Let's prove movie bob wrong : derive a moral from American Sniper

the_dramatica

New member
Dec 6, 2014
272
0
0
When on his final mission, Chris Kyle says that only one enemy sniper can fire over 1,000 yards. His commander says "He is whoever you want him to be."

Other sources than the movie say that it was a man standing out in the open with an rpg, not a sniper hiding in cover.

Therefore the moral is that war will eventually devour the mind of any man.

Well, that's my piss poor shot. Let's see what you guys have.
 

Lilani

Sometimes known as CaitieLou
May 27, 2009
6,581
0
0
I haven't seen the movie, but the moral which I've derived from it at this point is that American patriotism is both extremely easy to cash in on, and extremely happy to be cashed in upon.
 

tippy2k2

Beloved Tyrant
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
14,010
871
118
Seriously, did everyone see a different movie than I did? I keep seeing people call it "Military Propaganda" and "American Propaganda" and that it glorifies soldiers and war.

You know what I saw when I saw American Sniper: An ANTI-War Movie. Yes....Anti-War

Chris Kyle kills a kid, repeatedly abandons his wife when she BEGS him to stay, clearly has some anger issues crop up from the PTSD (as well as regular old PTSD), and is eventually killed after finally conquering his own demons by another veteran who was still fighting his off.

This movie is about the man Chris Kyle and the absolute devastation the war had on his mind and spirit. The only thing I thought of at the end of the movie was "how can we help other veterans with the toll that war has had on them?".
 

Lilani

Sometimes known as CaitieLou
May 27, 2009
6,581
0
0
tippy2k2 said:
Seriously, did everyone see a different movie than I did? I keep seeing people call it "Military Propaganda" and "American Propaganda" and that it glorifies soldiers and war.

You know what I saw when I saw American Sniper: An ANTI-War Movie. Yes....Anti-War

Chris Kyle kills a kid, repeatedly abandons his wife when she BEGS him to stay, clearly has some anger issues crop up from the PTSD (as well as regular old PTSD), and is eventually killed after finally conquering his own demons by another veteran who was still fighting his off.

This movie is about the man Chris Kyle and the absolute devastation the war had on his mind and spirit. The only thing I thought of at the end of the movie was "how can we help other veterans with the toll that war has had on them?".
At least in my neck of the woods (Midwest) nobody talks about the film that way. They say it's a great film about soldiers and patriotism and heroes and all that, all the same reactions I hear from typical patriotic films. Perhaps some people are just too determined to see war painted in a positive light, they can't tell when the opposite is staring them in the face.
 

tippy2k2

Beloved Tyrant
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
14,010
871
118
Lilani said:
At least in my neck of the woods (Midwest) nobody talks about the film that way. They say it's a great film about soldiers and patriotism and heroes and all that, all the same reactions I hear from typical patriotic films. Perhaps some people are just too determined to see war painted in a positive light, they can't tell when the opposite is staring them in the face.
That's all I keep seeing too and it absolutely baffles me how people could possibly see this film and think "You know what, fuck Arabs! This is 'MERICA, The greatest God damn country in the world! *Cue this song [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ruNrdmjcNTc]

Chris Kyle had his brain shattered by his experiences. In fact, my guess is this is the same exact kind of thing people see when they talk about how awesome Tony Montana is and how they want to be just like him in Scarface. (Do I need Scarface spoilers? Probably not but SF spoilers) All people remember is the cool one-liners and awesome actions he takes; everyone forgets that Montana dies an incredibly bloody and brutal end after forcing everyone that loves him away from him with his increasingly erratic behavior...

I suppose there's a chance that I'M the wrong one here but Clint Eastwood seems waaaaay too smart of a director to have such a simple message (the simple message being "America; Fuck Yeah" that is). I'd like to think that he was just a little too subtle making this one.

EDIT: Speak of the devil; that's what I figured, thanks for the link mystic (right below me)
 

MysticSlayer

New member
Apr 14, 2013
2,405
0
0
tippy2k2 said:
An ANTI-War Movie. Yes....Anti-War
From what I've read, that's actually how the film was supposed to be seen [http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/01/26/clint-eastwood-american-sniper-anti-war_n_6547068.html].
 

Armadox

Mandatory Madness!
Aug 31, 2010
1,120
0
0
I've been considering this topic, and I have a question. Who was it made for? The topic title depicts that it's necessary to prove Bob Chipman wrong, which creates an instant bias in the subject at hand. You're not looking for diverse ideas on the topic, but simply to justify your desire to be contrary to a particular person's personal opinion.

I'm not sure this was meant to be a loaded question, but I don't think anyone's answer is going to satisfy the original topic's desires as they are listed.

I'm less curious if a war movie has a moral point, as it's a war movie and thus any moral depictions will come from the person's personal beliefs, history, and ideologies that watch it. Everyone can see it, and come away with something else.

No, I'm now more interested in your personal interest in defending this movie. Why is it important to "prove Movie Bob wrong"? How will you be better off if you find you're right, and how will this effect your life? How do you personally gain from this experience?

When creating an "us vs. them" standpoint as this is meant to, what middle ground do you think can be met?

An opinion is a dime a dozen, but how you come to that opinion and how it effects you can grant you a deeper understanding on why you require gratification when it comes to these discussions..[footnote] Also, I kinda ended up skipping a vast half of this one after I found out that it was in no means a movie meant for me. Sorry...[/footnote]
 

Arctic Werewolf

New member
Oct 16, 2014
67
0
0
Lilani said:
I haven't seen the movie, but the moral which I've derived from it at this point is that American patriotism is both extremely easy to cash in on...
Is that really fair to say about a movie you haven't seen? Maybe it's really good. Maybe it would convince you to see things in a new light you hadn't even considered. Eastwood is a talented director and no stranger to liberal themes. We're not talking about Michael Bay, here. I trust Eastwood to make a movie more than I trust Mr. Chipman to criticize one particularly if sensitive and nuanced political and social issues are involved.

