0:00

I don't know if you knew this,

0:02

but the world of podcasting is massive.

0:04

Hi, I'm Leah. I'm the host of

0:06

CBC's Podcast Playlist. There is

0:08

such a constant avalanche of new releases it can

0:10

be hard to keep up. Luckily, Podcast

0:13

Playlist can help. Every week we deep

0:15

dive into the podcast world to find

0:17

the most compelling stories. And every month,

0:19

we'll give you a sneak peek into

0:21

the hottest new releases so you can

0:23

stay ahead. Tune in to

0:25

Podcast Playlist on CBC Listen and everywhere

0:28

you get your podcasts. This

0:31

is a CBC Podcast. This

0:38

new Kristen Dunst movie, Civil War, was the

0:40

number one movie in the box office

0:42

this past weekend. I think it's a

0:45

compelling and sometimes frustrating movie that poses

0:47

a lot of challenging questions. Then

0:49

on the podcast, we'll get into what Civil

0:51

War tells you about this moment right

0:53

now. I'm

0:58

El-Amin Abdul-Mahmoud.

1:04

This is Comotion. I've been waiting for

1:07

this conversation all week. I want to

1:09

get into Alex Garland's new film, Civil

1:11

War. This is a movie that

1:13

is set in the near future. It imagines what

1:15

a new Civil War in the United States might

1:17

look like. And then what the movie does is

1:20

it puts you in the position of shadowing a

1:22

group of journalists as they make their way through

1:24

a bunch of war-torn states. Here's a

1:26

bit of the trailer. Okay,

1:30

so here's the thing about Civil War.

1:46

It does a bunch of interesting things, but

1:49

one of the most interesting things about it

1:51

is you never find out the why. You

1:53

never find out why this war is happening.

1:55

There are sometimes I think some vague details

1:57

here and there, like the president, for example,

1:59

played by Nate Nick Offerman has disbanded the

2:01

FBI. We end up finding

2:03

out that California and Texas have formed an

2:05

alliance, which is quite an unlikely alliance. Then

2:07

otherwise, what you're doing is you're just following

2:10

this veteran war photographer, played by Kirsten Dunst,

2:12

whose own politics and feelings kind of remain

2:14

a bit of a mystery throughout the movie.

