Monday, January 26, 2015

#AmericanSniper

I saw American Sniper yesterday with my son. The other half of my family expressed no interest in seeing it nor even hearing what we thought of it. That probably represents America in a way.

My first reaction afterwards was to call my mother to get some PTSD family stories straight. Her brother-in-law (my uncle) had served in WW II and had survived fierce hand-to-hand combat at Guadalcanal, and had had problems. I was way too young to remember anything about that or the aftermath and she's my only living link back now. I will let those stories be, as horrific as they were, out of respect for the dead and for the living as they still affect the next generation(s). I also wanted to know more about an older cousin who had fought on helicopter gunships in Vietnam. He was older than me by 10 years and so I never knew him well as a kid like I did other cousins. I do remember his going over there -- conscripted. And I thought about him during scenes of "American Sniper." He returned home to a small Wisconsin town --the same one where my parents grew up and which I knew as a kid. I remember hearing about how dynamite explosions at a local stone quarry used to give him the jitters. My mother told me some detail about how his later marriage dissolved that I had never heard. I will not repeat those stories either, out of respect for the living but suffice it to say it could not have been his fault.

"American Sniper" isn't supposed to be about those wars but it is somehow. It's supposed to be about the Iraq War.  I have no family who served there, but only a dearly loved neighbor who did two tours in Iraq as a Marine. I wrote about him here. I thought about him too.

I felt a jumble of other emotions: guilt, anger, pride.  The anger came from critics dissing this movie as "pro-war." I mean, WTF?  Another piece of residual anger comes from unresolved issues dating back to Vietnam and its aftermath. When I was 19, I saw members of a mayoral administration openly cheer the "anti-war" killers of an innocent man -- one of whom is still at large. I can never "unremember" that.  That story doesn't belong here and I already wrote about it here. I see the same attitude today. I cannot square it with reality. The guilt part is more complex and I'm not quite willing or able to confront that yet, let alone talk about it.  The pride part come from the sense that somebody can still make movies like "American Sniper."  See it -- I think it's supposed to disturb you.

33 comments:

Lem the artificially intelligent said...

I haven't seen it. But I read that most critics of the movie probably have not either. The movie is not "pro war".

Shouting Thomas said...

It's a good flick. I saw it on Saturday night.

Not the best Clint ever, but certainly a good movie.

I think Clint made the movie because he liked the story and he thought he could entertain the audience with the story.

Not on the level of Unforgiven or Gran Torino, but that's setting the bar pretty high.

chickelit said...

Not on the level of Unforgiven or Gran Torino, but that's setting the bar pretty high.

Cooper's was the only well-acted role in American Sniper. Eastwood also caught flak for using "weak" actors in "Gran Torino" as well. It's probably deliberate on his part. Stars distract. They give fashion mavens something to chatter about. The fallout in Hollywood will be interesting because lots of money is involved.

chickelit said...

People's reaction at the end is understandable because the movie is going on all the way through the credits. At my viewing, there was complete silence. This is a military town.

Eric the Fruit Bat said...

(1) I apologize for not reading your post. Haven't seen the movie yet and don't want a spoiler.

(2) Last night we watched Belle de Jour (1967) with Catherine Deneuve, who's pretty easy on the eyes.

As usual with these sorts of foreign movies, I always get the feeling that there's a lot going on that I'm not catching.

But in addition to that, I got the feeling that the director was expressing some sort of low-grade disdain for his voyeuristic audience. Sort of like the contempt some prostitutes must feel for their clientele.

Some sort of psychological defense mechanism, I should imagine.

Eric the Fruit Bat said...

Two examples of stuff that left me bewildered: (1) a big fat Japanese guy goes to the tiny, little boutique brothel (if you can call it so much as a brothel) and he offers up his Ginzo International House-of-Ill-Repute membership card.

The lady in charge tells him that the card is no good there, and that he needs to pay cash, and he immediately and gladly hands her a messy handful of bills from out of his side pocket. She hands him back a wad of bills as his change.

I mean, was that absolutely side-splittingly hilarious to the contemporary French audience? Was the mere fact of a big, fat Japanese guy the high sign that it was time for everyone to laugh?

I really don't know.

And it bugs me, in a Sheldon Cooper kind of way.

Eric the Fruit Bat said...

Second example: There was this client who is a middle-aged slobbish kind of guy. Greasy. French. In terrible physical shape. Pudgy and mishapen like a troll.