But I haven't seen it, either. You may well be right. I would not really have been interested in a movie like this without knowing anything about it. But with Eastwood at the helm, and having read about the controversy, I'm very interested to go see what's up.

Oh, and I read Michael Moore doesn't like it? That probably means it's really good.
 

murrow

New member
Sep 3, 2014
72
0
0
Way, American Sniper is a Clint Eastwood movie? God damn it, I have to see it now. I was planning on skipping it due to the horribly generic title and even more generic war movie vibe. But Eastwood is one of my favourite American directors and I was dying for another of his flicks.

Thank you, Escapist forumites! You made my day!
 

Mezahmay

New member
Dec 11, 2013
517
0
0
tippy2k2 said:
Lilani said:
At least in my neck of the woods (Midwest) nobody talks about the film that way. They say it's a great film about soldiers and patriotism and heroes and all that, all the same reactions I hear from typical patriotic films. Perhaps some people are just too determined to see war painted in a positive light, they can't tell when the opposite is staring them in the face.
That's all I keep seeing too and it absolutely baffles me how people could possibly see this film and think "You know what, fuck Arabs! This is 'MERICA, The greatest God damn country in the world! *Cue this song [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ruNrdmjcNTc]
This reminds me of the criticism leveled at The Wolf of Wall Street's alleged desirable portrayal the hedonist lifestyle of a when the main character was clearly doing despicable things. I'm pretty sure Lilani is on to something with the whole people just see what they want to see thing based on their expectations and various biases.
 

Teoes

Poof, poof, sparkles!
Jun 1, 2010
5,174
0
0
What would doing so accomplish? Say you "prove him wrong" on this, so far as you can then say his opinion is invalid.. then what?
 

psijac

$20 a year for this message
Nov 20, 2008
281
0
0
Movie Bob review of Surrogate with Bruce Willis convinced me to go see it. And that movie was terrible. Proving Movie Bob wrong is a low bar to set. Not just because opinion is inherently subjective, he's also just wrong a lot of the time. Remember when he said PC Gaming was dead?



Lilani said:
I haven't seen the movie, but the moral which I've derived from it at this point is that American patriotism is both extremely easy to cash in on, and extremely happy to be cashed in upon.
Indeed the movie is set to make 200 million just in the month of January. Which would be a record at half that.

What's keeping you from seeing the movie?

My take away is 2 fold. 1. America is not doing enough to take care of the people they send into harms way. Some come back with broken bodies and minds.

2. The people who fightin these wars for us are not the monstrous murders The MSNBC wants them to be. They are human beings with human flaws.

Point 2 is why the left hates this movie. If the people who fought in Iraq were not immoral thugs, then maybe it wasn't an immorality war to fight, then maybe Bush was right. The absolute slippery-est of slopes but none the less it's out there.

Wat checkout the movie Jarhead instead. Its like American sniper in Reverse. Jake Gyllenhaal is great in it.
 

PsychicTaco115

I've Been Having These Weird Dreams Lately...
Legacy
Apr 10, 2020
5,950
14
13
Country
United States
One moral is to NEVER have a fake baby be seen close up because then the Uncanny Valley starts taking effect

Other than that, I haven't seen the movie but by golly, I can still make inferences on it!

Umm...

Fine, I won't give my super important opinion!
 

LostPause

New member
Sep 20, 2013
23
0
0
tippy2k2 said:
Chris Kyle had his brain shattered by his experiences.
That conclusion might be a bit stretched to take from the movie itself, but less so from real life. In fact, I get the impression that some critics wish the movie had made more of the ironic tragedy that Chris was killed while trying to help a PTSD-suffering fellow veteran with a trip to a shooting range. The movie's tone would have been almost completely shifted if that course of events had been filmed rather than described with a subtitle and followed by footage of crowd's mourning him. If more had been made of his comparatively unheroic and senseless death it certainly would have made a much clearer point about the far-reaching consequences of the military mentality and experiences.

The film has many narrative similarities to the anti-war film Hurt Locker, though that firmly stood on the other side of the fence when it came to characterising the self-destructive recklessness of its 'hero'. I get the impression that some critics aren't going to be happy with any war film that doesn't clearly demonstrate that war isn't heroic and that being a soldier isn't an awful career choice. While it's true that war is more often unheroic and traumatising than not and soldiers aren't usually the most mentally stable characters, often through necessity, this doesn't change the fact that Chris Kyle was a dedicated American who did some truly exceptional acts.

It's clear Eastwood wasn't interested in delving into the guy's obvious issues, such as his self-aggrandising ego and his apparent need to play up to his own 'legend'. To be fair, biopics of recently dead figures tend to gloss over the negative traits of their heroes, unless they make for a more effective narrative arc. In the end, I'd argue that Eastwood did succumb a little too much to the temptation to lionize his subject but that this allowed him to make a film more suited to his own skills, particularly since he wasn't making a documentary.
 

hermes

New member
Mar 2, 2009
3,865
0
0
tippy2k2 said:
Seriously, did everyone see a different movie than I did? I keep seeing people call it "Military Propaganda" and "American Propaganda" and that it glorifies soldiers and war.

You know what I saw when I saw American Sniper: An ANTI-War Movie. Yes....Anti-War

Chris Kyle kills a kid, repeatedly abandons his wife when she BEGS him to stay, clearly has some anger issues crop up from the PTSD (as well as regular old PTSD), and is eventually killed after finally conquering his own demons by another veteran who was still fighting his off.

