The Lincoln Memorial, a symbol of American unity, is shown destroyed in Alex Garland’s modern film, “Civil War.” The film, a stark depiction of a fractured United States, has drawn comparisons to classic war films, but cinematographer Rob Hardy says his visual approach was more influenced by the work of photographers William Eggleston and Saul Leiter than traditional war cinema.
Hardy, speaking to IndieWire, described his focus on capturing a singular, emotional moment within the broader chaos of the conflict. “For me, it was about sort of finding that singular moment—you look for the emotion, you want to be close enough to capture that in a subject, but also you want to be wide enough to feel the space and everything that’s going on around them,” he said. He likened his framing to that of Stanley Kubrick, prioritizing a sense of space and emotional resonance over the immediacy often associated with war photography.
This approach, while distinct, doesn’t exist in a vacuum. “Civil War” joins a long lineage of films grappling with the complexities of armed conflict, from the anti-war sentiments of 1957’s “Paths of Glory” to the visceral realism of 1998’s “Saving Private Ryan.” “Paths of Glory,” directed by Kubrick, utilizes long tracking shots and stark shadows to convey the futility and horror of World War I, focusing on the consequences of military ambition rather than glorifying battlefield heroics. The film’s power lies in its simplicity and brutality, a quality that Hardy’s work in “Civil War” seems to echo, according to analysis of the film’s style.
The influence of 1985’s “Come and See” is also apparent. Both films, it’s been noted, explore the harrowing experience of bearing witness to atrocities. While “Civil War” employs more polished close-ups, the lingering focus on the emotional toll of violence mirrors the unflinching gaze of “Come and See.”
“Saving Private Ryan,” released in 1998, redefined modern war cinema with its fragmented, handheld camerawork during the D-Day landing sequence. The film’s editing and John Williams’ score work in tandem to create a sense of both the awfulness and valor inherent in warfare. “Civil War” appears to borrow from this playbook, utilizing similar techniques to immerse the audience in the chaos of combat.
Interestingly, some observers have drawn parallels to Michael Bay’s 2007 film “Transformers.” While seemingly an outlier, “Transformers” pioneered a style of action sequencing characterized by overwhelming sound and fragmented visuals, creating a sense of disorientation and scale. This approach, whether embraced or rejected, has become a defining feature of modern action films, including “Civil War’s” depiction of the assault on the Capitol.
Kathryn Bigelow’s 2012 film, “Zero Dark Thirty,” is also cited as a stylistic touchstone. Its tautly edited depiction of the raid on Osama bin Laden’s compound, utilizing night vision cameras and a precise, soldier’s-eye view, offers a clinical yet immersive perspective on modern warfare. The film’s focus on tactical movement and threat assessment resonates with the camera work in “Civil War,” though the ultimate success of each film in conveying a meaningful message about war remains a subject of debate.
Finally, the 2012 video game “Spec Ops: The Line” offers a more meta-commentary on the allure of combat. Though it’s unlikely those involved in “Civil War” have played it, the game subverts the tropes of military shooters, forcing players to confront the psychological consequences of their actions and the inherent entertainment value of violence. The game challenges players to question their own participation in simulated warfare, a goal shared by many anti-war films.