2:16

I spoke to Omar El-Ekad and Rad-Sabbin-Pillay about

2:19

civil war, and I started by asking Omar

2:21

to describe this version of America that we

2:23

find ourselves in. Yeah,

2:25

I thought it was a really clever trick to

2:29

avoid getting bogged down in the kind of

2:31

fight that this movie intends to

2:33

want to pick, but then actually doesn't want to pick

2:35

at all. So, for

2:37

example, you have these Western forces, and I

2:39

suspect, I'll never be able to prove, but

2:42

I suspect that California and Texas is

2:45

a very deliberate choice because even

2:47

though if you go to the Inland Empire in

2:49

California, you'll know that parts of California are incredibly

2:51

right-wing, California is still

2:53

shorthand for left-wing in American political

2:55

discourse, whereas Texas is the exact

2:58

opposite. And if you couple them together in

3:00

this patently nonsensical,

3:03

non-realistic way, you get

3:05

to avoid having a conversation about who

3:07

the extremists are or who the

3:10

resistance is. And you see

3:12

this sort of repeatedly throughout the movie. They

3:15

go to a camp for internally displaced people,

3:18

and the people running the camp

3:20

are from the World Relief

3:22

Program, something so vague. Global Relief World

3:24

or something, yes. Yeah, exactly, right? Like

3:26

the fact that you and I could

3:28

sit here for 20 minutes and just

3:30

come up with various permutations of those

3:32

three words is exactly what's intended,

3:34

right? I think it's a movie that is barging

3:37

in through the door, trying to be

3:40

very loud and provocative, but when it comes down

3:42

to the specific details, does not

3:44

want to get bogged down in a conversation about

3:47

who's in the right or who's in the wrong. It

3:49

wants to say extremism is bad and then kind of

3:51

move on. Yeah, my read on

3:53

this is that it's definitely a movie

3:55

that wants to play on the conversations

3:57

that everybody's having about political polarization. Without

4:00

you know preventing a certain set of

4:02

the audience from coming into the theater

4:04

But rad, I'm gonna start

4:06

with the positives from you. What what about

4:09

this movie worked for you? I

4:11

mean, I think there's actually quite a bit

4:14

that worked for me because like Alex Garland

4:16

He's a filmmaker who knows how to concoct

4:18

some really stunning images and moments Yeah You

4:20

know like and I would say like it

4:22

like I think he's a great collector of

4:24

images and moments without necessarily building them into

4:26

a Satisfying whole and I feel that way

4:29

even about ex machina and and annihilation and

4:31

which are is to yeah, right? So in

4:33

this movie, I mean you think of like

4:35

the image of like when when Christmas Dunsons

4:37

character is watching the the news and you

4:39

see a map of the United States reflected

4:41

on her window And there's an explosion that

4:44

rocks the window and that map shakes like

4:46

that's a cool image Yeah, okay when they're

4:48

when they're driving through embers It's a very

4:50

apocalypse now image when Jesse Plemons his face

4:52

is an apocalyptic image Like whether he's asking

4:54

you about Frito-Lay or what kind of American

4:56

you are right? Like like you've got a

4:58

lot of and I think my favorite scene

5:00

in this movie and the scene that almost

5:02

sold the movie for me is When

5:05

they when they arrive at the small town and

5:07

they're like and the people in this small town

5:09

are like oh We just stay out of it.

5:12

They're like we stay completely This is a war

5:14

never touched their town like that the word never

5:16

touched their town Yeah, and then it then the

5:18

camera pans up and you see all these shooters

5:20

on their rooftops protecting the town So it's like

5:22

oh, yeah Yeah, we stay out of it at

5:25

gunpoint right and there's so much to kind of

5:27

pull out of that Is that it I mean

5:29

it to you the easy and like the easy

5:31

kind of I guess Relevance that scene is like,

5:33

okay This is like America itself that says that

5:35

it's staying out of other people's conflicts But then

5:38

it's doing so at gunpoint is because it's armed

5:40

to the teeth But it's also I wonder the

5:43

generous reading of that Is that is

5:45

that Alex Garland kind of pointing out

5:47

that this neutrality that he romanticizes all

5:49

bull? I yeah, first of

5:51

all, this is the idea of images that stick

5:53

with you Like this movie is just chock full

5:56

of them from beginning to the end the

5:59

mood that the The image that I keep returning

6:01

to is like the shot of two of the

6:03

main characters, a shot like

6:05

behind this helicopter that has been, you know,

6:07

felled in a daily penny parking lot. And

6:10

it just like it look is visually, genuinely

6:12

just visually stunning. But

6:14

you're right about the idea of like, here are

6:17

a bunch of images and here's what they amount

6:19

to in terms of what they actually want to

6:21

say. And those are two different conversations. Because I

6:23

feel like Alex Garland's ability as a technical director

6:26

is astonishing and is at work in this movie.

6:28

But in terms of his commentary, that's

6:30

the stuff that people have been fighting about. The

6:32

glass of stuff that I've seen the internet sort

6:35

of torn apart about whether, you know, this movie

6:37

is really trying to say something about America in

6:39

this moment. Or is this movie actually

6:41

like not interested in that particular question is just

6:43

kind of interested in the mechanics of, you know,

6:45

a road trip movie that also is going through

6:47

a civil war. Omer, when you

6:49

when you first watched the trailer for this film, you know,

6:51

you thought it looked in your words, incredibly trite. And

6:54

then you actually watched the movie. How did the movie

6:56

turn out for you? I

6:59

don't think it was a bad film. I

7:01

think it was an incredibly instructive movie, whether

7:03

it wanted to be or not on

7:06

the state of American political discourse as

7:08

it exists right now. Yeah. Where if

7:11

you're living in this country, hell, if you're living in the

7:13

West in general, you are

7:15

watching right wing political parties

7:18

essentially obliterate the mechanics

7:20

of democracy. You're

7:22

watching a slaughter on the other side of

7:25

the planet that's paid for with your tax

7:27

dollars. You're watching these incredibly violent things

7:30

that are not just things in of themselves, but

7:32

are projections of what's coming. But

7:35

you also might have to go

7:37

to dinner parties with people who support those things.

