American Sniper – What We Criticize
I quickly grew tired of reading passionate reviews about American Sniper that contained a sentence midpoint which read, “I haven’t seen the movie.” And so it was that I decided to go see the movie myself.
I’ll start by saying that the most common complaint I’ve heard – that “it glorifies war” – falls flat. The theater was full, and as several hundred people sat through the credits in silence, and got up in silence, and walked out of the theater in silence, I’m pretty sure they weren’t all fired up to get out there and go to war. My guess is that like me, they were thinking that war is awful, and horrific, and if it doesn’t kill you it likely breaks something inside you.
My second problem with criticism of the movie is the notion, shared by Michael Moore, that snipers by virtue of what they do are “evil,” and the idea that somehow they engage in dirty pool by shooting at someone who isn’t shooting back. And I have to ask… what rule book are we playing by? This is war, and it hasn’t been a gentleman’s game perhaps ever, but certainly not since we lined up in brightly colored uniforms and marched in neat rows slaughtering each other on an actual field of battle. To wish that war had a code of ethics, and conformed to our ideas of civilized behavior seems naive. We gave up civilized behavior when we went to war. And herein lies the problem.
When we go to war, we are asking people who were raised to not fight on the playground, and to be nice to each other, and to live by the rules of society and a code of ethics where aggression is punished, where the bad guys are the violent ones, and the nice people use their words – and we are asking them to selectively forget that while they go kill people for a few months. Then we let them come home to families, and people who go about their lives oblivious to war. And instead of letting them heal, and process, and put the experience behind them, we make them go back. Again and again and again. We demand they turn this civilian code of morality on, and off, and on and off. We can’t do that to people and expect that they won’t need to find a narrative to justify what they do, a reason that they make it ok. Soldiers kill the enemy in theory so that the enemy won’t kill them – or their buddies, or fellow soldiers. Kill other people before they kill you. And the less they seem like people, the easier it is to kill them.
So what happens when the enemy is a child with an IED? What do you do? This is a question that most of us will never have to answer. And this is why writing a tidy little review of American Sniper is impossible. If you have the actual experience to relate to this movie, you cannot be objective about it, and for good reason. If you are detached enough to be objective, then you lack the experience to make an informed judgment.
Was the story completely “true?” Well, probably not. Welcome to Hollywood. They can’t even stick to the plot of the Hobbit for Pete’s sake. But they are just doing their job too. They make movies so you can sit for a few hours and think outside your box, see the world through different eyes. And this movie does that. The acting in some cases was brilliant, and in others a bit 2-dimensional. And Clint Eastwood is not my favorite person, but he’s a good director.
Was Chris Kyle a hero, or a villain? The answer is neither, and that’s what has people at each other’s throats over this film. In real life very few of us are heroes, or villains. We’re all out there in our grey hats trying to pigeonhole complicated thoughts and unpleasant acts into black and white. Chris Kyle lived in the world of grey. He was wired in a way that allowed him do things that most of us couldn’t do. But do you seek out gentle, compassionate, non-violent, humble caretakers to go to war and shoot people? Probably not.
The bottom line is that Chris Kyle did what we asked him to do. He didn’t perch on a rooftop in New York City and pick off people coming out of an office building. But he had to commit virtually those same acts a few thousand miles away, and be ok with that in his own mind. As a country, I think we need to acknowledge that we ask combat soldiers to do the unthinkable every day. And perhaps we shouldn’t be so critical of them when they do what we ask.
If we are going to criticize, let’s be merciless with those who get us into wars in the first place. Be ruthless with them. Be brutal. Make them justify their behavior – not a sniper, not a Hollywood director. The movie will mean very different things, depending on who is watching. But I hope we can all leave the theater, in our silence, with a sense that war should always be the last resort, and that even when it’s fought at a conveniently far distance from our lives here, it always comes home.
I like the comment from The Nation: “It”s the same war movie we’ve been watching for 75 years.” and think Chris Hedge’s critique summed up the movie best.
It is hard to be merciless, ruthless, and to demand accountability when you have fear and warmongers becoming the architects of war and defining patriotism on their terms. For all their shortcomings, the Vietnam protests were essentially asking, “What the hell are we doing?”