He's a lusty fellow, and he adores the environment of the brothel, and being the center of attention, and he loves to celebrate, and he goes off on this tangent about how much he loves ham.

Ham. As in the cured pork product. He absolutely adores ham.

Did that leave them rolling in the aisles doubled over in fits?

I have to wonder.

Unknown said...

Thanks for your comments and personal insight, Chickl.
I will see this movie at some point for two main reasons:
One, and I know this comes as a shock, but, my hatred and loathing for the Hollywood left is like the heat of a thousand suns. I want to support Clint Eastwood and see a movie that will force me to think about something uncomfortable. The reality of war.
Two: my mother told me to see it.

ricpic said...

Many many many more Americans - witness the HUGE ticket sales for American Sniper - are for the good guys than are against them. This has driven the Left absolutely frantic. Which explains the idiot attacks on the film.

Aridog said...

Chickelit....I think your post was excellent on several points. War is war, the shock and nerve numbing experience of men (& women) killing each other, is not easy to adjust to internally. Training is what saves your life, because you are not born to it. I suspect other veterans, some who saw for more action than I ever did, here will say the same thing or close to it. A bond forms within your unit, from squad to platoon to company & battalion and some truly brave guys even asked to return to their units when they had the option to return home, or do an ITT, after an egregious wounding and substantial hospitalization. There is one of those who posts here regularly, but I won't name him because I didn't ask him. I was men like him who protected me when I was struggling to recover/repair damaged tracked combat vehicles in the field (I was in Ordnance in the original days of "forward support")...most of the time I only had a Model 1911 pistol, and if a rifle, it was slung over my back...not real handy. Sometimes I skipped it because whatever (like heavy tools) you are humping is heavy and anything to reduce the weight you try.

Tactics and equipment change, but not the core of war...killing, or being killed. Young men do it better, I suspect, because at those ages (I was age 26-30 during my time) we still think we are immortal. That said, NO ONE wants peace more than a Soldier or Marine. No is happier to have a moment of respite where he can sit down with native kids and just play...at least in my case. None-the-less, that "bond" I cited makes adjustment to home life difficult for many men....most adjust over time.

Even at my relatively young age, I was frequently called "old man" or "lifer" in jest mostly. I was v-e-r-y aware that my sergeant's stripes came at a mere 13 months of service because another man had died. I even resisted the promotion arguing that there must be someone with more time in service who deserved it...but my CO over-ruled me.

One thing seldom mentioned on news or opinion show, both favorable or unfavorable, is the primary focus of snipers is reconnaissance, with force protection adjunct to that. At least in my day the snipers were usually positioned with forward reconnaissance teams. Navy Seal Robert O'Neil made this feature clear when he appeared on a cable news show.

Full disclosure: I have not seen the movie yet, but I will soon. (Very rare for me to go to a theater) I already have a very good idea of what it will be like. War is war, as I said, and if portrayed in an honest portrayal will relate to many other wars...for that reason. The trailer where it shows Kyle watching a young boy pick up an RPG and saying under his breath "don't pick it up" then "put it down"...when I see the movie I will know how that turned out.

Frankly, all of us should be awe of all infantry Soldiers and Marines, as well as the other direct combat arms. I know I am because they all saw far worse conditions than I did. My great grandfather's Civil War Cavalry saber still hangs over this desk, and I cannot even imagine what he endured, even having three horses killed from under him by volley fire...dutifully reported to his wife, who recorded it in her diary (which I have) ... in those days wives frequently followed the army at a fairly close distance ... something impossible today. Just the idea of forming up on line, as infantry or cavalry then moving out to face volley fire I can almost not comprehend. I've been invited to the 150th anniversary celebration, in April, by a Lieutenant Colonel I have corresponded with (with a similar family history of the 15th NY Cavalry) though he's now in Iraq once again, for Appomattox and I may go, since the 15th NY Cavalry will be represented by artifacts there.

Smart people can "feel" what war is even if they've never been to one...as Chickelit has done very well here in this post. Thank you Chickelit.

Aridog said...

Footnote: The 15th NY Cavalry served in under Brevet General Custer, who wore his red scarf ever after ... the red scarf was was an identifying accoutrement of the 15 NY Calvary.

to this day I revere the memories, such as they are with scant details of both my great grand father and his grandfather who served as a Colonel in the Revolutionary War. Better men than me, without any doubt.

Aridog said...

Last remark, which I think Chickelit alluded to very well, is that we all owe our freedoms to those who risked theirs' ... even if distant from our shores. Again I'll say, amazing point of view Chickelet...you said it all with far less words than I can manage.

bagoh20 said...

