Home › Forums › Open Discussion › American Sniper
- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
February 25, 2015 at 5:06 am #816832
JTBParticipantI’m intrigued by a number of issues raised in the responses to the movie American Sniper.
Taking Clint Eastwood at his word and in line with his prior work, I think the movie is basically anti-war in thrust. It’s focus is on the plight of the patriot soldier and loved ones in war and it’s aftermath; about the dehumanizing effects of violence. I also think one has to separate it from Chris Kyle’s book (easy for me since I never read it) and take the movie as a creative endeavor in it’s own right.
What I’m struck by is the reluctance of critics and fans of the movie to take it as it is but instead to project their own views in what often seems to be quite insensitive to the content of the movie itself. Many “liberal” critics cite the supposed lack of context for the war in Iraq and think it thereby serves as a propaganda piece for the invasion. Lots of pro-war fans of the movie voice their outrage against the “savage” and “barbaric” Muslims they see depicted. I suspect there is a larger, quieter base of viewers who are simply glad to have the terrible experience endured by soldiers receive a respectful, sobering tribute and leave it at that.
Rather than making the movie into an Oliver Stone polemic and hammering home the disconnect between 9/11 and the invasion of Iraq, Eastwood seems content to simply show it as it happened, as the nation capitulated to or embraced the deception and geared up for war. From there he reveals the consequences. I wonder if the assumption that viewers won’t see that for themselves is condescending or perceptive? (Eastwood said he was fine with a little ambiguity.)
In any case, to me the interesting point is that whatever Eastwood’s intention, the movie will assume a meaning in popular culture. While I said I think it’s necessary to separate the movie from the book about the real Chris Kyle, that of course isn’t going to happen. Positive and critical views of the man and the war will influence viewers’ sense of the movie.
I read numerous comments that it’s popularity is due in part to the notion that the nation needs a hero when there is so much dismay about Afghanistan, Iraq and now the spawn of Iraq-ISIS. So perhaps a segment of viewers will not see Eastwood’s deep sorrow over how sincere, patriotic Americans are thrust into ill-conceived, pointless military adventures that rob them of their humanity and lives. If that’s the case, then maybe the liberal critics have a point. I know when I left the movie, I felt incredibly sad.
If we wind up with a series of Rambo like fantasies to express our collective notions of the Iraq War, that will be unfortunate in my opinion. But it’s hard to predict what our culture will embrace. My impression is that Lone Survivor didn’t get anything near the acclaim as did American Sniper. One important difference is that in LS, ordinary Afghans confronted the Taliban to save an American soldier who escaped to survive whereas the American Sniper couldn’t escape the horrific consequences of war even at home. Does that suggest people are ready to look at this experience with clear eyes? I hope so.
(It’s possible to have an interesting discussion about how American Sniper extends Eastwood’s dismantling of the cowboy gunfighter mythos he presented in Unforgiven, but that might be better later on.)
February 25, 2015 at 5:26 am #822292
Jd seattleParticipantI simply enjoyed the story depicting the hardships of war on the man, while deployed and at home. The setting and enemy was mostly irrelivent for me.
February 25, 2015 at 4:49 pm #822293
wakefloodParticipantJTB, I’ll respond to one of your points, not having seen AS yet.
You ask how the American experience in the Iraq/Afghan wars will be mythologized? Excellent question.
I suspect that we can look at another war with sketchy goals and the framing of it post event – Vietnam.
While I might suggest that a plurality, if not a majority look back on it as an unfortunate and needless excursion, there are those (many of whom worked very hard to NOT participate in it – I’m looking at you, Dick Cheney) who still fashion it as a necessary and patriotic war that we just didn’t stick with long enough to win. Easy to say for a chicken hawk.
Many of those voices, some of whom were instrumental in forcing our Afghan excursion, are still given platforms today to frame it as the right thing to have done and would do it again.
Are they in the majority? Likely not. Is that viewpoint held by enough people to create that “fuzziness” of history that will be shared both anecdotally and through media and textbooks to the next generation(s)?
