western liberal democracies, it poses a significant irony and challenge.Most Americans remain mere spectators or commentators on what happens in Gaza. In modern society, public participation in public affairs has largely been reduced to the act of voting once every four years, and even then, voter turnout in the U.S. continues to decline, nearing the 50% threshold. Those in mainland China who still advocate for introducing Western liberal democracy should watch this film and reflect deeply on the profound issues it presents.”
![](https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/w_1456,c_limit,f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2Fbc725782-ed7a-4409-bb62-7482cefda4cd_1140x632.jpeg)
Should the Media Be Indifferent
In the film, the group of journalists experiences a range of emotions—from initial excitement to eventual breakdown, and then to a calm acceptance of their colleagues’ deaths. The climactic scene, where a male journalist asks the president his final words before his execution, highlights this tension. The president’s pitiful plea, “Don’t let them kill me,” is met with the journalist’s cold statement, ” Yeah,that will do.”
This portrayal of journalists’ calmness—or “indifference”—sparked a lively discussion among Chinese viewers, presented as follows:
@Ciciaego (Upvotes:129) “This reminds me of two things: Photography is both beautiful and cruel; journalists are always (and should be) in a neutral position.”
@Evarnold (Upvotes:414) “The long-focus lens in the hands of journalists is repeatedly metaphorically compared to a sniper’s high-power scope, as if it grants power.…… However, what journalists hold are not guns, and they cannot have guns. Thus, journalists’ safety relies on a fragile consensus—whether the other side recognizes your special status as a journalist. The film shows both the extraordinary instances where warring parties refrain from attacking and even protect journalists, and the extremely dangerous situations where some people treat journalists as ordinary targets, killing them at will.”
Criticisms of the Romanticization of War
While the movie contains many intriguing scenes, its depiction of war remains lamentably idealized.
The Chinese political commentator @马前卒 (Ma Qianzu) with over 3 million followers on the Chinese internet, shatters the rosy picture the movie presents in an exclusive interview with The China Academy……
Head to The China Academy website to learn more.