American Sniper (2015)

[magicdog]

I have been tempted to catch this in theatres;  my friends tell me it's a bit brutal but very good.

 

I noticed their was a bit of controversy about comments made by Michael Moore (not that I pay much attention to what he says anyway), but it seems this movie is a freight train!

 

According to this, it's about to overtake "Saving Private Ryan" as the highest grossing war movie in the US!  So far it's made over 200 million dollars in less than 2 weeks of release!  That alone is stunning!

[vibeology]

I saw it over the weekend and I wasn't a big fan. Never mind the controversies, I just don't think the film was well done. The plastic babies, the continuity issues, the climatic battle scene that was impossible to see, the matrix bullet that didn't match the tone of any other part of the film and Sienna Miller saying "Chris!" over and over again into a cell phone. I think Bradley Cooper was the right lead and he's the only thing holding the movie together but  Eastwood and the script both let him down. 

[NoWillToResist]

No disrespect to Bradley Cooper but...why was he nominated for this? He did a fine job but I would hardly call it a difficult role to play. And nothing in his performance was particularly noteworthy to me.

 

Do soldiers routinely call home while literally out on missions? I always assumed calls home were done at base camp, not while you're in the middle of a fucking military mission. And do spouses really have the direct number of military satellite phones to inform their hubbies about the gender of their impending child?

 

I guess his wife had no friends or family? I found that difficult to believe. I also found her difficult to sympathize with when she kept whining about how she wanted him home. Did she not understand the job description of 'military wife'?

 

There was a little too much 'rah rah, America' flag-waving for my tastes. No faster way to make me check out emotionally than to have the hero state that America is the best country in the world. Those kind of blinders do not endear someone to me and is part of America's PR problem (IMO).

[kelnic86]

I really don't like how this movie is being turned into some right wing vs left wing debate. Maybe some people liked/disliked the movie for reasons that have nothing to do with politics.

[KatWay]

Spoof of the now infamous Fake Baby scene.

 

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xfDx4WBHJA

[stonehaven]

Just saw it..very moving..a bit complex...and sad overall....

I didn't see the "Team America" type rallying cry that the Right seemed to love..and didn't see the "murderous" killer that the Left seemed to see..

What I saw was an imperfect guy in an ugly war..and some of it raged inside of him..

Great performances all around...Clint did a magnificent job directing...and the choice of silence over the end credits was pitch perfect..

This totally blows Jersey Boys and Hereafter out of the water as far as Clint's directorial efforts but Gran Torino will remain my favorite Eastwood project...

I would totally recommend this movie...not for the "Rah Rah" but for those of us who have never served to remember the those that do..and the battles they still face..

[choclatechip45]

One of the best movies I've seen in a long time.

[CaughtOnTape]

I never saw the Rah-Rah USA thing either.  But I've heard a few people make that comment.  Which seems odd to me.  Kyle never seemed happy to be doing what he was doing.  He never stood up after a kill and pumped his fist or screamed with delight.  In fact, it seemed that Bradley Cooper and Eastwood did that very well in that they always had Kyle wait until the last possible second before he took a shot.  He gave people time to rethink what they were doing before he felt forced into taking a shot.  The first kill was especially evident of that.  His counterpart tried to congratulate him and his reaction was to tell him to get the fuck off of him.  And he certainly wasn't happy about it.  Kyle never seemed to revel or gain any enjoyment from his Legend moniker.  I actually think the one thing that drove him was on his first tour when one of his counterparts told him that the men feel safer knowing Kyle is around because he meant protection.

 

In the end, he just seemed like a man who had a job to do and did it to the best of his abilities.  To me, this was an excellent representation of what our troops are dealing with.  They signed up to defend their country and do what they were told, regardless of whether or not they agree.  They have to do disgusting, evil things they never wanted or expected to have to do in the name of saving their brothers and friends.  And when they come home, they have to deal with the fallout from having to make those decisions while assholes like Michael Moore sit up in judgment over them about it.

 

If it wins the Oscar, I won't be disappointed.

Edited February 2, 2015 by CaughtOnTape

[NoWillToResist]

I never saw the Rah-Rah USA thing either.  But I've heard a few people make that comment.  Which seems odd to me.  Kyle never seemed happy to be doing what he was doing.  He never stood up after a kill and pumped his fist or screamed with delight.  In fact, it seemed that Bradley Cooper and Eastwood did that very well in that they always had Kyle wait until the last possible second before he took a shot.  He gave people time to rethink what they were doing before he felt forced into taking a shot.  The first kill was especially evident of that.  His counterpart tried to congratulate him and his reaction was to tell him to get the fuck off of him.  And he certainly wasn't happy about it.  Kyle never seemed to revel or gain any enjoyment from his Legend moniker.  I actually think the one thing that drove him was on his first tour when one of his counterparts told him that the men feel safer knowing Kyle is around because he meant protection.