This movie is about the man Chris Kyle and the absolute devastation the war had on his mind and spirit. The only thing I thought of at the end of the movie was "how can we help other veterans with the toll that war has had on them?".
Which leads to the quote by Truffaut, who declared that "there is no such thing as an anti-war film, because war makes for exciting spectacle". I don't completely agree with the statement, because I think there are some good anti-war films, but most of them don't focus exclusively on the soldiers. Once you do, it because more confusing (remember, Fullmetal Jacket, Private Ryan and First Blood were meant as anti-war movies, yet many people don't see them that way)

It also brings the issue of movies like Fight Club, Wolf of Wall Street, Scarface and The Godfather, which presented their protagonists as extremely flawed who ended up even worst, yet they make them so sympathetic throughout the film (and the downward journey so much fun) that people wanted to imitate them.

I haven't seen the movie (yet), but it seems to be one of those movies people feel reinforces their previous stance, either anti or pro war. Each gets the moral that they want validated... Eastwood said he didn't want to make it political, but that is pretty much impossible given the subject.

And about proving Bob wrong, I don't need to get so current. He liked 2012 and Sucker Punch, and consider them study cases for narrative symbolism and photographic composition, so he can be wrong.
 

Arctic Werewolf

New member
Oct 16, 2014
67
0
0
hermes200 said:
Which leads to the quote by Truffaut, who declared that "there is no such thing as an anti-war film, because war makes for exciting spectacle". I don't completely agree with the statement, because I think there are some good anti-war films, but most of them don't focus exclusively on the soldiers. Once you do, it because more confusing (remember, Fullmetal Jacket, Private Ryan and First Blood were meant as anti-war movies, yet many people don't see them that way)

It also brings the issue of movies like Fight Club, Wolf of Wall Street, Scarface and The Godfather, which presented their protagonists as extremely flawed who ended up even worst, yet they make them so sympathetic throughout the film (and the downward journey so much fun) that people wanted to imitate them.

I haven't seen the movie (yet), but it seems to be one of those movies people feel reinforces their previous stance, either anti or pro war. Each gets the moral that they want validated... Eastwood said he didn't want to make it political, but that is pretty much impossible given the subject.
A good point, it is difficult to walk that line. But I'm not sure that is such a bad thing, really. The effort has produced some very good films and I think part of the reason is how they struggle with themselves. I like Platoon just fine, but for me Full Metal Jacket is a more interesting, entertaining and lasting film. Films like Patton are great precisely because they walk that line between lionizing and demonizing war, generals and soldiers. Some people gravitate toward one or the other. But for me, the tension between the two is drama on a biblical scale.

TL;DR I am fine with this.
 

hermes

New member
Mar 2, 2009
3,865
0
0
Arctic Werewolf said:
hermes200 said:
Which leads to the quote by Truffaut, who declared that "there is no such thing as an anti-war film, because war makes for exciting spectacle". I don't completely agree with the statement, because I think there are some good anti-war films, but most of them don't focus exclusively on the soldiers. Once you do, it because more confusing (remember, Fullmetal Jacket, Private Ryan and First Blood were meant as anti-war movies, yet many people don't see them that way)

It also brings the issue of movies like Fight Club, Wolf of Wall Street, Scarface and The Godfather, which presented their protagonists as extremely flawed who ended up even worst, yet they make them so sympathetic throughout the film (and the downward journey so much fun) that people wanted to imitate them.

I haven't seen the movie (yet), but it seems to be one of those movies people feel reinforces their previous stance, either anti or pro war. Each gets the moral that they want validated... Eastwood said he didn't want to make it political, but that is pretty much impossible given the subject.
A good point, it is difficult to walk that line. But I'm not sure that is such a bad thing, really. The effort has produced some very good films and I think part of the reason is how they struggle with themselves. I like Platoon just fine, but for me Full Metal Jacket is a more interesting, entertaining and lasting film. Films like Patton are great precisely because they walk that line between lionizing and demonizing war, generals and soldiers. Some people gravitate toward one or the other. But for me, the tension between the two is drama on a biblical scale.

TL;DR I am fine with this.
Of course. The quote from Truffaut doesn't mean they should stop trying. Just that many of those movies (like American Sniper here), tends to make people focus on some aspects of it. I.E., those with a leaning against wars, will focus on the PTSD and see it as an antiwar message, those with a leaning in favor of wars (or those expecting just an action thrill), will focus on other aspects and see the movie as prowar. The only exception are those that make it fairly obvious their stance and thus throw subtlety out the window (Grave of the Fireflies vs Rambo III)
 

the_dramatica

New member
Dec 6, 2014
272
0
0
tippy2k2 said:
That's all I keep seeing too and it absolutely baffles me how people could possibly see this film and think "You know what, fuck Arabs! This is 'MERICA, The greatest God damn country in the world! *Cue this song [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ruNrdmjcNTc])
I couldn't stop thinking of this song

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IhnUgAaea4M

It especially played through my head in the scene just after he landed the 2,100 yard shot. The movie tried to create tension by throwing lets of enemies at kyle but they where just mowed down like grass. It was p cheesy.

psijac said:
Wat checkout the movie Jarhead instead. Its like American sniper in Reverse. Jake Gyllenhaal is great in it.
Yes, loved jarhead

It's by far my favorite movie

Boris Goodenough said:
I had it the exact same way, because I was sitting on the tip of my seat when the kid picked up the RPG...
To be fair that was the most immersive scene in the movie, even though Chris Kyle's spotter didn't seem to give a fuck.

Teoes said:
What would doing so accomplish? Say you "prove him wrong" on this, so far as you can then say his opinion is invalid.. then what?
We get some mental exercise and a discussion on the topic.

