|
Basebf555 posted:This is a political issue, there's no getting around that. As hard as Eastwood may have tried, there's no way to make this film in a political vacuum, not now. So yea, I wanted to see Kyles story used to put out a message that I agree with, that I feel would actually be productive for our society. I'm with you on that. Basebf555 posted:As it is the movie puts out the same message that's gotten us to this point where we invade countries and then act surprised when people shoot at our guys.[/quote Most people understand that our foreign policy is directed by politics. Maybe the intention was to get people thinking and talking about the Iraq War, and by extension the political apparatus that sent our troops there, and by further extension war in general, without spelling it out, because telling people what to think does not always have its intended effect.
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 00:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 22:24 |
|
|
Sentient Data posted:
What? That's like, the definition of U.S. (and most other "western") foreign policy since like Reagan.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 00:03
|
|
if you think that in any way describes US foreign policy as seen by basically any other country in the world
|
Snowman_McK posted:
Ok, I am talking about the movie, so when I say Chris Kyle, I am talking about that guy you watched for over two hours. Snowman_McK posted:There's a better phrase for it quote:To not even consider the right and wrong of the war and just focus on "in that moment, he totally had to kill that kid/woman/guy" is myopic. To structure the film as something that has a payoff (he kills Mustafa, allowing him a real, military triumph in a war that had no military triumph) frames the war in a nice, palatable way, rather than a pointless, slogging occupation. quote:Actually, think about how the message of the film changes if you move the sniper duel to the first half. You wouldn't be following normal formula. This is still a Hollywood movie, and they have typical formulas. quote:It puts it more in line with something like "The Men in Green Faces." I don't know if you've read it, but it starts out as a team of Navy SEALs fighting in Vietnam, and ends with a loving Kung Fu fight against the evil North Vietnamese colonel. quote:Who are notably absent from this film, even by mention. quote:So does it follow that you think the film is shortsighted? quote:See, I disagree with this, but I suspect it's just word choice. It's unambiguously the correct tactical (or practical) choice in that moment, but using the word right suggests a moral dimension that I don't think you're going for. Killing someone who's going to squeal on you for murder is also the correct practical choice, but it'd be weird if you called it the right thing to do.' quote:That's probably true, but I think you'd feel worse for the US civilians, and be really angry if, later on, they were depicted as being all combatants with no hint of a moral dimension.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 00:10
|
|
|
Cole posted:If you're seeing it as a film about Iraq, yes. I don't see it this way. This is the problem with the movie. It's not a film about Iraq, but it's also not a good film about a person, because the Kyle of the movie (as opposed to the real Kyle) is pretty pale character. I think most people who are critiquing the movie for not reflecting the book more are doing so because "Morally Praiseworthy Great Man Makes Hard Choices" is just lacking compared to the character the movie could have been about. Every theme that the movie has would be more effective, not less, if the movie Kyle reflected the flawed humanity of the real Kyle.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 00:15
|
|
|
Mormon Star Wars posted:The child in the movie is a character in the movie, and his character is included for a reason - to cement the sainthood of the American Sniper so that later we can empathize with his suffering. The child is there because it washes away all moral questions: It's the moment that establishes that he couldn't ever really do anything wrong, because the people over there really are that bad, even (and especially) the children. This is repeated later when the child picks up the rocket launcher. This is an interesting interpretation. I think people are more likely to see the child as a symbol of the victims of war. Innocence is not just lost but gunned down, and the suffering passes on through generations, on the shooter's side as well. It's something that most people can relate to in ways that they might not relate to say a firefight between opposing soldiers.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 00:18
|
|
|
Mormon Star Wars posted:This is the problem with the movie. It's not a film about Iraq, but it's also not a good film about a person, because the Kyle of the movie (as opposed to the real Kyle) is pretty pale character. I think most people who are critiquing the movie for not reflecting the book more are doing so because "Morally Praiseworthy Great Man Makes Hard Choices" is just lacking compared to the character the movie could have been about. Every theme that the movie has would be more effective, not less, if the movie Kyle reflected the flawed humanity of the real Kyle. Which I suppose is a fair point to make, but at the same time I don't hold it against anyone who makes a movie for taking creative liberties in their filmmaking when it is just "based on" something, and not the actual story of something.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 00:18
|
|
|
Cole posted:Ok, I am talking about the movie, so when I say Chris Kyle, I am talking about that guy you watched for over two hours. quote:The movie is about a person in Iraq, it's not about the politics of Iraq. quote:You wouldn't be following normal formula. This is still a Hollywood movie, and they have typical formulas. quote:It's funny you bring up Vietnam. I don't know if you know who Harold G. Moore is, but he even did a sit down conference with the opposing commander of the Battle of Ia Drang once. Not relevant to your point, but it's interesting to me that two people who were hell bent on killing eachother can see war for what it was: government agenda, and not hold it against each other at the end of the day. quote:Which is fine, because this movie isn't about the politics of the Iraq war. quote:If you're seeing it as a film about Iraq, yes. I don't see it this way. quote:Someone who squeals on you for murder isn't trying to kill you or a group of people, this is apples and oranges. quote:I never said the people in Iraq can't be mad about the way they are depicted in contemporary American war movies. I actually have a close friend from Baghdad who hates the movie for the reason you just mentioned, and I completely understand his viewpoint without him even having to explain it. I think I get your point. You would like it to be a completely apolitical film that purely focuses on the trial and tribulations of one man. Would that be fair to say?