 

I don't equate "rah rah America flag-waving" with "soldiers are heartless killers", so my apologies if that's how my 'rah rah' comment came across. To me, those are two very different things.

 

I felt that there was a lot of (IMO unnecessary) attention paid to the American flag...particularly near the end. It just seemed geared to be emotionally manipulative to an American audience. I readily admit that I may be jaded, having seen one too many movies using a tattered or slowly falling American flag to symbolize an American loss or whatever. And Kyle's "America's the best country in the world" just puts my back up. There is no such thing. That kind of blind devotion/loyalty is not something to celebrate, IMO.

 

I did appreciate that Kyle was torn up having to kill that kid at the beginning and desperately didn't want to repeat that with the kid who picked up the rocket launcher.

 

I didn't dislike the movie at all; I just am puzzled by its immense box office and Oscar buzz.

Edited February 2, 2015 by NoWillToResist

[KatWay]

I thought it was pretty one-sided, especially considering that Eastwood made very nuanced WW2 movies (both of which were much better than American Sniper). The "enemy" had no name, no personality and no voice. Us versus Them. Kyle doing a terrible, but necessary job, being a war hero but paying a price. That's not adding anything new to the war movie genre.

 

Then I look at the comments the real Chris Kyle made and am even more uncomfortable with how much the movie celebrates him as a "true American hero" (as he has been called by the producers).

 

It's well done, no doubt, but it doesn't really do much with the subject it aims to explore...far less IMO than The Hurt Locker, for example. And it glosses over some really problematic issues that would have been more interesting to explore in favour of a lot of patriotic imagery.

[CaughtOnTape]

A true American hero in the sense that he kept countless soldiers alive in very dangerous situations?

 

Absolutely.  Not to mention, how he was killed....by a veteran, also suffering from PTSD, whom he was trying to help.

 

The "enemy" had several names.  Al Zarqawi, the Butcher, Mustafa....all given names.  Al Zarqawi in particular the American public has been very well educated about.  Seems they have enough of a voice every time they upload a video threatening someone or some country.  Maybe Eastwood felt they didn't need one considering they and their counterparts are still very much in the public eye professing their voice.  WW2 happened 70 years ago and therefore people may not really know the other side of the story.  Even though, I would venture to say Eastwood didn't really tell their story with any sympathy in any of his other movies.  His war movies have all had a very Us against Them theme....and well, they would....it's war.

 

As far as the flags go, that was his funeral and actual footage.  I'm not sure how one would've expected him to portray that otherwise.  I think a lot of people are making the mistake that he was seen as a hero because he killed 160 people or whatever it was.  And I suppose maybe some people see him that way, but I don't think that's what the movie went for and that's not the message I got.  I think Eastwood did a good job of showing he was a hero because he kept people alive.  Evidenced well by the therapy session when he stated he was haunted by all the men he DIDN'T save.  Something that I don't think HAS been done in a war movie before.  So in that vein, it did bring something new to the genre.

 

And he was from Texas.  So the "America is the best country in the world" thing is kind of a given.....just sayin (don't kill me if you're from Texas).

 

ETA because I knew The Butcher was not real but I sure made it sound like he was.  LOL

Edited February 2, 2015 by CaughtOnTape

[NoWillToResist]

I think Eastwood did a good job of showing he was a hero because he kept people alive.  Evidenced well by the therapy session when he stated he was haunted by all the men he DIDN'T save. 

 

I did like that Kyle kept distancing himself from the label of 'hero' and didn't feel like one because he couldn't save everyone; that every soldier who died while Kyle was behind his scope felt like a failure. It's far too high a standard to hold oneself to, but I did find it realistic.

 

 

And he was from Texas.  So the "America is the best country in the world" thing is kind of a given.....just sayin (don't kill me if you're from Texas).

 

Heh. True. As soon as the movie started and he was at a rodeo in Texas, I knew to brace for a VERY pro-America main character. :) 

 

Another thing I did appreciate about the movie: the lack of slurs (unless I missed them). I was honestly expecting to hear a lot of them in the war zone but I honestly can't recall a single one.

 

I think some of the criticism/controversy about the movie may involve the perceived "white washing" of Kyle. It appears that he had made some rather outlandish claims in his book - perhaps due to PTSD? - but all of that stuff was skipped over in the movie and he went from "war hero" to "dead hero".

 

Still, it's not like Eastwood claimed that the movie was fair, balanced and unbiased, right?

[Bastet]

Then I look at the comments the real Chris Kyle made and am even more uncomfortable with how much the movie celebrates him as a "true American hero" (as he has been called by the producers).