Arctic Werewolf said:
I like Platoon just fine, but for me Full Metal Jacket is a more interesting, entertaining and lasting film. Films like Patton are great precisely because they walk that line between lionizing and demonizing war, generals and soldiers. Some people gravitate toward one or the other. But for me, the tension between the two is drama on a biblical scale.TL;DR I am fine with this.
Well FMJ is anti-war, clear and cut. It just so happens that the first part of the movie is more remembered than the second part. Platoon is actually much more on the edge, since the town they shot up ended up exploding from ammunition deposits.
 

Boris Goodenough

New member
Jul 15, 2009
1,428
0
0
tippy2k2 said:
Seriously, did everyone see a different movie than I did? I keep seeing people call it "Military Propaganda" and "American Propaganda" and that it glorifies soldiers and war.

You know what I saw when I saw American Sniper: An ANTI-War Movie. Yes....Anti-War

Chris Kyle kills a kid, repeatedly abandons his wife when she BEGS him to stay, clearly has some anger issues crop up from the PTSD (as well as regular old PTSD), and is eventually killed after finally conquering his own demons by another veteran who was still fighting his off.

This movie is about the man Chris Kyle and the absolute devastation the war had on his mind and spirit. The only thing I thought of at the end of the movie was "how can we help other veterans with the toll that war has had on them?".
I had it the exact same way, because I was sitting on the tip of my seat when the kid picked up the RPG...
 

DudeistBelieve

TellEmSteveDave.com
Sep 9, 2010
4,771
1
0
tippy2k2 said:
Seriously, did everyone see a different movie than I did? I keep seeing people call it "Military Propaganda" and "American Propaganda" and that it glorifies soldiers and war.

You know what I saw when I saw American Sniper: An ANTI-War Movie. Yes....Anti-War

Chris Kyle kills a kid, repeatedly abandons his wife when she BEGS him to stay, clearly has some anger issues crop up from the PTSD (as well as regular old PTSD), and is eventually killed after finally conquering his own demons by another veteran who was still fighting his off.

This movie is about the man Chris Kyle and the absolute devastation the war had on his mind and spirit. The only thing I thought of at the end of the movie was "how can we help other veterans with the toll that war has had on them?".
This.

I haven't even seen the movie, but just based on the trailer I thought it was clearly showing the price war takes on the human soul.

I mean just the scene of the guy at the bar, telling his wife he's been home for a while but that he's not coming home because he's not ready. It's clear that, how did Moviebob call it? "Shooting the brown people" has seriously fucked with his head.

Again, just off the trailers it looked to me like a very clear ANTI-War film.
 

tippy2k2

Beloved Tyrant
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
14,010
871
118
Boris Goodenough said:
I had it the exact same way, because I was sitting on the tip of my seat when the kid picked up the RPG...
That was an excellent scene (although I find it so weird that they had the spotter in the background look like he was bored out of his skull...someone probably should have let that guy know filming started) but listening to Kyle beg the kid to put the damn rocket down had me on edge.
I thought for sure he was going to put a bullet in the kids back. It was a very nice turning point for Kyle as he let go of the trigger and seemed to be that first step he needed to gain his humanity back. I was still tense even afterwards though because I thought when the kid got the RPG up, he may still end up firing the damn thing when Kyle chose not to fire...although there was just the Humvee over there so maybe Kyle was more willing to let the risk play out since it wouldn't kill an American soldier if he chose wrong

SaneAmongInsane said:
I mean just the scene of the guy at the bar, telling his wife he's been home for a while but that he's not coming home because he's not ready. It's clear that, how did Moviebob call it? "Shooting the brown people" has seriously fucked with his head.
Jeez...you know what, I didn't even think about that too but that's an excellent point. I think I was distracted at that scene because MILD SPOILER: (in real life), that is when Chris Kyle "allegedly" punches Jesse Ventura in the mouth for talking trash about the SEALS but with the ongoing court case and whatnot happening, it was probably a good call by Eastwood to let that one part of the book go...
 

tippy2k2

Beloved Tyrant
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
14,010
871
118
the_dramatica said:
tippy2k2 said:
That's all I keep seeing too and it absolutely baffles me how people could possibly see this film and think "You know what, fuck Arabs! This is 'MERICA, The greatest God damn country in the world! *Cue this song [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ruNrdmjcNTc])
I couldn't stop thinking of this song

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IhnUgAaea4M

It especially played through my head in the scene just after he landed the 2,100 yard shot. The movie tried to create tension by throwing lets of enemies at kyle but they where just mowed down like grass. It was p cheesy.
Double post; my bad, I got three quotes in my system in a row and I missed yours

Even that part though I was perfectly fine with. I think one thing the movie didn't show at all and it kind of hurt it was just how well trained these guys were. Every one of those men on that rooftop were trained Navy Seals; some of the best trained soldiers in the world. They had the high ground, they had the cover, and the men attacking them had little to no cover on the streets with little to no training. Of course the Seals are going to mow them down like grass...
 

DudeistBelieve

TellEmSteveDave.com
Sep 9, 2010
4,771
1
0
tippy2k2 said:
Boris Goodenough said:
I had it the exact same way, because I was sitting on the tip of my seat when the kid picked up the RPG...
That was an excellent scene (although I find it so weird that they had the spotter in the background look like he was bored out of his skull...someone probably should have let that guy know filming started) but listening to Kyle beg the kid to put the damn rocket down had me on edge.
I thought for sure he was going to put a bullet in the kids back. It was a very nice turning point for Kyle as he let go of the trigger and seemed to be that first step he needed to gain his humanity back. I was still tense even afterwards though because I thought when the kid got the RPG up, he may still end up firing the damn thing when Kyle chose not to fire...although there was just the Humvee over there so maybe Kyle was more willing to let the risk play out since it wouldn't kill an American soldier if he chose wrong

SaneAmongInsane said:
I mean just the scene of the guy at the bar, telling his wife he's been home for a while but that he's not coming home because he's not ready. It's clear that, how did Moviebob call it? "Shooting the brown people" has seriously fucked with his head.
Jeez...you know what, I didn't even think about that too but that's an excellent point. I think I was distracted at that scene because MILD SPOILER: (in real life), that is when Chris Kyle "allegedly" punches Jesse Ventura in the mouth for talking trash about the SEALS but with the ongoing court case and whatnot happening, it was probably a good call by Eastwood to let that one part of the book go...
I think that court case is over, Jesse won. He proved he wasn't even anywhere near the bar in question when it happened.