Saw it last week. It was powerful. It was anti-war if anything, which any true account of war will be. It also gave me added sympathy for the people suffering in these wars where we bust the hell out of things in their world, although I think with good intentions and with no good alternatives for them.

It also portrayed a personality type in Kyle that is still among us, but now popularly seen as just a myth. The person who is stoic, and simply does what he feels obligated to do without ulterior motives beyond doing the right thing out of deeply-felt duty. A person driven and willing to sacrifice what he loves and desires, because he just can't live with himself if he didn't. A person who fears not doing his duty more than he fears anything else.

I would have done a lot of things differently if I was the director, but I think the real story of Chris Kyle is what is so compelling and pretty hard to embellish or even portray with mere movie making.

At the end, the audience applauded at the west side L.A. theater where I saw it deep in liberal land. The critics who are doing the usual anti-American stuff are outliers. Insulated, petty leftists, more concerned with protecting their seat at the dweeb table than anything else. They don't know anyone even remotely like Kyle, nor do they want to. Such a man makes them feel deeply inadequate. He makes me feel that way too, but with one difference - I also feel gratitude, awe and respect.


Evi L. Bloggerlady said...

It is by far the best movie of the season (I have not seen them all but it is the best one I have seen). It is not pro war, it is just a fabulous movie that capture a small part of war about as well as you can in a movie. It is a masterpiece.

Michael Moore is a big fat idiot.

Unknown said...

We are all familiar with Hollywood's obsession over GWB.
Many bad movies were made depicting GWB being arrested or assassinated.

The left's assassination fantasies animate much of their movie making. Even if it's not about GWB, hollwyood is often pre-occupied with assassination of leaders. That latest bru-haha being Lil' Kim.
(Even music videos by popular artists like Madonna got in on the GWB assassination fantasy action.)


I'd like to start a Production Company that specializes in making assassination fantasy movies about Hollywood leftists.
You know - your basic feel good revenge movie for the rest of us. Jane Fonda is first. Michael Moore is next.
Perhaps I’ll do a Kick Starter.

Harpooning Michael Moore.

bagoh20 said...

It shows the man killing women and children in the most clear and unambiguous way possible . To see that as pro-war or even pro-our side is to miss the point entirely. People who have not seen it and still criticize it in the way they are, don't realize what it shows, and they assume they do. They are broadcasting their ignorance and bias.

Christy said...

Thought provoking post, not just about the movie but about the generational effects. But I wonder how this has worked over our evolution. War has always been with us. How did we survive if it so eats the soul of our warriors?

I sometimes think our generation was raised on entertaining war movies and was not so prepared for the real thing. Do you think earlier generations were better prepared? I read stories of England after the Great War and PTSD was a major problem. I know my great grandfather suffered, but he joined the Union Army when he was 13, and I always figured his youth was part of the problem. Is it good that we never come to terms with the effects of war?

DADvocate said...

Saw the movie last week. Loved it.
Definitely not a pro war movie although I did try to enlist the next. They turned me down because I'm 63. Oh, well.

The audience included as broad an age range as you could get for an R rated movie, teenie bopper girls, old folks with canes and everyone in between. Plenty of guys with caps indicating they were veterans. Complete silence at my viewing also and we're not a military town.

bagoh20 said...

I think Americans have been well insulated from the effects of war up close, and the atrocity that leads us to resort to it. We read and hear about these things, but we don't live them. If the enemy was killing our family members in front of us, we probably would deal more easily with killing them back and killing in general. We don't even kill our own food anymore, and our biggest social problem is being offended by words, so I think our softness makes war a bigger shock than it used to be for citizen soldiers.

Dust Bunny Queen said...

Gran Torino was one of those movies that had layers and layers of meaning and many subliminal devices. A movie that made you think and should be seen more than one time to catch nuances you missed the first time. One of those movies that the more you think about it the more you discover. Disturbing, happy, sad, much pathos and much anger.

I am hoping the same from American Sniper.

It is good to not use famous names or faces in these types of movies. The personalities take away from the script and are a distraction.

Re: War
I had many friends who were badly damaged by the Vietnam War. One good friend who was drafted and committed suicide in boot camp. But...I also have had friends who were not harmed and actually benefited from the experience. I think it depends on many things. Your own mental abilities and strengths. Your background and how you were raised. The support group you have when you get back.

