Critics at Large | The New Yorker

Episode Summary: "War Movies: What Are They Good For?"

Release Date: April 17, 2025

Introduction

In this episode of Critics at Large, The New Yorker’s esteemed critics—Vinson Cunningham, Naomi Frye, and Alexandra Schwartz—delve into the intricate world of war movies. Focusing primarily on the recently released film Warfare, the trio explores how contemporary war cinema captures the complexities of conflict, memory, and trauma, while also situating Warfare within the broader canon of war films.

Exploring Warfare: A New Approach to War Cinema

The discussion kicks off with the trio recounting their recent experience watching Warfare, directed by Alex Garland and co-directed by Ray Mendoza, a former US Navy SEAL who served in Iraq. The film is deeply personal, drawing from Mendoza's real-life experiences during a 2006 mission in Al Qaeda-controlled Iraq.

Alex Schwartz highlights the film's emphasis on memory, stating:

“It tries to capture memory. It tries to capture as accurately... what actually happened to this group of Navy SEALs on this one particular day when everything that could have gone wrong did go wrong.”
(02:56)

Naomi Frye appreciates the film's unique storytelling approach:

“There's like, actual soldiers who are then portrayed by these actors, and the way they move together as a kind of unit conveys... this kind of, like, wordless bond, but in no way sentimentalized.”
(03:43)

Vinson Cunningham raises thought-provoking questions about the purpose of war movies:

“The film raises a bunch of hard questions about how we document war, why we do it, and whether there's a right or wrong way to do it.”
(04:05)

The War Movie Canon: Classics and Their Legacy

Before diving deeper into Warfare, the critics take a moment to reflect on seminal entries in the war movie genre.

Naomi Frye cites Apocalypse Now as a personal favorite, emphasizing its depiction of war’s horrors and broader psychological implications:

“It shows... the hell of war. But it also opens up to broader psychological questions and thoughts about the state of America.”
(05:11)

Alex Schwartz recounts his abbreviated journey through war films in preparation for the episode, mentioning Full Metal Jacket and Saving Private Ryan:

• Full Metal Jacket:
  Alex notes its brutal portrayal of Marine training and the dehumanizing process soldiers undergo:

  “...the breaking down, or the attempt at breaking down individuality to get a troop of fighters.”
  (11:29)

• Saving Private Ryan:
  Vinson discusses Spielberg’s masterpiece set in Normandy, highlighting its exploration of sacrifice and heroism:

  “World War II is really important as a way station in the canon because it is a war that all Americans agree with was good.”
  (07:10)

Vincent Cunningham further elaborates on the themes of sacrifice and national identity in war films, tying them to America's self-image as a global leader willing to make significant sacrifices for a better world.

Warfare: Breaking New Ground in War Cinema

Returning focus to Warfare, the critics analyze the film's distinct narrative and stylistic choices.

Vinson Cunningham points out the film's foundational premise that everything depicted is based on the soldiers' memories, invoking Bertolt Brecht's concept of the distancing effect to create a space for critical reflection:

“That distancing creates space for thought. You know, space to ask weird questions.”
(23:48)

Nomi Frye praises the film's minimalistic dialogue and emphasis on visual storytelling:

“Most of it is silent... there's really no conversation at all.”
(12:34)

Alex Schwartz underscores the film as a form of memory work, aiming to authentically represent the traumatic experiences of war:

“Part of the exercise here is that Ray Mendoza... wanted to capture the perspective of his unit after they went through a very traumatic event together.”
(15:21)

A poignant moment in the film involves the character Elliot, portrayed by Cosmo Jarvis, who lost his memory during the mission. The narrative revolves around Mendoza's efforts to reconstruct the mission for Elliot, emphasizing the theme of "no man left behind."

Trauma and Psychological Depth in Modern War Films

The conversation shifts to the depiction of trauma in war movies, with the trio comparing Warfare to other contemporary films.

Alex Schwartz draws parallels between Warfare and Zero Dark Thirty, critiquing the latter for its portrayal of torture's role in locating Osama bin Laden:

“Zero Dark Thirty is a movie that directly implies states essentially that torture was responsible for finding and killing Osama bin Laden.”
(28:15)

Vinson Cunningham reflects on The Hurt Locker and Zero Dark Thirty, discussing their violent and nuanced portrayals of modern warfare and the moral ambiguities they present.

Nomi Frye introduces the concept of testimonial art, emphasizing the importance of bearing witness to atrocities:

“...the importance, the proof of what actually happened... just the idea of documenting something as it is happening and then having the effect of that.”
(42:29)

Vincent raises concerns about the authenticity of memories and the role of art in preserving or distorting reality, especially in the age of AI-generated imagery.

Art, Memory, and the Ethical Responsibility of War Films

Alex Schwartz muses on the power of art to create lasting narratives that shape collective memory:

“Art gives a story... room for something else, which may be why.”
(45:07)

Vincent Cunningham compares Warfare to literary works like Virginia Woolf’s Mrs. Dalloway and the poem In Flanders Fields, highlighting different artistic approaches to conveying the psychological aftermath of war.

Nomi Frye shares a real-world event—the tragic ambush of Palestinian Red Crescent ambulances by the IDF—to illustrate the ongoing need for truthful documentation and the complexities of war narratives in the digital age.

Conclusion: Warfare as a Turning Point in War Cinema

The episode concludes with the critics contemplating whether Warfare signifies a new direction for war movies. The film's focus on memory, trauma, and the psychological toll of war offers a fresh perspective that contrasts with traditional war movie tropes of heroism and clear-cut narratives. The trio agrees that Warfare not only enriches the genre but also invites viewers to engage with the nuanced realities of modern conflict.

Notable Quotes with Timestamps

• Alex Schwartz (02:56): “It tries to capture memory. It tries to capture as accurately... what actually happened to this group of Navy SEALs on this one particular day when everything that could have gone wrong did go wrong.”
• Naomi Frye (03:43): “There's like, actual soldiers who are then portrayed by these actors, and the way they move together as a kind of unit conveys... this kind of, like, wordless bond, but in no way sentimentalized.”
• Vinson Cunningham (04:05): “The film raises a bunch of hard questions about how we document war, why we do it, and whether there's a right or wrong way to do it.”
• Alex Schwartz (28:15): “Zero Dark Thirty is a movie that directly implies states essentially that torture was responsible for finding and killing Osama bin Laden.”
• Nomi Frye (42:29): “...the importance, the proof of what actually happened... just the idea of documenting something as it is happening and then having the effect of that.”

Final Thoughts

War Movies: What Are They Good For? offers an insightful exploration of how war cinema evolves to reflect contemporary understandings of conflict and its aftermath. Through the lens of Warfare and a comparison with iconic films, Vinson, Naomi, and Alex illuminate the shifting paradigms in storytelling, memory, and the ethical responsibilities of filmmakers in portraying the harsh realities of war.