7:39

And so one of the sort

7:41

of central talking points

7:44

and avenues of rhetorical safety that

7:46

a lot of people have retreated

7:48

into is this notion that there's

7:50

bad things happening on all sides and

7:52

extremists on all sides are bad and bad things are bad

7:54

and so on and so forth. And I think this movie,

7:57

whether it wants to or not, is

7:59

such a thin. Fantastic distillation of that. I

8:02

agree completely the imagery is stunning and

8:05

not just the imagery but the the

8:07

soundtrack choices Which are incredibly adventurous. There's

8:10

a lot of technical really marvelous stuff

8:12

happening. Kirsten Dunst is doing an amazing

8:14

job. Yeah Fundamentally,

8:17

I think it's a political movie by virtue

8:19

of its negative space where you have this

8:21

film that is desperately wanting

8:24

for the moral righteousness

8:26

of resistance But also the

8:28

comfort and stability of Empire and

8:31

those are two fundamentally Opposing

8:33

things and what you end up with is a

8:35

kind of mush. Mm-hmm. It's very very loud very

8:37

provocative Not really seeming to

8:39

say very much at all Yeah, let

8:41

me let me give you let me give people who are

8:43

listening some of the examples of this Attempts

8:46

to avoid this pinning down of the politics

8:48

in the movie, you know For example

8:50

when we first meet Kristen Dunst and

8:53

Jesse the young journalist who really

8:55

adores her character Lee Says

8:58

to her. Oh you made your name

9:00

during the Antifa massacre It doesn't say

9:02

whether it's Antifa committing the massacre or

9:04

whether it was Antifa who were being

9:07

massacred It's got like well this sort

9:09

of vague political event is the thing that happened It

9:12

wants to terribly avoid any kind of commitment

9:14

to say like hey extremists on the right

9:17

or bad extremists on the left Or are

9:19

also also bad in the same way Where

9:22

like the last 10 years

9:24

of American? news cycles sort

9:27

of confirmed with people that Extremism

9:29

on the right has gone particularly violent

9:31

and like there's really one political party

9:33

that is interested in the mechanics of

9:35

insurrection For example, do you think this

9:37

movie actually commits to an apolitical frame?

9:40

Or do you see it as as Omer

9:42

says which is to say through avoiding answering

9:44

these questions? That's its own answer in its

9:46

own way This is

9:48

why Alex Garland makes it most so difficult, right?

9:50

Yeah, it's not like this. It's not to say

9:52

that this movie is a political I feel like

9:54

we're using the long range wrong language and we're

9:57

saying it's not a political movie because of course

9:59

there's gestures towards everything you're talking about,

10:01

right? Like Nick Offerman, there are shades of Trump

10:03

in him. Sometimes I get

10:05

the feeling that people want this to be a

10:07

movie that lambast Trump because we're going into an

10:09

election year and he's up for election. And I

10:11

don't need that from this. In

10:14

terms of complicating the politics so that

10:16

we can't really suss out what

10:18

this movie is trying to say, I

10:20

do think that's a cop out, right? Because

10:22

I do think what you're doing here is

10:25

you are making a movie that is

10:27

cosplaying as a serious film. As

10:29

a provocative film that is coming out in the middle

10:31

of, called Civil War, coming out in

10:34

the election year, the most you can say is

10:36

that well, fascism is harmful. Nationalism

10:38

is harmful. Which is true. It's

10:40

true, yeah. Not exactly. That's

10:42

not a factor, man. It's the same

10:44

point in Batman versus Superman. So if

10:46

you can't one up Zack Snyder in

10:48

your movie Politics, what's happening here? Like

10:51

I mean, I think for me, where it really loses

10:53

out is that you

10:56

don't have any conversation about any kind of

10:58

ideological tension expressed through these characters, because again,

11:00

you're romanticizing the neutrality of these characters. And

11:02

what you end up doing is just short-thrifting

11:04

your characters as well. Okay, I have a

11:07

lot of thoughts about where this movie wants

11:09

to go in terms of what it has

11:11

to say about journalists and their role right

11:13

now, but we're gonna take a quick break.