Not everyone is able to handle WAR. My brother who had a draft number that was very high is one of those who would never be able to handle being in the military as an organization, much less being in a war. Thankfully, he didn't get drafted! It would have destroyed him.

Unknown said...

The positive reviews of the movie must drive the collective left nuts.

Bonus.

That's what I keep hearing from those who see it. This is not a glorification of war.

The liberal progs who write essays for the NYTimes admit they DID NOT SEE the movie but insist their opinion is valid, relevant and intact. The left's message to their blind faithful devotees:
Look away. Don't rock the paradigm. It will harm you.

*Go take the blue pill. It is time to take the blue pill.* *said in a soft soothing voice over the emergency alert system*

Dad Bones said...

As an Air Force medic I wasn't in combat. When an injured soldier couldn't be treated at the Army's 8th Field Hospital I'd drive a crackerbox ambulance over there, help load him in, then drive to the flight line and load him onto a plane, usually to Clark AB in the Philippines.

Lying on stretchers and covered with bandages, with morphine running in their veins, and seemingly unaware of what was happening to them, was the way their inert bodies passed through the crackerbox.

My job was easy. I didn't have to drag his broken body out of a jungle at great risk, nor did I have to be the guy's best friend out in the boonies who was now missing him more than anything in this world. Most of all I didn't have to be his mother or his girl friend who were waiting to see what the war had done to their soldier boy.

Still, I think we're overdue in acknowledging and respecting those who carried out their missions rather than focusing too much on our casualties. I hope to see the movie later today.

Paddy O said...

Jim Gaffigan tweeted:

“Well, the only way we beat American Sniper for best picture is if we characterize people that like it as nutjobs.” - Hollywood Publicist

Amartel said...

Can't wait to see this in the theater this weekend. It will be the first time I've been to see a movie in the theater since the 1980s. Now I'm so used to watching movies at home on my tv so this should be interesting on several levels.

Amartel said...

Gaffigan is the best. Him with his hot pockets, Disney trips to hell, whale miseries, and the 4 little vampires.

Aridog said...

BAgoh20 said...

We don't even kill our own food anymore,...

1. True enough. I ceased hunting of any kind, not because I am against it, but because I no longer wanted to after returning home. I had only one urge back then and it wasn't very social, so I stepped away from everything except pistol shooting at targets and shotguns at clay pigeons.

2. Your comment(s) indicate to me that you "get it" just as the post does. For the record, I never met a man who went to war because he wanted to kill people. I do know a few who never could adapt to Asia.

3. Michael Moore couldn't make it through the most basic of boot camps...he'd have been re-cycled endlessly, or discharged as unfit. Even in the 60's he would have never been drafted, due to being too fat. Still I'd love to see do the rappelling drill in AIT...now that would be entertainment.

Unknown said...

Anyone who claims this is a pro-war movie isn't interested in truth. This is a powerful story about the effect that killing others in a justifiable/justified manner has on an honorable man, and how he was in the process of recovering. His death was the destruction of potential.

Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...

That's pretty repugnant what the mayoral administration did. As for the movie, it's pretty lame that people would characterize it as "pro-war" -- even I can tell from the trailers that it isn't. It goes to show how out of touch people are; so I'm glad that Clint Eastwood's doing movies. War is still an important theme. Not that any big studios are doing much these days - apart from some important sci-fi and fantasy, which is also important. Other than that it falls on the small independently green-lit operations to do decent drama, I'd suppose. But we still obviously need war films.

AllenS said...

Is it a war movie, or a movie about one man's personal experiences in life?

chickelit said...

It's both Allen. So not really an "or" question.

JAL said...

Hubby and I saw it today.

Powerful.

By now I was pretty familiar with the basic story line.

If you haven't seen it, go.

Probably will read the books now.

And for the people who hate it -- go and learn some stuff for a change. Be diverse. Be human. Be a decent person, like Kyle. Believe it or not.

ndspinelli said...

Gran Torino was about the Hmong. A good 90% of the US population know nothing about the Hmong. So, Eastwood was resolved to not use generic Asian actors in the first encounter millions would have w/ Hmong. All the actors were Hmong, and except for the girl, pretty poor actors. It was a righteous decision by Eastwood. He has made a righteous movie here and the left hate him. I LOVE that it's breaking all records. It's on our list. The Academy took a swipe @ Eastwood by not nominating him as director. It won't win any major awards. You can bet on that!

ndspinelli said...

Gran Torino was anti war, showing the damage the Korean War did to Eastwood's character and the Viet Nam war to the Hmong.