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 00:44
|
|
|
All art is political. News at 11.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 01:00
|
|
|
Mormon Star Wars posted:In the south, deer hunting is viewed as evidence of skill. I think many people who saw the movie would view a comparison between killing a child-terrorist and killing a deer as an example of how his mastery filtered through to all aspects of his life, including his life as a civilian. You know I used this angle kinda on Facebook to a friend of mine bashing American Sniper who didn't even see it but had a strong opinion about the film being propaganda based on the liberal media echo chamber criticisms he read. He actually compared this movie to the ISIS immolation video of the Jordanian pilot which is what set me off in this thread in the first place when I got fed up with the bashing. He said I was the first person he read claiming that the movie focused more on the ultimately tragic experiences of soldiers trained to kill coming home to families and civilian life with PTSD and the legitimate struggles they may endure in finding meaning in a world after years of killing and hate, inability to relate to others who don't understand what it's like. Which I think the real world ending of Chris Kyle's life beautifully encapsulated when he began to find meaningful redemption in relating to even more hosed up vets over war stories and gun ranges, a dangerous self destructive combination that defies our logic and common sense but made sense to Chris Kyle and ended with him being loving murdered shot in the back by an even crazier dangerous veteran with a gun in a firing range that Chris Kyle was trying to bond with and help. My friend said everyone else who likes the movie claims it's about depicting Chris Kyle as a hero who was haunted by the people he didn't save instead of the lives he took. I said well he could be seen as a hero to someone who thinks being highly accurate with a rifle is heroic. But the movie doesn't glamorize any of it very much, and I doubt most people would feel good or want to cheer the battle scenes in any way. I read interviews about this movie where someone saw the film in military base communities with families of soldiers and everyone was silent and many crying at the end of the movie, not hooting and hollering the killing, which sounds right to me and I think is how the movie connected with so many people. Yes in the South, or anywhere in the country with gun or military culture, being good with a gun is seen very differently than in cities where guns just mean violence and crime. I think of guns as violent tools mostly used in socially destructive ways, but I'm from New Jersey next to Newark where every major city is a gang war poo poo hole and only heard gunshots when it was an act of violence. But to some, it's just a different set of values and experiences. Positive relationships with guns growing up with their dads or friends, learning to handle firearms and respect them a point of view that is real different from many others and causes like culture war poo poo. My dad was a Vietnam veteran with guns, always locked in a safe and shown to me like once ever, but I went hunting or shooting a few times as a kid with him. I hated it, but I didn't hate him or my brother who joined a rifle club and learned marksmanship like a sport. My dad also got into arguments with me when I was a kid talking about how I've been reading about poor places around the world and didn't understand why more wasn't done to help. He got indignant that third world people were often savages, not people like how we in America were. Horrifying to hear but I dropped the subject, but here and there he would say crap like telling my nerd friend about to go to Japan on a student exchange trip, to never trust Asians. That they'd be his tour guide during the day and throw grenades in his or his buddies tents at night and kill them. Half joking but half you know deeply set racial hatred poo poo. I get mad, very mad when I read the vitriol about Chris Kyle cuz he actually wrote down his story and his world view. Chris Kyle is clearly a racist lying blowhard but for one he is an American and he has the right to be as full of poo poo as he wants. He thought he was Walker Texas Rangers and lied that he punched out a loving governor and all that, who cares? He got sued for it like he should've, and that's not in the movie so why harp on about it? Now the big loving point here that I get the most worked up over is just how everyone is mad in the wrong direction. People talk like Clint Eastwood and Chris Kyle are the moral equivalents of Dick Cheney or Donald Rumsfeld. They absolutely loving are not. Clint and Chris both fought in war as soldiers, they didn't give the orders to start them. And Clint has made a career trying to communicate that war is a serious loving thing, not playing Cowboys and Indians, that the military of a nation is filled with ordinary people doing things that are absolutely ridiculous, inscrutably demanding, and if they are lucky enough to live through it, cause lifelong scars some visible like having no legs and some invisible like Chris Kyle in this movie. The character in the film doesn't even understand how war has changed him, which the last act with Chris at the doctor asking questions is all about. But once he's back with fellow vets talking about the poo poo and shooting guns, he's a little better. Cuz those veterans are changed forever by their experiences. In