Though if Eastwood had put it in, I totally would of saw the movie just to see someone performing as The Body
 

Kinokohatake

New member
Jul 11, 2010
577
0
0
I haven't seen it, and most likely will see it on netflix or maybe tv. My question is did they put the scenes in the movie with him supposedly killing dozens of people in New Orleans or shooting the two car jackers at the gas station and disposing of their bodies?
 

tippy2k2

Beloved Tyrant
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
14,010
871
118
SaneAmongInsane said:
I think that court case is over, Jesse won. He proved he wasn't even anywhere near the bar in question when it happened.

Though if Eastwood had put it in, I totally would of saw the movie just to see someone performing as The Body
I knew Jesse won but I didn't know the hows or whys (I didn't pay any attention to the case; I can't stand Jesse Ventura). During that scene, all I could think about was listening for Ventura in the background to say something rather than paying attention to the movie so I kind of missed the emotional impact I was supposed to be listening to :)

Thomas Guy said:
I haven't seen it, and most likely will see it on netflix or maybe tv. My question is did they put the scenes in the movie with him supposedly killing dozens of people in New Orleans or shooting the two car jackers at the gas station and disposing of their bodies?
No they did not
 

Johnny Novgorod

Bebop Man
Legacy
Apr 10, 2020
16,688
744
118
Country
Argentina
Don't sweat it, Movie Bob pretty much always proves himself wrong on his own.
 

Tiger King

Regular Member
Legacy
May 1, 2020
837
0
11
Country
USA
tippy2k2 said:
Seriously, did everyone see a different movie than I did? I keep seeing people call it "Military Propaganda" and "American Propaganda" and that it glorifies soldiers and war.

You know what I saw when I saw American Sniper: An ANTI-War Movie. Yes....Anti-War

Chris Kyle kills a kid, repeatedly abandons his wife when she BEGS him to stay, clearly has some anger issues crop up from the PTSD (as well as regular old PTSD), and is eventually killed after finally conquering his own demons by another veteran who was still fighting his off.

This movie is about the man Chris Kyle and the absolute devastation the war had on his mind and spirit. The only thing I thought of at the end of the movie was "how can we help other veterans with the toll that war has had on them?".
Just watched the film and what you have said tippy is pretty much what I took away from it.
I've been thinking about some of the criticisms of the film now, and I recall one in particular where the film was likened to the scene in 'inglorious bastards' where the German sniper kills lots of American troops.
There are a few scenes where a number of terrorists are killed with, what I guess you would say is, cold efficiency
But then this guy was credited with over 160 kills. Even then I feel the comparison was a bit harsh.

I dunno, perhaps some people saw nothing but MERICA! not for me though.

As for morals.......I dunno, war is bad?
 

the_dramatica

New member
Dec 6, 2014
272
0
0
disclosure: i have not seen the film.

i have read about the man on wikipedia.

suggestion:

People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.
it does not say "nice men"...
 

Arctic Werewolf

New member
Oct 16, 2014
67
0
0
the_dramatica said:
Well FMJ is anti-war, clear and cut. It just so happens that the first part of the movie is more remembered than the second part. Platoon is actually much more on the edge, since the town they shot up ended up exploding from ammunition deposits.
I was thinking of the Kubrickian-thought-experiment style of FMJ, which makes it stand out for me, and of course the performance of R. Lee Ermey. And I guess it's been too long since I've seen Platoon. I need to go back and watch some of these before I get any older!
hermes200 said:
Of course. The quote from Truffaut doesn't mean they should stop trying. Just that many of those movies (like American Sniper here), tends to make people focus on some aspects of it. I.E., those with a leaning against wars, will focus on the PTSD and see it as an antiwar message, those with a leaning in favor of wars (or those expecting just an action thrill), will focus on other aspects and see the movie as prowar. The only exception are those that make it fairly obvious their stance and thus throw subtlety out the window (Grave of the Fireflies vs Rambo III)
I gotcha. Very interested to see for myself how American Sniper fits into all this. Even if it was kind of a pro-war movie... I might even be OK with that. I mean hell, I think the man who made Flags of our Fathers and Letters from Iwo Jima has fucking earned it.
 

beastro

New member
Jan 6, 2012
564
0
0
My view for years now is any "Based on a True Story" movies plot or moral should be taken with a ton of salt and enjoyed for the entertainment value. Facts are always twisted to for dramatic license and it's why I ignore most documentaries now as they're increasingly taking the same angle.

It's also the take almost every veteran I know has for movies these days. This one particular they view as a soldiers tall tale that just got turned into movie.

Lilani said:
At least in my neck of the woods (Midwest) nobody talks about the film that way. They say it's a great film about soldiers and patriotism and heroes and all that, all the same reactions I hear from typical patriotic films. Perhaps some people are just too determined to see war painted in a positive light, they can't tell when the opposite is staring them in the face.
How are those things in a war mutually exclusive to a movie being anti-war?

I haven't seen a single US movie that wasn't anti-war that wasn't made to be taken as a light hearted action film.
 

LetalisK

New member
May 5, 2010
2,769
0
0
the_dramatica said:
Therefore the moral is that war will eventually devour the mind of any man.