11:16

Think of your favorite one-hit wonder. Or

11:18

that overpriced toy your parents would never

11:20

let you have. Or that TV show

11:22

that no one else remembers because it was

11:24

canceled way too soon. Now what if

11:26

we could fix it? I'm Francesca Ramsey.

11:28

And I'm Delon Grant. And after 20

11:31

years of friendship, we are now hosting

11:33

a new nostalgia podcast called Let Me

11:35

Fix It. Each episode we'll dig into

11:37

our favorite celebrities, shows, and brands of yesteryear,

11:39

and then imagine what it would take to

11:41

repackage them for relevance today. Think of our

11:43

show as an intervention, but with way

11:45

less stakes. So subscribe to Let Me

11:48

Fix It wherever you get your favorite podcasts. We'll

11:50

be back in just a second. Thank you. Alright,

12:05

we're back. My name is Alameen Abdul-Mahmoud and this

12:07

is Commotion. Let's get back to it. I'm talking

12:09

to Omar Alakhed and Radtime and Pelay and we're

12:12

talking about this new movie, Civil War. The

12:14

director Alex Garland, by the way, was on cue with

12:16

Tom Power recently and I recommend going out to check

12:18

back conversation wherever you get your podcasts, but I just

12:21

want to play you guys a quick clip from that

12:23

interview. Let's hear it. And the film

12:25

is trying to function like a reporter itself.

12:28

So it's trying to remove its own bias

12:30

and just showing you a sequence of events

12:32

in the way a journalist would. When

12:34

I told people I was going to

12:36

make a film, particularly guy in the film industry,

12:38

I said, I want to make a film where

12:40

journalists and the heroes are the heroes. And they

12:42

said, don't do that. Everybody hates journalists and it

12:45

freaked me out. Absolutely freaked me out because journalists

12:49

are like doctors. You do need

12:51

them. I would say right

12:53

now there are problems of exactly

12:55

the sort that journalism is required

12:57

to fix. So I

12:59

get not exactly conspiracy theorists, but

13:01

I start to look at who

13:04

is undermining trust in journalism and

13:06

why. There is a lot

13:08

going on and everything that Alex Garland just said, but Rad, let

13:10

me just give you a reaction. What do you make of what

13:12

he just said? I mean, look like, okay,

13:14

so on the one hand, I don't know

13:16

that he's wrong because yes, there is this

13:19

sentiment of fake news and Trump is certainly

13:21

feeding into that. And like in the era

13:23

of social media complicating what we know is

13:25

real. Like, yes, there is this distrust that

13:28

is contributing. This is trust of journalism that

13:30

is contributing to the divisiveness of it. Right.

13:33

Like, look, if this is the conversation you

13:36

want to have the conversation about how people

13:38

view journalism and neutrality and journalism or objective

13:40

truth and stuff, then let's have that conversation.

13:42

Like, let's actually have it. Not just

13:44

like going to romanticize this kind of

13:47

ideal that you believe journalism is because

13:49

right now what we're seeing is

13:51

more objective truth coming from on the

13:53

ground in Gaza with people using social

13:55

media than we are from the, you

13:58

know, establishments that are so-called. professional

14:00

journalists, right? We are seeing that there are

14:02

certain agendas being served. There's certain kowtowing going

14:04

on in places like the New York Times,

14:06

right? So this idea, you know, and those

14:09

are like, you know, meanwhile, like the people

14:11

who are like, you know, people like CNN,

14:13

for example, in order to embed with the

14:15

IDF inside of Gaza, they have to sort

14:17

of follow a certain set of rules that

14:19

the idea sort of lays out. So certainly

14:23

news organizations are abiding by certain

14:25

rules that are laid out by

14:27

particularly interested parties. Sorry, sorry to

14:30

cut you off. But no, but that's the

14:32

thing. It's like to then believe that these

14:34

individual journalists don't have any kind of biases

14:36

are not informed by the people they might

14:39

be working for and whatnot. I

14:41

think that is naive. And for you

14:43

to use that as your shield to

14:45

not actually have any real conversations is

14:47

just I mean, I think that that's

14:49

where, you know, your your whole movie

14:52

falls apart. Well, certainly, Omar, when you

14:54

watch this movie, you go, actually, I'm

14:56

not really sure that you're making a

14:58

good case for the neutrality of journalism.

