>>12036
Looked gay the first time I saw it and it looks gay now.
>>12039
>In what world would Texas and California secede from the union as a joint political entity?
Literally zero to anyone politically aware. For civil war analogies, California is like an evil version of Mississippi before the war (the reason the Union raped and pillaged through the entire south because they couldn't win a resource war), and Texas is more akin to Kansas or Florida during the same time period. Not even a minuscule probability. They have to make it East vs West because that's the only socially acceptable social discourse that is allowed though, and the directors are too stupid to make it a three-party war between the North-Eastern states, the Southern/Central states, and the West Coast.
If they made it North vs South then people would allude to the last civil war and the directors would have to choose a political slant. If they made it Red vs Blue then they would get in trouble with the feds and with the wokeshit corporate investors, but there's clearly money to be made so they came up with this cockaninny bullshit to be milquetoast and appeal to the lowest common denominator who will be stupid enough to think the movie is supposed to be about "their side." Alex Garland is a Britbong hack and he's still riding the coattails of the only two successful movies he ever worked on (Dredd where he was only a writer, and 28 Days Later) the way George Lucas rode the coattails of Star Wars.