Well, that's my piss poor shot. Let's see what you guys have.
So you agree with Moviebob, then? Because that was his conclusion as well. His issue with American Sniper was that it would have been a much better documentary than a feature film.
 

Lilani

Sometimes known as CaitieLou
May 27, 2009
6,581
0
0
beastro said:
Lilani said:
At least in my neck of the woods (Midwest) nobody talks about the film that way. They say it's a great film about soldiers and patriotism and heroes and all that, all the same reactions I hear from typical patriotic films. Perhaps some people are just too determined to see war painted in a positive light, they can't tell when the opposite is staring them in the face.
How are those things in a war mutually exclusive to a movie being anti-war?

I haven't seen a single US movie that wasn't anti-war that wasn't made to be taken as a light hearted action film.
The problem I have is when they begin to romanticize the events of war itself to make the soldiers look either more heroic or more justified in their actions. For example, Michael Bay's Pearl Harbor. The Japanese never deliberately attacked hospitals in Hawaii, yet apparently Pearl Harbor wasn't morally unambiguous for Michael Bay so he plopped a love interest character in a hospital and had it attacked. In fact, the only civilians killed at Pearl Harbor that day were killed by fires started by American anti-air shells. But you'll never catch that movie framing the collateral damage as something caused by friendly fire as well as hostile.

This is the problem I have with US war films. It is very rare for a war to be completely morally unambiguous, yet filmmakers, documentary makers, TV special makers, and everybody else who cashes in on America's patriotic nostalgia always prefer to take the easy route and make sure the conflict is as unambiguous as possible so that the soldiers are elevated from brave people to practically angels on earth. They always want to portray the war as something where the ends always justifies the means--that no matter what we did, it was always justified and always the best choice. I understand that films in general do things like this to drive up the drama and the stakes, but American war films in particular have a way of upping the ante by also driving up the patriotism so as to gloss over the sheer ridiculousness of what's been done to the story with stars and stripes and bombs bursting in air.
 

Zhukov

The Laughing Arsehole
Dec 29, 2009
13,768
0
0
tippy2k2 said:
Lilani said:
At least in my neck of the woods (Midwest) nobody talks about the film that way. They say it's a great film about soldiers and patriotism and heroes and all that, all the same reactions I hear from typical patriotic films. Perhaps some people are just too determined to see war painted in a positive light, they can't tell when the opposite is staring them in the face.
That's all I keep seeing too and it absolutely baffles me how people could possibly see this film and think "You know what, fuck Arabs! This is 'MERICA, The greatest God damn country in the world! *Cue this song [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ruNrdmjcNTc]
Given the current political climate, the tagline alone ("The deadliest sniper in US history") is enough to nudge impressions in that direction.

Also, I've read that Kyle's family was involved. Or rather, that they threatened to sue if the film showed him in the slightest negative light.

Anyway, preconceptions are a powerful thing.

A person looking for an anti-war message can look at the scenes with his wife and see a theme about war tearing a family apart. A person looking for an pro-war message can see the same scene and get misty eyed over the self sacrifice of a woman understanding that her husband has answered a higher calling.

The first person can watch the PTSD scenes and say, "Ah, so war has ravaged the man's soul. Fuck war!" The second person see the same scenes and say, "Jesus, look what those Arab bastards did to our hero! Fuck Arabs!"

To me it did come across as a bit 'Murica. Not horrendously so, but it was there. I mean, we're talking about a film in which the All American Hero wins a sniper duel with a recurring enemy parkour-ing super-sniper in the face of a sandstorm, then has a climactic shoot-out, before making a dramatic close escape, complete with "take my haaaaand" scene.

Dry, down-to-earth, just-the-facts, neutral filmmaking this is not.
 

tippy2k2

Beloved Tyrant
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
14,010
871
118
Zhukov said:
tippy2k2 said:
That's all I keep seeing too and it absolutely baffles me how people could possibly see this film and think "You know what, fuck Arabs! This is 'MERICA, The greatest God damn country in the world! *Cue this song [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ruNrdmjcNTc]
Given the current political climate, the tagline alone ("The deadliest sniper in US history") is enough to nudge impressions in that direction.

Also, I've read that Kyle's family was involved. Or rather, that they threatened to sue if the film showed him in the slightest negative light.

Anyway, preconceptions are a powerful thing.

A person looking for an anti-war message can look at the scenes with his wife and see a theme about war tearing a family apart. A person looking for an pro-war message can see the same scene and get misty eyed over the self sacrifice of a woman understanding that her husband has answered a higher calling.

The first person can watch the PTSD scenes and say, "Ah, so war has ravaged the man's soul. Fuck war!" The second person see the same scenes and say, "Jesus, look what those Arab bastards did to our hero! Fuck Arabs!"

To me it did come across as a bit 'Murica. Not horrendously so, but it was there. I mean, we're talking about a film in which the All American Hero wins a sniper duel with a recurring enemy parkour-ing super-sniper in the face of a sandstorm, then has a climactic shoot-out, before making a dramatic close escape, complete with "take my haaaaand" scene.

Dry, down-to-earth, just-the-facts, neutral filmmaking this is not.
I know a couple of people have brought up the "preconceived notion" idea but I just wanted to say thank you for kicking in some examples because that makes a lot more sense to me now. I don't agree (if that wasn't clear :D) with the "'Merica Fuck Yeah!" that people are seeing but those examples at least help me understand where that's coming from.

The same kind of thing happened with 300 (for those who were looking for a deeper message outside of "AWESOME SLOW MO!!!!"); People who were pro-war said that King Leonidas obviously represented George W Bush standing tall without help in order to fend off the evil men trying to destroy their way of life while anti-war people said Xerxes was obviously George W Bush as the evil invader going into the much less powerful but crafty Sparta in order to "give them peace". The view you had in real life was usually the difference between how you interpreted the movie.
 

