Hard to believe that Texas and California would team up, but otherwise it looks like an interesting premise for a movie.
Hard to believe that Texas and California would team up, but otherwise it looks like an interesting premise for a movie.
We could isolate Russia totally from the world and maybe they could apply for membership after 2000 years.
Yes, what possible common ground could they have?
He's written some very good scripts so I'm holding out a wee bit of hope. But not much for such an inflammatory subject. The last nuanced movie I remember about "civil war" was Ride With the Devil. That came out in 1999.
And that had to be directed by a foreigner and the novel was published in the 80s.
After eight years of TDS, calls for concentration camps for anti-vaxxers, "Space to destroy" and a general musteline eagerness(on both sides) to come to lethal grips over everysinglething...?
Give it another decade and there won't be any Texans left in Texas, just Calexians.
We may lose and we may win, but we will never be here again.......
Now if they had based it one of the Kurt Schlicter novels instead of this silly premise....
Support the Second Amendment Foundation and the Firearms Policy Coalition, join and give!
They're a biblical plague but more are pouring into Utah and Idaho now than TX.Originally Posted by Trooper224
PS: Nick Offerman without a mustache is a crime against humanity.
Texas and California have made noises about seceding from the Union. And one is the bogeyman of the left, the other bogeyman of the right. So it makes sense for a movie where you want to appeal to most Americans.
And remember when demons and beasts cast their darkness, you have God's love - and Browning's wrath - to guide you.
Welp, 2024 sure is shaping up to become a "WWF battle" for the record books.
Administrator for PatRogers.org
English guy writes novel about civil war in America, riigghhhtt. I'd rather ask a virgin about sexual intercourse.
My guess is that they chose to have Texas and Cali secede jointly specifically because they don't want it to be rooted in current events. The point of philisophic sci-fi is to remove the events from the present day to allow people to think about things one or two steps removed from their current biases and reference points. To hazard a guess, the point of this movie isn't to have people pick sides, it's to examine what a civil was would actually be like to regular people in the US. If you leave current divides out of it, it's easier for people to have sympathy for the characters and leave out the assumptions their bringing in.
Here's my prediction.
Hollywood has an anti-Trump bias. So much so, they think his presidency could be the downfall of the US. It seems this is most likely the position the creators of the film are operating from, and most film makers.
Given that, the creators think it's viable that Trump gets in office, and starts a civil war. He's such an enemy of the people, that neither red or blue stronghold states, California and Texas, can appease Trump, and Trump, in all his insanity, doubles down on protecting himself, his ego, and his office in DC. He goes to war with the American people, and red and blue states equally become his enemy.
In Hollywood, the highest form of priest and prophet of their Hollyweird church is the Journalist. Therefore, there are shoot on site kill orders on journalists in DC.
When it's all said and done, I expect the moral of the story is going to essentially be-
"Unqualified presidents, like Trump, will get everyone killed. Let's just get back to the status quo and elect swamp people, for our own good."
But, I should probably just stick to making grips.
Reply With Quote