 

Bingo.  This was highly unlikely to be my type of film anyway, and the commercials certainly did nothing to get me interested - just his wife saying his name over and over - but once I read about the real guy being (inaccurately) portrayed, I knew I'd be taking a pass.

[MartinKSmith]

I saw this film tonight, I've had the screener for a while, but opted to go to the cinema to see it, because I knew I'd be forced to sit through the film if I went to the cinema, whereas I'd be more than likely to turn the screener off at some point, had I watched it at home/alone.

 

For me, the film was (for the most part) well made. The story was there. But I'll never be comfortable with the term 'hero' for soldiers, particularly not those who have killed over 100 people. "Enemies" or not. 

 

And while I got that the footage at the end was the actual footage, people celebrating 'the legend' that was Chris Kyle, so dubbed because of the amount of kills he had..? Again. Doesn't sit right with me. 

 

And that's before you add all the "We're number 1" attitudes the film brought with it. Not being American, I will NEVER understand the amount of love and devotion you have to your country. 

[shelley1234]

I saw the movie and really wanted to like it, but I didn't.  I wish that it spent more time on the effect of war and PTSD and less time on the Legend that Kyle was and the kills he had.  I also honestly wish they had picked another war veteran or made it a fictitious story since there has a lot of talk and some proof about how much of Kyle's book is just not based on fact, but on embellishment.  

 

I also read that Chris Pratt was originally considered for the lead.  I love Bradley Cooper, but I wish they had worked it out or waited for Pratt.

 

P.S.  Fake baby.  C'mon Clint.  You're better than that or at least you should be.   

[missbonnie]

This is easily one of the best movies that I have ever seen. It's not a war movie. It's a movie about what war does to the human psyche and to the families of the people who have been to war. I'm 53 years old and have probably seen roughly 600 movies in a theater in my lifetime. I have NEVER had a movie end and people got up to leave and you could have heard a pin drop. I have friends who live in Kansas City, NYC, Dallas, Denver, Oregon and California and every single one of them said the exact same thing happened at their theaters. If a single movie managed to get that reaction in all those places it's truly something special.

As far as Michael Moore goes, when he goes and serves a few tours of duty, then and only then can he come back and shoot his mouth off.

[Rick Kitchen]

 

As far as Michael Moore goes, when he goes and serves a few tours of duty, then and only then can he come back and shoot his mouth off.

 

Why?  In order to hate war, you have to have fought in a war?

[KatWay]

 

I have NEVER had a movie end and people got up to leave and you could have heard a pin drop. I have friends who live in Kansas City, NYC, Dallas, Denver, Oregon and California and every single one of them said the exact same thing happened at their theaters. If a single movie managed to get that reaction in all those places it's truly something special.

To be fair, that's I think partly due to the no music bit at the end. I watched the movie and I didn't particularly like it and even rolled my eyes at the overly heroic imagery at the end, but since there was no music it was just dead silent in the theatre and I felt uncomfortable saying anything. Usually when the credits roll and the music comes on, I start chatting, but since there was no music it just felt weird, like you were still disturbing someone. So everyone just left the theatre and started chatting outside, where the noise was at a normal level. And I didn't hear only positive remarks, so I doubt everyone who kept silent in the theatre did it because they were so moved.

[magicdog]

Not being American, I will NEVER understand the amount of love and devotion you have to your country.

 

 

As an American, I'll never understand why you have no love and devotion to your country.

 

 

For me, the film was (for the most part) well made. The story was there. But I'll never be comfortable with the term 'hero' for soldiers, particularly not those who have killed over 100 people. "Enemies" or not.

 

 

 

If it makes you feel any better, most military folk don't consider themselves heroes either.  They reserve that honor for  those who never came home

 

As far as Michael Moore goes, when he goes and serves a few tours of duty, then and only then can he come back and shoot his mouth off.

 

Why?  In order to hate war, you have to have fought in a war?

 

 

 

 

I agree with your comment missbonnie.  Moore is little more than an armchair quarterback on the Monday after the game.   Then again, I expect trash talk from him and his ilk.  He is entitled to his opinion, but it would be nice if he were a bit more understanding of what he derides. He needn't fight in a war to hate it (ask anyone who's ever fought in one and they'll tell you how much they hate it too) but he should keep in mind that he wouldn't have the lifestyle he currently has without the sacrifices people he openly claims to despise fought and died for.

[GHScorpiosRule]

I have NEVER had a movie end and people got up to leave and you could have heard a pin drop. I have friends who live in Kansas City, NYC, Dallas, Denver, Oregon and California and every single one of them said the exact same thing happened at their theaters. If a single movie managed to get that reaction in all those places it's truly something special.