ways that people can't or refuse to understand unless they have served, or maybe close family members have served and maybe died or turned into distant assholes or something. I think that's how this movie became so successful,it's not about celebrating war but it's about trying to teach some loving respect to the rest of us that God willing will never have to see a battlefield ever. America has a great military, but it deserves great leaders who understand the significance of the decision to use it, cuz it will gently caress up entire generations of families on every side of the conflict. That is why he made Flags of our Fathers and Letters From Imo Jima for example, to take away the glamorization and mythification of it. American Sniper is not designed to sell you a war and you are a loving idiot, doing a disservice to the anti war philosophy and the thousands of soldiers who probably wish we never went to loving Iraq either. It's designed to well, sell you a movie ticket mostly and boy was it successful at that. But it's made from Chris Kyle's point of view, where he basically was some divinely sanctioned warrior killing for his country and had the personal responsibility to save the lives of all his fellow soldiers, by killing everything he saw in his scope with peerless precision and accuracy. He probably thanked God for the winds every bullet that landed home like an NFL player thanking God for helping him catch a football and win the game. The amount of partisanship that exploded over this movie really depressed me. Reposting montages of conservative twitter racists ain't poo poo we should expect that vocal minority in everything. But all the progressives, anti war people, left leaning writers artists and posters, I was deluding myself I guess that they have higher standard, more critical thinking skills, not as prone to knee-jerk reactionary bullshit that divides Americans more than anything, the crap in every news comment section. But with American Sniper, the news comments mentality finally entered the mainstream, and the discussion was bullshit prattle about tweets and condemnation, WMD and 9/11, racists and rednecks and Chris Kyle's offensive memoir like any of it is addressing anything that could change lives for the better. And the irony is Chris Kyle actually died to help the Americans who suffered the most from the needless war in Iraq, the ones who got hurt fighting it! gently caress! Smoothrich fucked around with this message at 07:13 on Mar 4, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 05:07
|
|
|
I don't think you'll ever be able to get a good read on the movie if you fly into a rage whenever anyone talks about Chris Kyle (movie character or real man) in a way that isn't 100% praising him. edit: If the movie is actually trying to get people to respect human soldiers for the suffering they've been through, then the creation and canonization of movie Kyle directly undermines that. Anyone can respect a (fictional) saint, but that character is fictional and outside the reach of your average soldier. The real challenge would be to show the man, and then ask people to empathize with him. Mormon Star Wars fucked around with this message at 05:32 on Mar 4, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 05:23
|
|
|
Mormon Star Wars posted:I don't think you'll ever be able to get a good read on the movie if you fly into a rage whenever anyone talks about Chris Kyle (movie character or real man) in a way that isn't 100% praising him. that's just what a leftist would say
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 05:32
|
|
|
I still can't believe he took a PTSD man to a gun range. He should have gotten help from a real organization that could tell him he's being dumb. But he's a real man that don't need any of that baby psychological poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 06:17
|
|
|
Invalid Validation posted:But he's a real man that don't need any of that baby psychological poo poo. This is an actual thing that 90% of the people in the military who need help think, especially combat arms jobs.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 06:55
|
|
|
Invalid Validation posted:I still can't believe he took a PTSD man to a gun range. He should have gotten help from a real organization that could tell him he's being dumb. But he's a real man that don't need any of that baby psychological poo poo. You're totally right of course. And buried in the partisan bullshit over the movie it's producers and directors of non profit veterans lobby groups have said they have received record donations and attention since the movie came out and they couldn't be happier. I think I've heard PTSD described as a silent struggle alot of times and men are culturally conditioned to not talk about or confront those kind of feelings or issues and it's one of the root causes of veterans turning into druggies alcoholics criminals homeless unemployed divorced suicide statistics all that lovely stuff. Chris Kyle ended up murdered. People say it is a negative that Chris Kyle's memoirs do not discuss PTSD while saying the movie should've focused more on it in between saying both are disingenuous. But I mean that's pretty much the point. Chris Kyle and many other veterans don't understand PTSD and do dangerous poo poo because of it to treat the symptoms. The movie is doing a good thing for society by having that message and maybe promoting organizations that can help people who are still suffering from our dumbass war in Iraq. They are victims of lies and propaganda too just in a different way than Iraqi soldiers militia and civilians are. Alouicious posted:that's just what a leftist would say I am a leftist. I think my left wing values mean I should be sympathetic to people who I disagree with when there are root causes to people becoming racist violent crazy people, just like there are reasons black communities struggle with violence and crime, instead of attacking people for turning out messed up. It's what upsets me about many of the critics who share my politics. Smoothrich fucked around with this message at 07:04 on Mar 4, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 07:00
