Thank you for the comment! I agree this movie does a good job showing horrific violence. I would argue that movies don't send people to war. Social circumstances do, like resource scarcity. Like not having food or shelter. When people don't see the system as serving them, they will seek to overthrow it. As for this film serving as a warning... There was a great anti-war film made in 1930, All Quiet on the Western Front. Won two academy awards and was seen as such a great lesson on the horrors of war, it was recommended that the League of Nations show it to all countries of the world, so that we may never have war again. Less than ten years later, the world was in the throes of World War 2. In large part because the German govt cut unemployment, sending thousands into the arms of the fashists. We can avoid making the same mistake by showing the system serving the people.

I don’t think the MAGAs want war, fear, and death. I feel like they want peace, respect for Christian values (we’re a Christian-dominant culture after all), incentives for hard work, and decreased incentives for those who wreak havoc on our judicial system and abuse social welfare programs.

Good point! I didn't see much of it until after the fact.

Thanks for the comment! In the real world, many war journalists ARE reluctant propagandists. Sometimes they're inadvertent propagandists. Trying to "get the money shot," makes them seem less like actual journalists and more like exploitative paparazzi. Garland's point is that, in war, all sides "use violence?" Well, that's not much of a point. It's already understood. If he's making a film with media members as the main characters, why not explore how media shapes the country's perception of itself? That way he can still have his cake of not naming Democrats or Republicans, and still give us something challenging to explore.

Thanks for the comment! What did you not agree with?