I have. It was Passion of Christ. And I only went with a friend to see what the controversy was about. Just like I've heard about this movie's ending so silent you could hear a pin drop, the same was said about Passion.

I'm not planning to see this movie because I just don't like war movies.

[Shannon L.]

 

I have NEVER had a movie end and people got up to leave and you could have heard a pin drop. I have friends who live in Kansas City, NYC, Dallas, Denver, Oregon and California and every single one of them said the exact same thing happened at their theaters. If a single movie managed to get that reaction in all those places it's truly something special.

 

I have. It was Passion of Christ. And I only went with a friend to see what the controversy was about. Just like I've heard about this movie's ending so silent you could hear a pin drop, the same was said about Passion.

 

Selma, too.  In fact, both times I saw it people didn't get up to leave right away--they stayed still and quite through a significant amount of the credits.  That's something I've never seen.  Usually, it's some people stay and most people get up to leave.

 

I have mixed feelings on the movie.  I could swear we had another thread on this because we were discussing it somewhere else (maybe the Awards Season thread?)  But, someone there posted my thoughts much more eloquently than I did--that we wished the movie focused more on the war at home.  The PTSD and for some reason the other poster and I had a feeling that his brother had a much different opinion of what was happening over there and wondered if there was some tension between the two.  I thought it was a good movie and understand Bradley Cooper's nomination, but I didn't think it was "record breaking weekends" good.

 

Regarding Michael Moore:  He's all about provocation and that's about it.  Sure, he's entitled to his opinion, but he could phrase things much better instead of being so blunt most of the time.  But, I do appreciate all he's done for the troops and our vets over the years, so I can't completely dismiss him.

Edited February 8, 2015 by Shannon L.

[missbonnie]

I have. It was Passion of Christ. And I only went with a friend to see what the controversy was about. Just like I've heard about this movie's ending so silent you could hear a pin drop, the same was said about Passion.

I'm not planning to see this movie because I just don't like war movies.

I saw that in the theater as well, although I'm Catholic I can't watch that movie again. I do know people who watch it every year on Good Friday. The brutality of it about did me in, I about had to go outside halfway through but didn't. My experience at the end wasn't silence though, more like the sound of people who were or had been weeping.

Edited because my phone is annoying.

Edited February 8, 2015 by missbonnie

[missbonnie]

As an American, I'll never understand why you have no love and devotion to your country.

If it makes you feel any better, most military folk don't consider themselves heroes either. They reserve that honor for those who never came home

I agree with your comment missbonnie. Moore is little more than an armchair quarterback on the Monday after the game. Then again, I expect trash talk from him and his ilk. He is entitled to his opinion, but it would be nice if he were a bit more understanding of what he derides. He needn't fight in a war to hate it (ask anyone who's ever fought in one and they'll tell you how much they hate it too) but he should keep in mind that he wouldn't have the lifestyle he currently has without the sacrifices people he openly claims to despise fought and died for.

And that is the very reason I can't stand him. Like it or not, it's because of the men and women who have served their country that he has the freedom to shoot his mouth off. I have often wondered if he was forced to go live in a war zone for a year if he would be so forthcoming with his comments considering that he could be shot by some terrorist who disagreed with him.

I hate war plain and simple. What I hate even more though is people who haven't been there running their mouths negatively about the people who have or are currently serving in the military.

Edited February 8, 2015 by missbonnie

[KatWay]

 

Like it or not, it's because of the men and women who have served their country that he has the freedom to shoot his mouth off. I have often wondered if he was forced to go live in a war zone for a year if he would be so forthcoming with his comments considering that he could be shot by some terrorist who disagreed with him.

 

What does all of that have to do with freedom of opinion though? North America hasn't been a war zone in over a century, and that was a civil war. Nobody actually has tried to invade the US in, like, ever. Nobody alive and born in the US has ever lived in a war zone. Michael Moore's freedom to shoot his mouth off has nothing to do with the currently fought wars.

Edited February 8, 2015 by KatWay

[mansonlamps]

I have. It was Passion of Christ. And I only went with a friend to see what the controversy was about. Just like I've heard about this movie's ending so silent you could hear a pin drop, the same was said about Passion.

For me it was Schindler's List. Nobody even got out of their seats for around 5 minutes.

I'm planning on seeing this in the theaters so don't have an opinion yet, but I'm not sure why it's considered wrong by so many to be proud to be an American. I can't imagine wanting to live anywhere else.

Edited February 8, 2015 by mansonlamps

[Bastet]

What I hate even more though is people who haven't been there running their mouths negatively about the people who have or are currently serving in the military.

 

Do you think only those who have served in Congress can complain about those who are doing so?  Can only those who have been at the helm of a corporation criticize the policies and actions of other CEOs?  Can only cops call out instances of police brutality, racial profiling, etc.?  Are other lawyers the only ones who can complain about the poor conduct of some lawyers?  Doctors about other doctors?  I don't see why there should be a special rule for members of the military.