15:00

Like I don't I don't I don't think you

15:02

watch this movie and go, yeah, this is the

15:05

best model of journalism that will serve people for

15:07

for for the journalists to completely disappear themselves and

15:09

not at all appear anywhere on the camera. What

15:11

would you make of the stuff that Alex Garland

15:14

was just saying? So

15:16

this notion that everybody hates journalists. Well, I

15:18

mean, that can't be entirely true. You still

15:20

have a show or not everybody. So

15:23

let's name them. In spite of some people's, you

15:25

know, in spite of my repeated letters to the

15:28

CBC, which they will not return. There's

15:32

there's a believing Republican candidate

15:34

for president has repeatedly called journalists enemies

15:37

of the people. Right. There's

15:39

a lot of the center right, including the

15:41

Democratic Party in the United States who

15:43

hate Palestinian journalists because they are presenting

15:45

a version of events that directly makes

15:48

a grotesque career out of the the image

15:50

that these folks are trying to sell. Now,

15:53

whether you agree or disagree with anything I've just

15:55

said, at least I've said something right.

15:58

And this goes back to the. The way

16:00

that the journalism is presented in this movie

16:02

I don't think is factually incorrect. I think

16:04

there's parts that are hyperbolic for sure, But

16:06

that movie making. On. It

16:09

goes back to the idea of. The

16:12

fundamental purpose of journalism. Which.

16:15

Is a name for thing to

16:17

say. What happened weight. And.

16:21

You can try and lean on the

16:23

suppose neutrality and objectivity of journalism, which

16:25

has never been there from the beginning.

16:27

You can't be a journalist and be

16:29

completely objective. A neutral. On.

16:32

You have to want to make things better on

16:34

some level. But. Also,

16:36

this is journalism within the context of a piece

16:38

of art that you chose to make. Still, it

16:40

could have gone and done journalism right. I'm sure

16:43

he has the resources as to go to any

16:45

part of the world that needs desperately journalism or

16:47

now to try and do it. but you chose

16:49

to make a work of art and a work

16:52

of overtly political aren't. You.

16:54

Can't send selectively. Hide.

16:57

Behind the suppose it impartiality of

16:59

journalism. In the way that the

17:01

movie quite literally does. when things get too

17:03

intense, suddenly we get a bunch of still

17:05

shots about is happening on. You

17:08

can't keep doing that. And sort of

17:10

have your cake and eat it too. I don't think that

17:12

was a bad movie, but I do think it's a movie

17:14

that has i'm fine shoves. Ejector seat buttons

17:16

aren't listen, you've been and real war zones

17:18

as a journalist and then you have to

17:21

sit down and a movie theater and now

17:23

and then Nicole Kidman come on the screen

17:25

she has become to this place for magic.

17:27

And you have a popcorn and a drink

17:29

in front of the on the you watch

17:31

this movie. That's gotta be a bit of

17:33

a distance between the reality of being a

17:36

journalist in a war zone and then you

17:38

know that fictionalized you know and interpretation of

17:40

it did last movie sort of Palmer real

17:42

threads of what it's like to report in

17:44

war zones. I

17:47

think a lot away the did become. like

17:49

I said earlier, it's sort of. There's areas

17:51

that are particularly hyperbolic. Is sort

17:53

of. Adrenalin Rush. I

17:55

think I'm. Forever. the guy

17:58

as the traveling around with kirsten dunst i think turns

18:00

it up to 11 a little bit too much. When there

18:02

more, yes. I've seen people sort

18:04

of do their versions of this. And I

18:06

stuck around towards the end of the credits

18:08

to see who their consultants were, because I

18:10

strongly suspect that a lot of these

18:12

actors were sent to Hazardous Environment Training, which is

18:14

what the insurance companies force newspapers

18:16

and media outlets to send their journalists to

18:19

before they go to the war

18:21

zones. And so

18:23

things like, for example, when the older reporter

18:27

who's with them for part of that movie tells

18:30

the younger one to get sleep whenever she can.