Ariseishirou

New member
Aug 24, 2010
443
0
0
Zhukov said:
Also, I've read that Kyle's family was involved. Or rather, that they threatened to sue if the film showed him in the slightest negative light.
According to an article linked on the film's Wiki page, his wife was actually involved in writing the script itself. This sort of puzzles me, because all her character does is stand around and cry the whole film long, really. And complain about her husband having to go to war when he literally told her that he was training to become an elite soldier so that he could do to war and "defend America" on their _first date_.
 

Evonisia

Your sinner, in secret
Jun 24, 2013
3,258
0
0
The film is completely hollow.

It's aim is to be a by-the-numbers portrayal of Chris Kyle's life according to the biography and make it seem compelling, and I think it succeeded at the compelling part. Beyond that, though, nothing. There is no hidden message. There are no themes, you see elements of many arguments but never anything built up from them.

An enjoyable film with some nice action and characters moments to be sure, but not one with anything to say.
 

Sanunes

New member
Mar 18, 2011
626
0
0
tippy2k2 said:
Jeez...you know what, I didn't even think about that too but that's an excellent point. I think I was distracted at that scene because MILD SPOILER: (in real life), that is when Chris Kyle "allegedly" punches Jesse Ventura in the mouth for talking trash about the SEALS but with the ongoing court case and whatnot happening, it was probably a good call by Eastwood to let that one part of the book go...
Jesse Ventura won his defamation lawsuit against the book (I do believe it was concluded after filming was finished), but I think the studio would have been nervous of a lawsuit against them if they did decide to portray that one aspect of the book even if the decision was against Ventura the first time.
 

Eddie the head

New member
Feb 22, 2012
2,327
0
0
Johnny Novgorod said:
Don't sweat it, Movie Bob pretty much always proves himself wrong on his own.
Yeah I kind of quit watching him after the whole "gamergate" thing. I don't know what the "gamergate" people where doing, but you certainly weren't any better. Anyway it was at that point that I was like wow this an opinion I do not need.
 

RedDeadFred

Illusions, Michael!
May 13, 2009
4,896
0
0
Haven't seen the film or review.

However, whenever a movie involves anything political, Bob's judgment is immediately clouded. Sometimes he'll start singing praises because it agrees with his ideologies (Elysium) other times they'll confuse him and cause him to misconstrue a movie's message (this one by the sounds of it). This, among other reasons, is why I don't watch Bob's stuff anymore. Sometimes he can be quite insightful, other times he's rather insufferable (IMO -also, keep in mind that I actually share his political stance).

I've seen the trailers, and to be quite honest, I don't understand how anyone could take this as anything but antiwar. Maybe the actual movie is completely different, but from the trailers, it seems like it's a movie about a man who has been permanently changed for the worse after all of his killing.
 

Ariseishirou

New member
Aug 24, 2010
443
0
0
Sanunes said:
tippy2k2 said:
Jeez...you know what, I didn't even think about that too but that's an excellent point. I think I was distracted at that scene because MILD SPOILER: (in real life), that is when Chris Kyle "allegedly" punches Jesse Ventura in the mouth for talking trash about the SEALS but with the ongoing court case and whatnot happening, it was probably a good call by Eastwood to let that one part of the book go...
Jesse Ventura won his defamation lawsuit against the book (I do believe it was concluded after filming was finished), but I think the studio would have been nervous of a lawsuit against them if they did decide to portray that one aspect of the book even if the decision was against Ventura the first time.
Oh it wasn't just that. He also "allegedly" shot 30 Katrina looters from the roof of a stadium (which has been shown to never have happened) and shot and killed two carjackers (which also never happened, according to the police). Between that the fact that apparently his SEAL buddies really didn't like him that much (several have since written memoirs and the compulsive liar/self-centered asshole theme comes up a lot) we didn't even get remotely close to what seems to have been the real Chris Kyle who, while he did other things that can be construed as heroic, was a deeply flawed man. Instead we got Captain America The Invincible Sniper of Awesome, Heartwarming Family Man.

And... eh. I can see why. Like Zhukov said, the family was heavily involved in making the film and between the whole "you don't speak ill of the dead" cultural more and potential lawsuits, it was easier to just chicken out and not include any of the controversial bits about his life. Though I, personally, think it would have made for a richer and more interesting film if they'd kept them.
 

beastro

New member
Jan 6, 2012
564
0
0
Lilani said:
The problem I have is when they begin to romanticize the events of war itself to make the soldiers look either more heroic or more justified in their actions. For example, Michael Bay's Pearl Harbor. The Japanese never deliberately attacked hospitals in Hawaii, yet apparently Pearl Harbor wasn't morally unambiguous for Michael Bay so he plopped a love interest character in a hospital and had it attacked. In fact, the only civilians killed at Pearl Harbor that day were killed by fires started by American anti-air shells. But you'll never catch that movie framing the collateral damage as something caused by friendly fire as well as hostile.
Exactly why people need to get their history from books and not film.

This is the problem I have with US war films. It is very rare for a war to be completely morally unambiguous, yet filmmakers, documentary makers, TV special makers, and everybody else who cashes in on America's patriotic nostalgia always prefer to take the easy route and make sure the conflict is as unambiguous as possible so that the soldiers are elevated from brave people to practically angels on earth. They always want to portray the war as something where the ends always justifies the means--that no matter what we did, it was always justified and always the best choice. I understand that films in general do things like this to drive up the drama and the stakes, but American war films in particular have a way of upping the ante by also driving up the patriotism so as to gloss over the sheer ridiculousness of what's been done to the story with stars and stripes and bombs bursting in air.
This is blowback from the Vietnam era and overcompensation for the treatment they received back then. Servicemen are actually the most annoyed by it when it's pointed out, they more than anyone else know how human (and trouble-making) their comrades are.
 