Edited February 8, 2015 by Bastet

[galax-arena]

Can only cops call out instances of police brutality, racial profiling, etc.?

Damn, someone better let the Ferguson protesters know! 

 

 

As an American, I'll never understand why you have no love and devotion to your country.

Who says that MartinKSmith has no love and devotion to their own country? I think they were just calling out the OTT patriotism/nationalism that Americans often bring to the table, and I think that's legit. I don't think it has to be one or the other. I'd prefer a happy balance. I'm not a fan of the imperialism and ethnocentrism that often go hand in hand with over-the-top patriotism and nationalism.

 

Loving something doesn't mean you have to think that it's the best ever. When you boil it down, I love America, and that's why all of my country's fuck ups piss me off. I want us to do better. It's the ones you love that have the power to disappoint you the most.

Edited February 8, 2015 by galax-arena

[NoWillToResist]

It's not a war movie. It's a movie about what war does to the human psyche and to the families of the people who have been to war. .

 

I felt like that was what they were trying to do, but to be honest, I didn't really feel it. I really felt that the movie did not give enough attention to Kyle's PTSD. Throw in that the movie didn't acknowledge his less stellar moments, and it really bothered me. Why didn't they just make someone up instead of using Kyle if they were going to gloss over/ignore some of his less heroic comments/actions/claims?

 

I mean, as far as the mental effects of war...wasn't that what The Hurt Locker was all about? So, did Clint just want to put a more personal spin on it by using a real American soldier's story and then couldn't pass up the tagline about America's deadliest sniper and thus chose Kyle?  

 

I also wasn't really affected by Cooper's performance. His two moments behind the scope which involved kids were good, but otherwise...meh.

 

As an American, I'll never understand why you have no love and devotion to your country..

 

Speaking personally, one can have a great deal of love and devotion to one's country without making IMO ignorant and inflammatory claims that theirs is "the best country in the world".

Edited February 9, 2015 by NoWillToResist

[missbonnie]

Do you think only those who have served in Congress can complain about those who are doing so? Can only those who have been at the helm of a corporation criticize the policies and actions of other CEOs? Can only cops call out instances of police brutality, racial profiling, etc.? Are other lawyers the only ones who can complain about the poor conduct of some lawyers? Doctors about other doctors? I don't see why there should be a special rule for members of the military.

Because outside of the police officers, the rest of the groups you mentioned do not face the risk of death whenever they go to work.

[shelley1234]

Because outside of the police officers, the rest of the groups you mentioned do not face the risk of death whenever they go to work.

 

While I often agree that Michael Moore strives to be divisive and to stir the pot....I also strongly believe that the thoughts and opinions of all those in this country should be shared and protected, not just those we value or believe in.  If only patriotic comments are allowed because soldiers fight for that freedom then I would make the case that it is a conditional freedom.  

[missbonnie]

While I often agree that Michael Moore strives to be divisive and to stir the pot....I also strongly believe that the thoughts and opinions of all those in this country should be shared and protected, not just those we value or believe in. If only patriotic comments are allowed because soldiers fight for that freedom then I would make the case that it is a conditional freedom.

This is very true, it's also a very important freedom born out of our country's war for independence. Which is my point.

[KatWay]

 

This is very true, it's also a very important freedom born out of our country's war for independence. Which is my point.

England doesn't have freedom of speech?

[NoWillToResist]

Say what you will about Aaron Sorkin, but I think he nailed this issue for me in the first episode of The Newsroom, when Will McAvoy goes off on a college girl who wants him to say why he thinks America is the best country in the world. His short answer is: it isn't. His long list of why it's not was, IMO, fucking awesome and long overdue.

 

You can love your country and think it's great and want to protect it, but there is always room for improvement. Something doesn't have to be the best to have worth.

 

If someone can look at America and not see that some things are fucked, well...that's concerning to me.

Edited February 10, 2015 by NoWillToResist

[missbonnie]

England doesn't have freedom of speech?

I'm assuming that our forefathers had a specific reason for the first amendment. I am not saying that people don't have the right to express their opinions. What I am saying is that typically a person who has a migraine wouldn't have an inkling of the feelings of a person with brain cancer. Does that help to explain what I meant? I am honestly hearing what you are saying, but I am trying to convey why I feel that there are certain things that another person cannot possibly understand because they haven't been there, so perhaps he should have made his comments with that in mind.

And NoWillToResist Amen

Edited February 11, 2015 by missbonnie

[mansonlamps]

Say what you will about Aaron Sorkin, but I think he nailed this issue for me in the first episode of The Newsroom, when Will McAvoy goes off on a college girl who wants him to say why he thinks America is the best country in the world. His short answer is: it isn't. His long list of why it's not was, IMO, fucking awesome and long overdue.