18:32

That's the thing that every one of the soldiers

18:35

who teaches these Hazardous Environment Training courses will tell

18:37

you to get sleep whenever you can. It's that

18:40

line verbatim I heard when I

18:42

was doing that training. The

18:45

difficulty, I think, where, and I

18:47

don't blame the movie for this because it's very hard to

18:49

do, the difficulty in having any

18:51

more accurate and assessment of journalism than what is

18:53

presented in this movie is that so

18:55

much of journalism is not

18:57

only very boring, but

19:00

also difficult to describe in a clean

19:02

narrative sense that still allows you to

19:04

root for a hero. So

19:06

on the former front, if you went to the

19:09

NATO airfield when we were stationed there and you

19:11

went into the Canadian media tent, most

19:13

of the time all you would see is four

19:15

people sitting at their computers clacking away, getting

19:18

rejections for their freedom of information. That's not

19:20

that sexy, Omer. I was totally. Incredibly

19:23

unsexy. It's deeply

19:25

unsexy, right? The other part of it is

19:27

that a lot of your

19:29

favorite war reporters, a lot

19:31

of the stuff you read every day from

19:33

these correspondents wasn't found out by them. It

19:36

was a fixer. It was a local. And Afghanistan, one

19:38

of the most effective fixers was a

19:41

guy who used to be a surgeon, an Afghanistan

19:43

guy who made more money running

19:45

around to dangerous parts of the country and

19:48

filing stories for these reporters that they would

19:50

then later throw their names on or

19:52

grabbing information for them. He

19:54

made more money doing that than practicing medicine. How

19:57

the hell do you put that into a movie and still have the

19:59

person? getting the fixtures reports and translating

20:02

them into a story and putting his name on it

20:04

how do you make that person look like the hero?

20:06

There's a difficulty there right? But otherwise

20:08

I thought they did a fairly admirable

20:10

job. Rad, just before we wrap

20:13

up here we should say this is a movie that comes from

20:15

A24. They put a lot of money into

20:17

this thing. They grossed over 25 million dollars.

20:20

It won the box office. It

20:22

had their best ever opening weekend

20:24

for A24. What do you

20:26

make of this strategy for A24

20:28

to do this with Civil

20:30

War and Alex Garland? This

20:33

is actually really fascinating because it's

20:35

a fascinating transition for A24 because

20:37

as anyone who's familiar with A24

20:39

we are talking

20:41

about a boutique indie distributor. They made

20:43

their name

20:47

on Spring Breakers and then Moonlight. They

20:50

are more of an art how they

20:52

are a distributor and a label that

20:54

prides themselves on investing in O'Tours. They

20:57

are a filmmakers brand. Lately

21:00

they've had to shift

21:02

gears and make more commercial cinema

21:05

because the math wasn't mathing especially after

21:07

they poured way too much money on

21:09

Bo is afraid. Between that and then

21:11

also David Lowry's

21:16

Green Knight, the idea of throwing money at

21:18

O'Tours to make whatever they want, they set

21:20

themselves up in their own Heaven's Gate scenario.