Vigormortis

New member
Nov 21, 2007
4,531
0
0
Johnny Novgorod said:
Don't sweat it, Movie Bob pretty much always proves himself wrong on his own.
On just about every point, in fact. Or, in the very least, every other point.

He'll then spend a few months lecturing all of us on how we were wrong to accept his prior assertions in the first place. As if it were our fault he was wrong and made a colossal fool of himself.

But then some film directed by someone or on the topic of something he has a personal vendetta against will come along and he'll spend a few dozen videos beating that dead horse over and over.
 

The Choke

New member
Nov 5, 2014
52
0
0
The moral of the story is: All Bradley Cooper movies would be improved if he was playing a CG raccoon.
 

Armadox

Mandatory Madness!
Aug 31, 2010
1,120
0
0
I didn't get back to this thread til now, but.. how and who would I have to talk to, to get Reasonable Atheist's warning undone for the post he made? I actually feel he was in the right for his opinion, and would like to vouch for him to get that post unlocked. Also, I'd like very much to have an open dialog when someone feels in disagreement to me in a manner that isn't down right assailing, which it was not.

That being said, a rebuttal: Why people feel about a thing isn't necessarily always a solid state, and you can spin a positive or negative reinforcement onto that opinion by how you ask the question. By placing an aggressive "prove X wrong" statement in front of the question, you're no longer asking for simply that people need find narrative for something, but to specifically find narrative for something to be against someone. I simply wanted to know what the OP gained from proving Movie Bob wrong.. or right, or how their opinion at all has an effect on the opinion of someone who, quite happily, moved on from that subject weeks ago.

The ability to push a discussion along is a good thing, but I am far more curious as to why anyone would care to focus on only one person's opinion and choose to deem that opinion wrong as the basis of wanting that discussion in the first place.

It was solely an entertaining aside to a thread that has turned out to be a broad range of opinions in scope and clarity, and, also a mild curiosity of the OP's wording specifically because I found it amusing to ask. Answer not given, I simply ignored it as it wasn't so badly needed that I had to have him defend his choice in wording. Though, I'll gladly defend yours in calling me out on my aside...
 

Silvanus

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 26, 2020
5,500
1,253
118
Country
United Kingdom
Armadox said:
I didn't get back to this thread til now, but.. how and who would I have to talk to, to get Reasonable Atheist's warning undone for the post he made? I actually feel he was in the right for his opinion, and would like to vouch for him to get that post unlocked.
I would guess he received that warning for the comment about trolling. It's against the site's rules to say another member is trolling, and even though Señor Atheist said he wasn't sure, it probably still counts.

NB, it's against the rules to troll, too, but that's a great deal harder to prove, of course.
 

psijac

$20 a year for this message
Nov 20, 2008
281
0
0
Movie Bob has released a follow up video.

Essentially he claims he is right but he understands how we can be confused into thinking this is a good movie, and forgives us if we think that his opinions can are anything but infallible.
 

TotalerKrieger

New member
Nov 12, 2011
376
0
0
Why was this movie made exactly? More specifically, why this particular soldier? Chris Kyle hardly seemed like someone who deserves the sort of fame he is currently receiving among certain circles in the US. I believe Texas has decided to honour him with a state holiday. In reality, he was a rampant self-promoter and made numerous false claims and slanderous accusations. Many believe he disrespected the entire UDT/SEAL community by carrying out a smear campaign against Jesse Ventura and cozying up to the talking heads on FOX news.

How many soldiers who have served in Iraq or Afganistan have written books? Surely others have equally compelling stories to be told while also demonstrating far less questionable conduct in both service and civilian life.

This all could have been forgiven if the movie addressed these aspects of Chris Kyle. Instead, the narrative opted to whitewash much of his past and portray him as merely a flawed hero with a tragic story. I cannot decide whether Eastwood's overly simplistic tale of service and sacrifice is just an objectionable artistic choice or a conscious effort to disseminate the sort of "ours is not to reason why" patriotism that one sees among this movie's biggest fans.
 

psijac

$20 a year for this message
Nov 20, 2008
281
0
0
Higgs303 said:
Why was this movie made exactly? More specifically, why this particular soldier? Chris Kyle hardly seemed like someone who deserves the sort of fame he is currently receiving among certain circles in the US. I believe Texas has decided to honour him with a state holiday. In reality, he was a rampant self-promoter and made numerous false claims and slanderous accusations. Many believe he disrespected the entire UDT/SEAL community by carrying out a smear campaign against Jesse Ventura and cozying up to the talking heads on FOX news.

How many soldiers who have served in Iraq or Afganistan have written books? Surely others have equally compelling stories to be told while also demonstrating far less questionable conduct in both service and civilian life.

This all could have been forgiven if the movie addressed these aspects of Chris Kyle. Instead, the narrative opted to whitewash much of his past and portray him as merely a flawed hero with a tragic story. I cannot decide whether Eastwood's overly simplistic tale of service and sacrifice is just an objectionable artistic choice or a conscious effort to disseminate the sort of "ours is not to reason why" patriotism that one sees among this movie's biggest fans.
People Have a hard-on for numbers. And Chris Kyle had the highest number of confirmed kills and the longest kill by an American. it could have easily been anyone else.
 

the_dramatica

New member
Dec 6, 2014
272
0
0
Beer! Trucks! GUNS! HEY GIRL! KILLING AYRABS! F*&K YEAH! MURICA! *profit*

/moral

If you can't handle american morals you need to take your commie, freedom hating ass, back to french canadia.

Oh heres a visual interpretation of the main moral