You can love your country and think it's great and want to protect it, but there is always room for improvement. Something doesn't have to be the best to have worth.

If someone can look at America and not see that some things are fucked, well...that's concerning to me.

Did he tell us which countries are better?

[NoWillToResist]

Did he tell us which countries are better?

 

I linked the clip in my post, so you can have a look. But basically, he questioned - as i do - the generic use of 'best'. Best at what? Military spending? Health care for its population? Equal rights? Education? Environmental policies? The number of Olympic gold medals won? What are we measuring in order to claim that the US is the best at it?

 

It's been a while since I watched the ep but I do remember that he pointed out that many of the good things that Americans enjoy and brag about are not remotely unique to the States. I think he listed some negative things that the US is best at as well...if my memory serves correctly, the US was #1 pertaining to the percentage of its incarcerated citizens. Hardly something to brag about, IMO.

 

Anyway, it's just a personal annoyance of mine to see anyone seriously state, with no qualifiers, that their country is "#1" or "the best".

 

So, as soon as Kyle said that America was the best country in the world, it was an automatic "ugh, fuck" from me. :)  I'd like to know which other countries he's lived in so that he felt comfortable making that assessment.

 

Love your country. Respect your country. Fight for your country if you want, but please, please, please, don't ever turn a blind eye to its faults.

 

The US is a good country. I just don't think it has to be called the best piece of dirt on the planet Earth to justify fighting for it.

Edited February 11, 2015 by NoWillToResist

[Janet Snakehole]

" Iguess his wife had no friends or family? I found that difficult to believe. I also found her difficult to sympathize with when she kept whining about how she wanted him home. Did she not understand the job description of 'military wife'?"

I agree with a lot of the movie's criticism, but this....makes me uncomfortable. Not going to lie, I am a military fiancé, but I am not one to agree with all of the military's actions. It is not my job, I never applied for it, and I do honestly oppose a lot of what is going on. We should be questioning all of it, not just being like, oh ok, whatever. So, I can't hate on someone's wife for wanting them home. I am probably not explaining this well, but it bugs me that people associated with the military are supposed to just be ok with everything, when in reality there are a lot of different viewpoints. It can be hard to deal with separation particularly if you are not ok with the reasons behind the separation.

Edited February 12, 2015 by Janet Snakehole

[BitterApple]

I thought the movie was great minus that awful rubber baby. Eastwood should have hired a real life infant or just scrapped the baby from the scene altogether.

[lampshades]

Anyway, it's just a personal annoyance of mine to see anyone seriously state, with no qualifiers, that their country is "#1" or "the best".

 

So, as soon as Kyle said that America was the best country in the world, it was an automatic "ugh, fuck" from me. :)  I'd like to know which other countries he's lived in so that he felt comfortable making that assessment.

 

Love your country. Respect your country. Fight for your country if you want, but please, please, please, don't ever turn a blind eye to its faults.

 

The US is a good country. I just don't think it has to be called the best piece of dirt on the planet Earth to justify fighting for it.

 

I think you can still call the US the best country while recognizing that it has many faults. There isn't a single country in the world that doesn't have problems. 

[KatWay]

But calling any country the best is crap IMO. The US is the best in some aspects, but not as good in others. Other countries are just as good as the US, or - gasp - perhaps even better in some aspects, but worse in others.

Patriotism to me is to love my country, acknowledge its strengths and work on its flaws, but not claiming this is the best possible place to exist in the world.

[Betweenyouandme]

Not that anyone has to make me happy, but I'd prefer hearing a country was someone's favorite versus them stating it was the best. I mean, not everyone agrees which facts, values, laws, freedoms, cultural norms, and other aspects are important.

Plus, it's good to realize that what you might think about a country you've never been to may or may not match what you'd think if you tried living there a year, and that's impossible to do for every country in the world.

[NoWillToResist]

I agree with a lot of the movie's criticism, but this....makes me uncomfortable. Not going to lie, I am a military fiancé, but I am not one to agree with all of the military's actions. It is not my job, I never applied for it, and I do honestly oppose a lot of what is going on. We should be questioning all of it, not just being like, oh ok, whatever. So, I can't hate on someone's wife for wanting them home. I am probably not explaining this well, but it bugs me that people associated with the military are supposed to just be ok with everything, when in reality there are a lot of different viewpoints. It can be hard to deal with separation particularly if you are not ok with the reasons behind the separation.

