Movie Reviews
Movie Review: 'Warfare,' a forensic portrait of combat, hunts war-movie clichés
Ray Mendoza and Alex Garland ’s “Warfare” is more defined by what it isn’t than what it is.
In their Iraq War -set film, there’s never any description of a wider strategy. There are no backstories to the American Navy SEALs whom we follow on an unspectacular mission. There’s not a short monologue about mom’s cooking back home, let alone a speculative word about life after the war. There’s not even a dramatic close-up to be had.
“Warfare” aspires to be, simply, just that. We are effectively embedded in a platoon on what seems to be a minor mission in Iraq in 2006. Walking in two single-file lines down a Ramadi street at night, one soldier says, “I like this house.” Under the cover of darkness, they rush inside the apartment building to set up their position while keeping the family inside quiet. In the morning, their sniper, laid out on a raised bed, sweats while looking out on an increasingly anxious scene. His rifle’s crosshairs drift through the street scenes outside, as suspected jihadists mobilize around them.
War-movie cliches have been rigorously rooted out of “Warfare,” a terse and chillingly brutal immersion in a moment of the Iraq War. Clouds of IED smoke and cries of agony fill Garland and Mendoza’s film, with little but the faces of the SEALs to ground a nearly real-time, based-on-a-true-story dramatization. Few words are spoken outside the intense patter of official Navy jargon. When the mission comes to its bloody and hectic conclusion, the only utterance left hanging in the clouded air is the unanswered, blood-curdling shriek of a woman watching the men leave her bombed-out home: “Why?”
A year after “Civil War,” a movie predicated on bringing the horror of war home to American soil, Garland has returned with a film even more designed to implode fanciful and far-away ideas of war by bringing it acutely close. Mendoza, an Iraq War veteran who served as a consultant on “Civil War,” co-writes and co-directs “Warfare” from his own first-hand experience in Iraq. The movie is introduced as based on the memories of the troops involved, and “Warfare” gives little reason to quibble with its ultra verisimilitude.
That doesn’t mean Mendoza and Garland’s film isn’t without its sympathies. For a movie quaking with sonic tremors, the first thumps sounded in “Warfare” come from the 2004 music video to Eric Prydz’s “Call on Me,” as the battalion bops in harmony to the female bodies gyrating on a screen in front of them.
In battle, they are hardly any less choreographed. If a mode of American war movie leans toward showing the follies of war on the ground, the soldiers of “Warfare” — while not immune to a little “Call on Me” imitation — are supremely precise. When things go haywire here, it’s not because the SEALs aren’t alert or are haphazard in their regard for the lives around them.
This image released by A24 shows a scene from “Warfare.” Credit: AP
Among them are sniper Elliott (Cosmo Jarvis), Eric (Will Poulter), Tommy (Kit Connor), Sam (Joseph Quinn) and Ray (D’Pharaoh Woon-A-Tai). We never learn anything about any of them except their fidelity to their comrades and their willingness to do what’s necessary when even the heaviest fire is raining down on them.
Sounds of fire pop through the immersive sound design of Glenn Freemantle. Whether “Warfare” is the most accurate war film ever made or not, it’s certainly among the most sonically enveloping experiences of battle. After an explosion rocks the men, “Warfare” staggers in a concussed haze. The film’s craft, generally, is impressive, including production designer Mark Digby’s recreation of the Ramadi block.
Despite all the effort to shed “Warfare” of war-movie tropes, though, they do intrude in one glaring way. Like countless movies before it, “Warfare” runs its credits alongside photographs of the real SEALs (some faces are blurred out), along with footage of them with the actors and filmmakers on set. To honor the real men is, of course, laudable and necessary. But the behind-the-scenes tone of the epilogue chafes with the spell cast by “Warfare.”
The point of “Warfare,” to me, seems less about paying these Navy SEALs tribute than showing combat how it truly unspools — messily, chaotically and pointlessly. With the exception of a pair of Iraqi interpreters, “Warfare” — despite its broad title — limits itself to one side of a battle. But I’d argue the only bad guy in “Warfare” isn’t on either side of the fight, but is found in the aerial viewpoint — used sporadically by the filmmakers — from a U.S. plane overhead that renders every person mere pixels on a screen.