I suspect the answer is yes, and that leaves me cold and uncomfortable.
February 25, 2015 at 5:19 pm #822294
wakefloodParticipantAnd for those who ponder such things, I’ve spoken with a co-worker who did two tours of Iraq who had the following response to a comment about Hurt Locker made by someone passing by.
“What a piece of sh*t. They just made stuff up.”
So, you have a major award winning movie that was highly praised and is now ingrained as part of they mythology of that war and at least one participant (he indicated that the movie was joked about by his buddies.) suggested that it was NOT indicative of reality. Not surprising on some level as every historical event is mythologized so we’ll likely be playing this one out for many years to come.
And based on ANOTHER American sniper’s thoughts on his participation in that war, it makes it clear that even other participants have different takes on it.
February 25, 2015 at 7:31 pm #822295
dobroParticipantThis is just another in a long series of propaganda events to further the militarization of our society and the fetishizing of the military that has been in high gear ever since 9/11.
after Viet Nam, the lesson antiwar activists and citizens hoped the plutocrats would learn was to not involve us in useless wars of choice. Instead, they learned to shift the military burden to the poor and minority communities, never ask for sacrifice from the vast middle class and when the vets come asking what happened to their healthcare, their benefits, their payback for their service to the corporate overlords, to give them a hearty “God bless you and God bless America and thank you for your service!” and send them back to their cardboard box under the bridge.
Sick, sad, and, unfortunately, the military-corporate-industrial-oligarchical world we live in today.
February 26, 2015 at 12:38 am #822296
JoBParticipantJTB..
one of the hardest things for a writer to accept is that no matter what their intention… every reader will take away their own idea of what that story meant. It is the same with films.
If Clint Eastwood intended to make a movie that the majority of his audience would see as an indictment of war… he failed.
what “America” is taking away is a glorified hero… not a man broken by war.
February 26, 2015 at 5:28 pm #822297
wakefloodParticipantJoB, that topic specifically, was dealt with in a very good and mostly unseen movie from 2007, called “In the Valley of Elah”.
Highly recommend it.
Tommy Lee Jones plays a retired military investigator looking into his son’s disappearance after return from Iraq.
February 26, 2015 at 7:01 pm #822298
dhgParticipantWow, dobro, that was eloquent. The war machine has got a grip on this country and is not letting go. It’s half our annual budget but none of the Republicans will talk about cutting it. Quite the opposite.
I haven’t seen this movie but I understand it greatly humanizes a horrible act and that the real sniper did not agonize over his actions, he reveled in them.
February 26, 2015 at 8:13 pm #822299
SmittyParticipant“It’s half our annual budget”
Where do you get that number? More like 20%
Oh wait….do you make 77 cents on the dollar too?
February 26, 2015 at 8:41 pm #822300
JanSParticipantwhile wake may be off on his percentages, here’s where to get the info..
http://www.cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=1258
https://www.cbo.gov/taxonomy/term/17/featured
no need to be snippy about the .77, like all the women, etc. are lying on here…it doesn’t come across well :)
February 26, 2015 at 8:43 pm #822301
JanSParticipantand, hey, all..it’s playing at the Admiral…no need to go downtown to see it. Me? I’ll pass…
February 27, 2015 at 4:40 am #822302
tttParticipantFrom an NPR interview of bradley cooper who helped produce the movie; he said eastwood’s intent was to bring light to the mental/emtional struggles that a soldier goes through because of what they experienced in war. Chris kyle struggled when he returned (per the movie; i have not read the book), and he tried to help others that were struggling too. He was killed by a man he was trying to help, that, from what i have read about the court case, had underlying mental instability before even being deployed, but that was not known until after he murdered kyle. Cooper said eastwood intentionally tried to take politics out of the movie.
Btw, if you are complelled to help a veteran post deployment, consider giving to woundedwarriorproject.org
February 27, 2015 at 3:51 pm #822303
JoBParticipantgiving to wounded warrior project is something i can support
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.