 

Full disclosure: I know little to nothing about the military, so my apologies if my understanding is wrong but when one enlists, isn't there is a requirement for x tours or x amount of months/years of service? That's what I had always thought, which is why I was bothered by the wife being annoyed at him for leaving. Unless I misunderstood/misheard and he was volunteering for extra tours that weren't needed, I really didn't like that it appeared to me that she went into the relationship knowing he was a SEAL, married him, and had kids with him despite knowing on her wedding day that he was being shipped out to Iraq and then gives him crap about serving. I have no issue with military wives questioning the reasons behind the Iraq war - hell, get in line! - but it just played to me that she was giving her husband grief about leaving their family even though he was having to do his duty. Was this not the case in the film? Did he sign up for more tours than needed? THAT I could understand pitching a fit over when you've got two kids at home.

 

I think you can still call the US the best country while recognizing that it has many faults. There isn't a single country in the world that doesn't have problems. 

 

Then, how is the US the best? By definition, it lessens every other country in the world. If the US has faults and every other country in the world has faults, then how can one be better than the rest?

[CaughtOnTape]

Was this not the case in the film? Did he sign up for more tours than needed? THAT I could understand pitching a fit over when you've got two kids at home.

 

Yes he volunteered for more tours than he was obligated to serve.  Hence why she was pissed off.  They made that pretty obvious in the movie if you ask me (Her begging him in the bedroom not to go again and he did it anyway).  I mean, why did you think she was begging him to stay?  That would seem to be a totally different conversation to me if it was his duty and there was no way he could get out of it.

 

And who cares if someone thinks the US is the best country in the world?  That's their viewpoint.  No one needs to explain it to anyone else, if you ask me.  Thinking that anyone who says that doesn't realize the country has it's issues is being naive, to be honest.  And besides, people who say that are usually saying it in highly emotionally charged situations.  Give them a break.....geez.  Everything in the world is not black and white.  Thank God there are people who think that....because I'll be damned if I'm going to some foreign country with a target on my back to dodge bullets.  I'm a coward, I'm comfortable with it.  

Edited February 12, 2015 by CaughtOnTape

[galax-arena]

And who cares if someone thinks the US is the best country in the world?  That's their viewpoint.

Because when that sort of pride goes unchecked, it often leads to imperialistic/ethnocentric attitudes, and that's never good.

 

It's less of a big deal when someone from a small nation with no global power believes their country rules and all other countries drool. But for country like the US, which is a superpower with tons of global influence? Yes, it matters. We could do with a touch of less hubris. There's a reason why a lot of other countries hate us - and I'm not talking along strict political lines, but about the sentiment among ordinary citizens in places that are our allies, e.g. South Korea - and it's because we tend to be arrogant jerkoffs and believe that our way is the best way to the point of trying to impose it on other countries without listening to what they say. 

Thinking that anyone who says that doesn't realize the country has it's issues is being naive, to be honest. 

I don't think so. At least, in my experience, they're not willing to acknowledge them. Or they want to derail the point by screaming about how other countries are even worse.

 

Not that people from other countries aren't guilty of this, too. Bringing up racism in Canada? "Well, at least we're not as racist as America!" etc. 

Edited February 12, 2015 by galax-arena

[NoWillToResist]

Yes he volunteered for more tours than he was obligated to serve.  Hence why she was pissed off.  They made that pretty obvious in the movie if you ask me (Her begging him in the bedroom not to go again and he did it anyway).  I mean, why did you think she was begging him to stay? 

 

I thought that she was lonely, had no support system while trying to raise two children single-handedly, felt overwhelmed and was desperate. If he signed up for more without taking his young family into consideration then I officially retract my criticism of her attitude.

 

 

And who cares if someone thinks the US is the best country in the world?  That's their viewpoint.  No one needs to explain it to anyone else, if you ask me.  Thinking that anyone who says that doesn't realize the country has it's issues is being naive, to be honest.  And besides, people who say that are usually saying it in highly emotionally charged situations. 

 

Yes, everyone is entitled to their opinion, of course. Just as I'm entitled to think that that opinion is stupid. And others are entitled to think that me thinking that is stupid. ;)

 

The whole "we're #1" is just a thing that I personally find very annoying and problematic. That attitude has IMO contributed very negatively to America's reputation world-wide. No faster way to rile up your fellow Terrestrials than to announce that you're better than everyone else on the planet. Yes, it's probably a recruiting tool and yes most people probably don't mean to imply that America is perfect, but it still bugs me. *shrugs*

Edited February 12, 2015 by NoWillToResist

[NumberCruncher]

Interesting that the discussion in this thread has focused so much on one line in the film that I thought really had very little bearing on the content of 99.9% if the rest of it. I think the film was pretty careful not to dwell on the reasons behind the war and focused more on how war emotionally/physically impacts those who have to fight it. Personally I didn't see any rah-rah patriotism that apparently others did. I saw a film about a man who, right or wrong, had to make some pretty impossible choices that would have shaken anyone to their core. He was changed as a result of his experiences as evidenced by his growing weariness as the story progressed. I didn't see that character glorify what he was doing even if he acknowledged it was (in his eyes) necessary. I expected the movie to be political in tone considering how much bickering I've observed on both sides of the political spectrum, but honestly, I was pleasantly surprised by how little I found.