This image released by A24 shows Charles Melton, center, in a scene from “Warfare.” Credit: AP
In this forensic portrait of war, the only way to not get what’s happening on the ground is to be too far from it. François Truffaut famously said there’s no such thing as an anti-war film because movies inherently glamorize war. “Warfare,” though, is intent on challenging that old adage.
“Warfare,” an A24 release is rated R by the Motion Picture Association for intense war violence and bloody/grisly images, and language throughout. Running time: 107 minutes. Three stars out of four.
Movie Reviews
Movie Review | Bugonia
Bugonia (Photo – Focus Features)
Part body horror, science fiction, and a fractured mirror reflecting our troubled times, Bugonia, directed by Yorgos Lanthimos, is a big-screen, kick-in-the-pants kind of movie.
House of Bugonia
Directed by Yorgos Lanthimos – 2025
Reviewed by Garrett Rowlan
Starring Emma Stone and Jesse Plemons, the film plays out like a chamber piece after Plemons’s character, the unstable Teddy, kidnaps Stone’s character, the “pure corporate evil” (his words), Michelle Fuller, with the reluctant help of Teddy’s cousin Donnie, played by newcomer Aidan Delois.
The reason for the kidnapping is best described as idiosyncratic.
After being subjected to a brutal ordeal—she’s shown in the opening minutes undergoing extensive martial arts training—Michelle is confined to a basement, where she and Teddy engage in a tense game of cat-and-mouse. The direction these exchanges take was not what I expected.
The cast is excellent. Of Emma Stone, I can only quote Celluloid Heroes by The Kinks: “If you cover him with garbage, George Sanders would still have style.” Well, Stone’s Michelle Fuller isn’t covered in garbage, but she is drenched in blood, some of it her own, shot with electricity, beaten, tackled, shorn, and chained. And yet, there’s that voice, those green eyes, and the way she’s photographed in corporate power attire at the start: from the bottom of the frame, she looks ten feet tall, every bit the star.
I first saw Jesse Plemons shooting a kid in cold blood on Breaking Bad, and with his recessed eyes and jutting chin, he retains that ruthlessness with a hint of madness. He’s like an auto wreck you can’t look away from. Aidan Delois, though his lines grow sparser as the movie progresses, does a remarkable job of acting with his eyes. They seem to know what his confused mind doesn’t.
There’s cruelty in Bugonia, to be sure, but it’s nothing like the impaling of a black cat I recall from Lanthimos’s otherwise-excellent Dogtooth. In fact, given the film’s underlying themes of allegiances, the shocking scenes are stomach-turning but motivated.
I liked Poor Things, Lanthimos’s last film, but Bugonia is even better.
> Playing at Regency Academy Cinemas, Regal Paseo, IPIC Theaters, Regal Edwards Alhambra Renaissance, Landmark Pasadena Playhouse, AMC Atlantic Times Square 14, AMC Santa Anita 16, Regal UA La Canada, AMC Laemmle Glendale, and LOOK Dine-In Cinemas Monrovia.
Movie Reviews
Nouvelle Vague
Netflix delivers a black-and-white biopic of famed French New Wave director Jean-Luc Godard and the making of his first feature film, Breathless. The movie delivers a compelling look at the filmmaking process. But harsh (if limited) language, suggestive moments, some spiritual fumbling and constant smoking could make this a tricky film to navigate.
Movie Reviews
“Sentimental Value” Lacks the Focus to Cut Deep – The Wesleyan Argus
The pre-release screening of “Sentimental Value,” which played on Saturday, Nov. 8 at the Goldsmith Family Cinema, was both confusing and simple. A collection of vaguely assorted scenes with a lack of focus, the movie was also an interesting exploration into a troubled family desperate to improve. Although I understand why a lot of people like this movie, I think “Sentimental Value” could’ve been much better.
There were some elements I just didn’t understand. I’m not knowledgeable about the film industry or film production, so there were some references that I didn’t get. I wonder if I would like the movie more if I understood the film buff references and the jokes related to Norwegian culture, both of which flew over my head. I mean, this is quite literally a film about filmmaking. I feel similarly whenever an author focuses on their craft so directly: It detracts from the movie. It’s like a writer writing about writing; it feels almost redundant.
