“Civil War” focuses on a team of military-embedded journalists as they take a risky journey across a dystopian future U.S. in a race against time to reach Washington DC before rebel factions attack the White House. The film stars Kirsten Dunst (“The Power of the Dog”), Cailee Spaeny (“Priscilla”), Wagner Moura (“Devs”), Stephen Henderson (“Dune”), and Nick Offerman (“Parks and Recreation”). Critics have been generally kind to the film since its premiere at SXSW, as it currently boasts a 92{aa83d2d274e5cebe1bf02c48557a30262dc5b65c32a1a77feb451c1419135e41} approval rating on Rotten Tomatoes. You can read /Film’s “Civil War” review right here.

The big thing is, as it always is, whether or not audiences agree with critics. More to the point, whether or not that critical buzz gets audiences out beyond opening weekend. The film is undoubtedly going to be divisive, but it can’t be so much so that it falls off a cliff after its debut. It’s also important to point out that this is very much an American movie and may have limited appeal overseas. Be that as it may, with a $50 million budget, A24 probably needs the film to earn at least $150 million worldwide to justify its existence. For what it’s worth, the studio’s biggest movie ever is “Everything Everywhere All at Once” ($143 million worldwide). No other A24 film has ever grossed $100 million or more.

Looking at the larger picture, Garland has never been a particularly safe bet as a director. “Ex Machina” was a solid hit for A24, pulling in $38 million in its day amidst mass acclaim. But it was a much cheaper movie to make. “Annihilation,” on the other hand, ended up in a messy distribution situation and only made $43 million, largely because it streamed on Netflix in most of the world. Meanwhile, 2022’s “Men” was an outright financial disaster, taking in just $10 million worldwide. So the fact that Garland is making the studio’s most expensive movie to date is interesting.

“Civil War” hits theaters on April 12, 2024.