[Cobalt Stargazer]

Because when that sort of pride goes unchecked, it often leads to imperialistic/ethnocentric attitudes, and that's never good.

 

It's less of a big deal when someone from a small nation with no global power believes their country rules and all other countries drool. But for country like the US, which is a superpower with tons of global influence? Yes, it matters. We could do with a touch of less hubris. There's a reason why a lot of other countries hate us - and I'm not talking along strict political lines, but about the sentiment among ordinary citizens in places that are our allies, e.g. South Korea - and it's because we tend to be arrogant jerkoffs and believe that our way is the best way to the point of trying to impose it on other countries without listening to what they say. 

 

In The Best Years of Our Lives, (which is a much better film, but that's not the point) there's a scene close to the end where a returned veteran named Homer  is sitting at a lunch counter, and an older man starts talking to him about what a shame it was that he had to sacrifice part of himself during the war. The veteran's hands had been amputated and been replaced by hooks that functioned in their stead*. The older fellow goes on to say that the US had been pulled into the war by "a bunch of radicals in Washington", and that guys like Homer fought the wrong people and paid the price for it. The counter clerk, played by Dana Andrews, comes over and tells the older guy to pay his check and clear out. A confrontation ensues, and Andrews punches him out, then loses his job.

 

Lives was released in 1946, way before Vietnam and way before the current Middle East situation. So my question is, at what point did it become, for lack of a better way to put it, socially acceptable to look down on those who do the fighting? Not that I thought the guy should have gotten punched in the mouth, but the scene struck a nerve with me. I don't think you have to think your country is a perfect utopia to be proud of it, or to be proud of fighting to defend it. Even a questionable guy like Chris Kyle.

 

*The guy who played Homer actually did lose his hands while training paratroopers at Camp MacKall when some faulty TNT blew up. He'd never acted before.

[MartinKSmith]

Lives was released in 1946, way before Vietnam and way before the current Middle East situation. So my question is, at what point did it become, for lack of a better way to put it, socially acceptable to look down on those who do the fightinIg? 

I'm just going to chime back in here and say that I, personally, don't think it's OK to look down on soldiers/military personnel, but nor do I think they should be placed on a pedestal simply for time served in the armed forces.

 

There are some that deserve the praise, some that have gone far and beyond the call of duty and, y'know, credit where credit's due. But just by signing up? You don't become a "hero", not in my eyes.

 

Also, while I'm here...

 

Who says that MartinKSmith has no love and devotion to their own country? I think they were just calling out the OTT patriotism/nationalism that Americans often bring to the table, and I think that's legit. I don't think it has to be one or the other. I'd prefer a happy balance. I'm not a fan of the imperialism and ethnocentrism that often go hand in hand with over-the-top patriotism and nationalism.

 

This. Essentially. I am Scottish. I live in Scotland and have done my whole life. I like it here, I could list off a bunch of things that are great about the country, I could equally list of a bunch of things that aren't great about the country. While I would much rather live here than anywhere else in the world, right now, I would never call it the best country in the world. 

 

Like others have said, to claim that puts you above everyone else. Scotland has it's faults just like every other country in the world. No country deserves that moniker. 

[CaughtOnTape]

Like others have said, to claim that puts you above everyone else. Scotland has it's faults just like every other country in the world. No country deserves that moniker. 

 

You keep stating this as if every person in America walks around saying it like it's true.  For every American who's said that, there are 50 who don't.  Please don't paint us all with the same brush.  Just like you would never say your country is the best in the world, I'm sure I could find a few Scottish people who would disagree.  That hardly makes the entire country culpable for either viewpoint.

[MartinKSmith]

You keep stating this as if every person in America walks around saying it like it's true.  For every American who's said that, there are 50 who don't.  Please don't paint us all with the same brush.  Just like you would never say your country is the best in the world, I'm sure I could find a few Scottish people who would disagree.  That hardly makes the entire country culpable for either viewpoint.

I obviously don't think the whole country believes it, or even says it - I know people personally who don't think that way.

 

However, America is the country that puts that message out there to the world, via films, TV, etc. Now, granted, a large part of that is down to the fact that America has one of the biggest film/TV industries, so it's natural that there'd be a higher than 'normal' concentration of that theme out there. But still, the point still stands that the message is out there. 

 

At times, some films, particularly war films, almost feel like propaganda from the Americans.