"It's hard for me to answer that question. In fact, I imagine the same could be asked about any other movie. Why this one specifically? You ask me about the motivation of my film, its meaning. I don't know, honestly. People go to the movies to laugh, cry, be inspired, be moved... This movie is just one more experience. It's a moment of my life, and I want to share it with everyone. You can categorize it politically or not, but what is undeniable is that it is a precise description of what war is. Nothing more."
Ray Mendoza, former soldier who co-directs with Alex Garland in Warfare. Time of War, talks about his movie, which is also his life, or part of it, and it seems that the movie itself continues in each of his answers, or in another way, the conversation he is currently having with the press about the purpose and meaning of his movie could well be part of the film itself (along with the paraphernalia of press agents, dossiers, and promotional photos). Why stop at narrating the battle and not continue the story much further until now? In a way, a war movie alongside all the discussions about it is a complicated artifact to categorize and order, never quite clear how much is glorification, how much is denunciation, how much is an exercise in narcissism, or how much is a legitimate rejection of everything that makes us worse.
Brady Corbet, director of 'The Brutalist': "Cinema has stopped thinking big because streaming has changed the industry"
Jennifer Coolidge, the most desired and most exuberant milf: "I would love it to be true that I 'met' 200 men, but it was a joke, I was exaggerating"
To set the stage, Warfare narrates a precise moment from the past Iraq war. Again, it could be added. The difference is that now the always critical and provocative voice of Garland, director of hallucinatory prophecies like Civil War, takes charge. Or part of it. The idea, in truth, is not to tell anything specific, but everything in a generic way. It is a simple (if such an adjective were possible) battle between perfectly equipped American soldiers with the most sophisticated killing equipment and what weariness has come to call insurgent troops (who rises against whom). The entire movie is decided in its vocation to reproduce in detail, and in a carnal way even, the sensation of war, of combat, of fractured bodies. And blood. And suffering. And fear. And camaraderie. Indeed, "This is war!", as Groucho Marx would say.
"I understand," Garland now speaks, "that the movie may evoke conflicting feelings. But that cannot prevent things from being told. It is necessary to represent the world as it is, without simplifications. Sometimes, things are irreversibly complicated, and that should not stop us from talking about them. It is simply about showing what happened." Pause. "And how do we achieve an accurate representation without falling into sensationalism? I am aware that cinema has a supernatural and unhealthy ability to make everything it touches sexy. A bank robbery can be the most exciting thing in the world for someone watching from the outside, but for a hostage, it is just terrifying. We were aware of that, and that is why the participation of not only Ray but all the veterans who were in the battle and accompanied us during filming has been essential. The actors were responsible for their truth as performers and the truth of the real people who lived what they were representing. If something has guided me to make this movie, it is a sense of responsibility," explains the director in what could well be the perfect argument for his defense.
"The U.S. has always been at war, but news of Johnny Depp's mess with his girlfriend comes out, and we forget everything"
Ray recounts that perhaps ("I'm not a therapist, and I can't assert it with certainty," he says) he chose the army to escape the reality of the city of Los Angeles where he was born, which resembled a battlefield. "I grew up in a neighborhood full of gangs where death was a daily occurrence. I could list a long list of family members, uncles, nephews, or cousins who have been attacked, shot, or killed in prison... The army teaches you to handle and manage all that violence. What I found when enlisting was a certain sense of family. I was looking to be part of something, and in the army, you learn the meaning of terms like sacrifice. It's not about shooting firearms, killing people, and all that; it's about knowing that there will always be someone willing to come to your aid if you need it."
Q. Do you feel that society has forgotten about you or no longer remembers at all what happened in Iraq? Otherwise, is it time to hold governments accountable, including the Spanish government, which lied about weapons of mass destruction?
A. [Garland] What I believe is that we live in a time of complete amnesia. We all already know what happened in Iraq. I don't think it needs to be insisted upon. For me, the problem is more general. What happened there is not very different from what has happened in so many other places. Just look up and see what is happening in Gaza, Ukraine, and other wars that don't even make the news. We forget everything, and it becomes increasingly evident despite having the information. We are experiencing a global leadership crisis, and people cannot be dissociated from the responsibility of what they vote for.
Q. Is the current moment much worse than in other recent times in history?
A. [Mendoza] The United States has always been at war. We are at war. For you Europeans, it's different because suddenly you have the war right there next to you, and you feel threatened. But in truth, the war has never stopped. However, suddenly news of Johnny Depp's mess with his girlfriend comes out, and we forget everything.
A. [Garland] I do believe that the moment we are living in is frankly dangerous. Never in the last few decades have we been like this. I am 55 years old, and the world is experiencing a situation that I have not seen since 25 years before I was born, since World War II.
Warfare, as is customary in Garland's cinema, is a movie about men, men who attack, men who protect, and men who act, speak, and behave as men are supposed to behave in front of men. Some time ago, in Men (2022), masculinity in its most toxic expressions became the subject of his reflection. Could it be a problem of a deep and millennia-old testosterone poisoning? "Let it be clear that the plot of this movie is not about masculinity or anything like that. But I do believe there is a common problem in everything we talk about: the amnesia we mentioned earlier. Not long ago, we experienced a moment like the Me Too movement that seemed like a movement from which there would be no turning back, and suddenly we witness all these reactionary discourses. But not only that, the most serious thing is that we still haven't managed to change it. There are still husbands who beat their wives to death. Not long ago, my 11-year-old daughter told me how men approached her on the subway... I insist, amnesia is currently the most serious problem in my view."
Ray says he sees himself in actor D'Pharaoh Woon-A-Tai, who portrays him. He sees in him what he experienced in the past. "I can't say that I'm happy. That's not the feeling, but I am glad that things are being told as they were... Perhaps it will serve to prevent them from happening again."
And here, finally, the purpose of all this.