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/killing_ragheads_for_jesus_20150125
Mike
The Film was not about showing both sides or trying to understand the conflict on some higher level it was about one mans story his motivations and his battle with it I don’t get why your trying to make this into some dissertation on war and the meaning of life.
I think the movie never asked the question of “why the people in Iraq are fighting” because A. only a small fraction of the population was fighting and B. It doesn’t matter to the soldier the movie is about.
This Film is not a documentary
I spent a lot of time in the Infantry and let me tell you why we fight is because its our job you send us we fight. Nobody else is going to cover our backs in a combat zone except us. The deeper reflection happens when your out of the fight. Men have been killing other tribes since history began thinking happy thoughts will not end that, neither will wishing upon a star.
There are sheep, and there are Wolves, and no matter there motivations there are Sheepdogs, just be happy we have them cause when Uncle Sam calls we need Sheepdogs not Sheep
One last thing the Air Force officer who they interviewed was in a communications squadron and then an attorney hearing his view on combat is like hearing me talking about molecular cell biology neither of us knows the slightest thing about it .
This is the last I’m posting about this I have two many friends in to many circles of hell over both these wars to debate the value of soldiers.
Sickening… We are taught to kill from our earliest moments. No one invaded us…..which is a valid reason. To defend yourself. WE are invaders. We have no valid reason to be there. It was WRONG FROM THE BEGINNING..!!
As Jeanne said: “And I have to ask… what rule book are we playing by? This is war, and it hasn’t been a gentleman’s game perhaps ever…. To wish that war had a code of ethics, and conformed to our ideas of civilized behavior seems naive. We gave up civilized behavior when we went to war…”
Jeanne, I appreciate your thoughts about what Michael Moore had to say about snipers. Most of the time, I curiously read what he has to say on a given subject. This time, I think he just carelessly shot off his mouth.
To me, it’s a point of view: If a German sniper murdered your uncle in WWII, that’s one thing. If an American sniper saved your mom or dad, and their convoy in Iraq, that’s something else. I guess that’s all pretty much black-and-white to me — not ANY shades of gray.
His later comments, however, tell various ways he supports today’s American military: “My 12 Years of Support for the Troops” http://www.thewrap.com/michael-moore-fires-another-subtle-shot-at-american-sniper/
Overall, I think Moore’s a good guy, but he could have been a bit more circumspect when criticizing American snipers who protect the lives of our military today.
My grief with Michael Moore’s tweet is that it was a tweet, the 21st century way of almost assuring that the tweet-ee will put his/her foot into his/her mouth. Had Michael Moore written an up-ed column or an entry into his Facebook page explaining the rationale for his 140 characters, he might have avoided the entire kerfuffle which Sarah Palin turned truly vicious over the weekend, as only Sarah Palin can do.
What I find interesting is that Michael Moore is correct about the word “sniper.” The connotation is that the sniper is doing something cowardly, like hiding behind a tree or a big boulder and shooting someone. In previous wars, if the sniper was on your side he was called a “sharpshooter.” He did the same job by seeing the person responsible for the machine gun nest or the messenger sneaking up to size up the forces on your side. It made him a “good guy.” If the person was doing the same job for the enemy’s side, he was seen to be a “sniper” to the other side. So, it stands to reason, that Michael Moore was told as a child that his uncle had been killed by a sneaky sniper.
What is lacking in all of this current rush to judgment against Michael Moore by the right and by lots of people is that they are or choose to be entirely ignorant of his contributions to the documentary filmmaking world, to the communities in which he has lived, and to the returning veterans from George Bush’s gratuitous war in Iraq. Fox News certainly doesn’t want anyone to know what Michael Moore’s contributions have been and Sarah Palin would be even less receptive to knowing the truth about him.
Michael Moore opposed the invasion of Iraq openly and eloquently. But he has always been most generous to those who have returned from Bush’s war and from other wars. He is not ungrateful and he is certainly not unpatriotic. So please do not dismiss him so quickly here at Mudflats.