The movie has a relatively simple plot that’s filled in with a lot of character scenes. In short, the film focuses on the lives and journeys of two sisters, Agnes and Nora. Their father, Gustav, was a film director, but he left them both. Agnes has a child, while Nora remains single and focuses on her acting career. The general plot structure is fine, and I actually think Gustav is a really chilly character, in an unsettling way. His very presence brings an air of unease into every scene he’s in. The character of Gustav is really intriguing and shines far above most of the other characters in the film.
The central flaw of the movie is how unfocused it is. There are a lot of scenes that seem to be there to show off cinematography more than anything else. The film employs swift cuts to black between scenes, which is quite jarring and leaves little room for cohesion. It makes it seem like the director doesn’t know how to transition between scenes and is just throwing them together. I think there should’ve been a clearer sense of temporality to the movie with the past and present divided into separate worlds because right now, the flashback scenes look and feel basically the same as the modern-day scenes. I will say the camera quality and minute-to-minute cinematography is well crafted, but it’s not perfect.
I will give a huge amount of praise to the music, which is rich and fulfilling. I almost wonder if “Sentimental Value” would be better as a playlist than as a movie. The soundtrack is warm and comforting, fitting right into the movie and enhancing each scene.
We also get a slight hint of WW2 and Nazi elements in the movie, with Nora and Agnes’ family being victims. This is more of a backdrop than a main focus, which is a bit unfortunate. I wonder how the movie would be different if they made this historical context a primary focus. They could’ve explored the impact of wartime trauma destroying families across generations.
Also, speaking of missed opportunities…
It’s both interesting and sad how Agnes’ child, Erik, is the least boring part of “Sentimental Value.” He almost feels like the emotional center here, in a subplot where Gustav wants to have his grandchild play a role in his movie. Gustav wants to relive his golden years and connect with his grandchildren, but Agnes is still wary of him and doesn’t want to. I was quite invested in this conflict across three generations, and I wanted to see more of it. Sadly, it doesn’t go anywhere. It reminds me of another film, “Happyend” (2024), where there’s a balanced sibling-like relationship with two characters, done much better than “Sentimental Value.” Here, the focus is primarily on Nora, and Agnes really doesn’t have much screen time. I think the storyline with Agnes and Erik should’ve been a major part of the story. This plot could’ve ended many ways: either with Agnes realizing her child should bond with their grandpa, or Gustav realizing not to control his family.
The lack of this conclusion makes me wonder if there was a practical consideration about the difficulty of working with child actors. Even then, there were better ways to end that story! This brings me back to the lack of structure within the movie; it needed to have better pacing to make the story work. As it stands, the ending of “Sentimental Value” falls flat.
“Sentimental Value” is a film with a lot of room for improvement, if only the filmmaker had sorted out the disorganized nature and lack of focus within the movie. In the end, however, I can somewhat appreciate what it went for. Even if the execution wasn’t the best, the atmosphere, characters, and music made for a pretty fascinating movie.
Total rating: 3 stars
Atharv Dimri can be reached at adimri@wesleyan.edu.
-
Nebraska1 week agoWhere to watch Nebraska vs UCLA today: Time, TV channel for Week 11 game
-
Austin, TX1 week agoHalf-naked woman was allegedly tortured and chained in Texas backyard for months by five ‘friends’ who didn’t ‘like her anymore’
-
Hawaii7 days agoMissing Kapolei man found in Waipio, attorney says
-
Vermont4 days agoNorthern Lights to dazzle skies across these US states tonight – from Washington to Vermont to Maine | Today News
-
Southwest1 week agoTexas launches effort to install TPUSA in every high school and college
-
New Jersey6 days agoPolice investigate car collision, shooting in Orange, New Jersey
-
West Virginia5 days ago
Search for coal miner trapped in flooded West Virginia mine continues for third day
-
Seattle, WA7 days agoSoundgarden Enlist Jim Carrey and Seattle All-Stars for Rock Hall 2025 Ceremony