21:22

It's not paying out. Now they want to

21:24

make more commercial cinema. Civil War is now

21:26

you got the director of Ex Machina. They

21:28

gave him 50 million dollars to make. I'll

21:31

be a spectacle but look we've been talking about

21:33

it for almost half an hour now. So that's

21:35

a spectacle that is still O'Tourist. I'll

21:39

be a spectacle but look we've been talking about

21:41

it for almost half an hour now. So that's

21:43

a spectacle that is still O'Tourist. Or

21:46

the populist idea of O'Tourist. So I'm

21:49

digging this. If you know if a studio

21:52

out there wants to

21:55

throw money at directors And

21:57

find a viable way, a commercially viable

21:59

way, The to make auteurs you know still

22:01

exists and give their ideas else. I'm all

22:03

for it. I think the danger is that

22:06

even when a Twenty Four was sort of

22:08

doing is cool all look. We got Lady

22:10

Bird with a critical or weeks they were

22:12

kind of falling into certain formula. The elevated

22:14

for trend started falling into certain formula Day

22:16

Twenty Four brand started having it's own kind

22:18

of familiarity in the way that Marvel as

22:21

the was almost like indeed cinema answered Marvel.

22:23

So there's a risk that danger of them

22:25

kind of slipping into their own formulas by

22:27

pursuing this direction. But I am all for

22:29

any company. That still want to throw it? Throw

22:31

even more money at Filmmakers before it's over a

22:33

with you. The last word on this: What does

22:35

it say to you that there's so much appetite

22:38

for this movie that he does the number one

22:40

movie the box office after it opens In this

22:42

moment. I think you're going to or more the

22:44

some sort of. In the near

22:46

future. It. Was driving home from a rating

22:48

where trump I teach at in and with a

22:50

program on here and we do this thing in

22:52

the close to your driving drunk driving back of

22:54

my students. And. For.

22:57

Reasons that are in explicable to me. I swear I

22:59

did not bring the said. She decided to

23:01

talk to me about was born and good. It

23:04

felt like she was trying out opinions on

23:06

me to that she thought might work to

23:09

satisfy everyone in the car and enough room

23:11

generally. And. Is kept coming back to

23:13

this notion of. It's also complicated

23:15

and their about things being done on

23:17

all sides. And I could

23:20

see the relief and her voice to she was trying

23:22

out this opinion. Because. It was

23:24

a way to. Pretend. Like

23:26

you're not looking away from something horrible, but also

23:28

not say something that was going to get you

23:30

in trouble or get someone offended. It's

23:33

just such a compelling. Position.

23:35

To take comfort in feels like you're saying

23:37

something. When you're actively not

23:40

and and it's dangerous because. Fascists,

23:43

Know what to do with that? kind of central isn't.

23:46

You. Just move a little further towards Fascism. In

23:48

the Centrist has to move along with you because

23:50

their main position is to be in the center

23:52

of things. So. I think it's. A

23:55

kind of i'm. Projection.

23:58

Of what we're going to see in the

24:00

next few years where it's going to sound

24:02

provocative to say that there's extremist on all

24:04

sides. And. You're.

24:06

Going to get Civil War

24:08

type productions. I don't know that

24:10

that's a particularly good thing, but I think it's

24:13

going to be a very popular thing. are I?

24:15

I prefer you. Been here. I pretty always be

24:17

provocative pal. Thanks Arena Don't know I keep having

24:19

me back but officials have cars rather than play.

24:21

Ah, this is the first time with close to

24:23

agreed on anything so it's been a delight. Figures

24:26

Always forever be your friend. They.

24:29

They take her for Brigid be and

24:31

as that are such elevated can't. Type

24:34

the as are the best! Thank you so much. Thank you.

24:37

Are like at is a former Globe and

24:39

Mail journalist and author of the novels American

24:41

War and What's Strange Paradise He was in

24:43

Oregon, read Salmon Fillet, the freelance film critic

24:45

and regular here and commotion he was in

24:47

Toronto. You can listen to that interview by

24:49

the way with the Director of Civil War

24:52

Alex Garland Osu with Tom Power Wherever. I

25:03

gotta tell you another great thing about this

25:06

movie by Civil War is got a great

25:08

soundtrack. This is from that movie that's a

25:10

little bit of a song. Dream baby Dream

25:12

by Suicide Sir John Simpson shows up on

25:14

the soundtrack. Della Soul is on the soundtrack.

25:17

Civil War is playing and select Feeders right

25:19

now and that is over the shout. Remember

25:21

you can find us on Instagram we are

25:23

at Commotion Cbc. my name is Ellen Me

25:25

after my mood tomorrow.