In his film production company he gives preference to veterans. And in the area where I live, he has restored the downtown movie theatre which had been closed for almost two decades and a major blight in the center of town. Our town now hosts an annual film festival (no. 11 this year) that brings many films, film artists, fans, and lots of income to the local hotels and restaurants, to say nothing of the local bookstores. He hires veterans at the area movie theaters whose restoration he has spearheaded, he hosts special programs for veteran groups at the theaters, he gives free passes to active-duty members of the military and their families. He does not deserve to be vilified for having tweeted rather than written an essay.
Michael Moore and liberals like him treat veterans with respect, unlike the GOP members of Congress who steadfastly refuse to support any bill that will help veterans have a better return to a peaceful society. People in this country who wrap themselves so easily in the flag and tout their patriotism are almost always the least truly patriotic among us.
Finally this whole kerfuffle about “American Sniper” arises in part because the subject of the film, Chris Kyle, was not all that heroic except in his own mind. The movie pretty much ignores the ugly parts of his book because his family did not want the whole story told. That’s okay, so long as we all understand that this is a Hollywood interpretation of him. Maybe the people who sit mute in the theater during the credits have never seen a movie where there is any shred of ambiguity. At least Clint Eastwood maintains that there is ambiguity, having said that it is an “anti-war” movie.
For me, I really enjoyed “The Theory of Everything” and “The Imitation Game.” I’ve gave up on war movies, the prerogative of this seventy-one year old biddy.
We are the enemy!! We are a valid target! Wouldn’t we be doing the same to defend OURSELVES…??
I was talking about the semantics of it. The word “sniper” has a negative connotation as in Michael Moore’s statement that he uncle was killed by a “sniper.” We shouldn’t have abandoned the term “sharpshooter” when we’re doing the same thing. Obviously in war time, the sharpshooter/sniper is a valuable person to have around which ever side you’re on.
This is an excellent point Beaglemom. Thank you Jeanne for a thoughtful post about the complexity of the human condition.
I am old enough to be of the Vietnam war era, so I learned a long time ago to honor our military personnel, regardless of whether I support the politicians who sent them to war.
My husband and I saw the movie over the weekend. Like you, Jeanne, we noted that the audience was silent while exiting the theater at the conclusion.
Chris Kyle, the sniper, did what he was sent to do. Apparently, he did it very well, better than just about anyone else. No doubt, his actions saved American lives.
What troubles me in this story is Chris Kyle, the civilian, who finally came back home after his four tours of duty, was not the humble, heroic character that Clint Eastwood portrayed on the screen.
Kyle himself bragged about killing two would-be Texas carjackers (there are no records of such with local authorities) and killing 30 people in post-Katrina New Orleans. He was successfully sued for lying about a bar fight with Jesse Ventura. http://www.salon.com/2015/01/23/7_enormous_lies_american_sniper_is_telling_america_partner/
He also claimed that ALL the royalties ($3 mil) from his book went to charity; in fact, only about 2% did. ($52,000) http://www.nationalreview.com/article/384176/justice-jesse-ventura-was-right-his-lawsuit-j-delgado/page/0/2
Chris Kyle’s history as a successful sniper is well-recorded. However, the unsubstantiated civilian killings he bragged about later, unsupported by reality, along with his various other character issues, taints my feelings about this movie. That being said, Clint made a good movie.
To my core..I would wish..the human race..had no war, no political battles and no religious folks preaching..’our god is bigger then your god’. I dislike intensely ..heated arguments. Having grow up on a trap line..in the wilds of Oregon.. if..I found myself..in an attacked..situation..in a parking lot, or was in a..war zone..I would mean to..survive, find ways to ..make I it to the best humane resolution..should there be one..and yes..shoot to kill.
EXACTLY!
I haven’t seen the movie and I won’t but for personal reasons not political ones. From what I could see in the trailer, and certainly it doesn’t need that to surmise, this is a movie about the ghastly circumstances men and women endure in combat, whatever the required duty they have, and what it does to them as human beings who probably left home pretty much like any kids raised in peaceful neighborhoods, for the most part, and required by necessity to kill other people. They come home broken (yes, they do) and repair themselves enough to function sometimes very well, sometimes not so much. Certainly there are those who had different experiences, a few of them were not good folk to start with but most were pretty average joes, as my dad would have called them. I have family members who have been through this. We have been through it with them. None of them wanted to be called heroes, and none of them wanted to become what they had to be to survive. . Watch it again played out in a drama? No and no and no.
Eventually, I’ll see this movie, when it’s out on DVD and I can borrow it from the library. Business Insider today had a column on what was portrayed in the film vs. what was in Chris Kyle’s memoir. Usually, I don’t like Eastwood’s direction. I would have liked The Changeling if it had used period music. Instead, every time Eastwood’s jazz piano chimed in, I was pulled right out of my suspension of disbelief. It happened so often that I couldn’t even enjoy the fine acting on display.
Thanks for your measured review, Jeanne. This is one theatrical experience I don’t need or want. I hate war.
As a teenager I had a poster in my room which read, “War is not healthy for children and other living things”.
Little did I know then what it actually meant.
Thank you for watching the movie and reporting to “us”.
Heard a wingnut claim that they would use this movie to beat up on libs.in the next election. I’m not gonna go see it. I detest wingnut wars and the mockery they make of those sent to kill and be killed. Not everyone in Iraq volunteered to be there,just because we have an all volunteer army. That is something whitey wingnut can’t visualize. It wasn’t whitey wingnut’s kids lives on the line and has hardly ever been the case.
But,we can balance the budget if we cut healthcare and benefits to all our veterans as well as the poor,the elderly and kids forced by wingnuts to be brought into this world and then neglected. Next war they drum up,they can be the first to “volunteer” to get their asses shot off and die horrible deaths and then not be honored when they return in flag draped caskets-out of public sight and mind. We don’t need no stinking reminders that war is dirty and bloody and messy and other people’s sons and daughters die for korporate profits.
Eastwood is a good director and I like much of his acting. His politics stink!!
Mike you missed the whole point
and………..?
“If we are going to criticize, let’s be merciless with those who get us into wars in the first place. Be ruthless with them. Be brutal. Make them justify their behavior – not a sniper, not a Hollywood director.’
That is the point,
War is a political solution, but war for a soldiers is not political its there job. I detest all wars but would deploy again in an instant if I still could. This movie isn’t about politics its one guys story (dramatized by hollywood) about what we as a collective had him do for us.
As for it not being whitey wing nuts kids on the line, in reality it is. White middle class kids make up 85 percent of the combat arms, and they are 90% republican now those numbers are not military wide its just for the combat arms grunts. So whitey wing nut tends to carry a disproportionate amount of the casualty count in any armed conflict.
The american people need every reminder we can give them of the costs of war keeps them from thinking its a good idea.
Well said Bill.
However you might of opened a can of worms with those accurate stats.
Whitey wingnuts are the overwhelmingly white,well-off,rethuglican pols whose kids are not put in danger. . Here is a quote from 2003-If anybody should be complaining about battlefield deaths, it is poor, rural whites,” says Charles Moskos, a military sociologist at Northwestern University in Illinois.
In 2012 32% of enlisted troops were conservative,23% liberal and 45% moderates.In 2013 about 70% of combat troops were white .
were not talking about all enlisted just Combat Arms and when you add in the ranger battalions and other special operations forces and remove non combat MOS assigned to combat units you’ll get the 85% white
In 2012 43.81 percent of all enlisted troops identified as republican I don’t know where your guy got his numbers from but if broken down by MOS that number climbs to 87.56 percent Republican for combat arms
most of the combat arms soldiers come from white middle class to white upper class neighborhoods and income brackets http://www.heritage.org/static/reportimages/045130A94EE437E6D7284160BBAA2862.gif
You were talking about combat soldiers. I was,have always been and will always be ticked off at war mongers-mainly white rethuglicans-who would rather see our sons and daughters die than to try diplomacy. Don’t confuse the issues. Where did I brutalize either the sniper or the director. I stated my humble opinion about Eastwood. This movie will be used as propaganda in the next election. It is about politics-all of it. The decisions to invade a sovereign nation that hadn’t attacked us. The deliberate destruction of cities and people,the votes to give dumbass dubya carte blanche to kill at will,the whole thing is/was political. And that is my last word on this subject!