|
|
|
Snowman_McK posted:It's the same problem that a lot of people have with Ender's Game, funnily enough. It's a scene that should ask questions, but its depiction leaves no room for any other interpretation than "it was the right thing to do, and justified." Unless you're saying that some interpretations are invalid and thus don't count, I don't think it's true that there's only one way to interpret that scene. Snowman_McK posted:And once again, even if you can justify that act (and the film can) you would hope that the film would wonder, at least a little, how everyone involved got to that point. The film presents it as a video game level, though. Nothing came before or after, it's entirely free of context or consequence. I think viewers bring the context with them. That nothing came before or after may have been designed to prompt people to think for themselves instead of spoon feeding them the questions they should be asking and giving them the answers as well. There are many ways to try to reach people. There are a lot of good documentaries on the Iraq War that tell you exactly what to think. Maybe this film was trying something different.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 07:09
|
|
|
Snowman_McK posted:There's a better phrase for it It ends with Chris Kyle being murdered by an American soldier, in America. Shot in the back on a shooting range after four or five tours in a war zone, by the kind of guy Chris believed he was fighting to save all along. Happy ending?
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 07:25
|
|
|
Smoothrich posted:The movie is doing a good thing for society by having that message and maybe promoting organizations that can help people who are still suffering from our dumbass war in Iraq. They are victims of lies and propaganda too just in a different way than Iraqi soldiers militia and civilians are. And a different sort of movie showing a monstrous central figure may have provoked a different reaction, and not reached the same number of people. Smoothrich posted:I am a leftist. I think my left wing values mean I should be sympathetic to people who I disagree with when there are root causes to people becoming racist violent crazy people, just like there are reasons black communities struggle with violence and crime, instead of attacking people for turning out messed up. It's what upsets me about many of the critics who share my politics. I think many progressives get upset when they think they see an opportunity missed because they know how hard it is to get their voices heard in the current media landscape. The ones I know share your perspective on the importance of looking at the root causes and not blaming victims.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 07:25
|
|
|
Smoothrich posted:It ends with Chris Kyle being murdered by an American soldier, in America. Shot in the back on a shooting range after four or five tours in a war zone, by the kind of guy Chris believed he was fighting to save all along. Happy ending? And before that it shows the baddest sniper in history brought to his knees from his involvement in a war which we are never told has any meaning.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 07:28
|
|
|
I dont think Chris Kyle is a monster, just an rear end in a top hat. What did the movie do so wrong? Didn't pepper his dialogue with enough ethnic or religious slurs? It means nothing. Chris Kyle was a soldier with a family, was highly decorated for his success at his role of being a sniper, and was a victim of murder. You want two additional hours of Chris Kyle getting drunk and raging at pussy liberals and watching Fox News or something?
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 07:32
|
|
|
socketwrencher posted:Unless you're saying that some interpretations are invalid and thus don't count, I don't think it's true that there's only one way to interpret that scene. quote:I think viewers bring the context with them. That nothing came before or after may have been designed to prompt people to think for themselves instead of spoon feeding them the questions they should be asking and giving them the answers as well. It gives answers all the time, they're just never very satisfactory or interesting ones. Smoothrich posted:It ends with Chris Kyle being murdered by an American soldier, in America. Shot in the back on a shooting range after four or five tours in a war zone, by the kind of guy Chris believed he was fighting to save all along. Happy ending? Smoothrich posted:I dont think Chris Kyle is a monster, just an rear end in a top hat. What did the movie do so wrong? Didn't pepper his dialogue with enough ethnic or religious slurs? It means nothing. Chris Kyle was a soldier with a family, was highly decorated for his success at his role of being a sniper, and was a victim of murder. You want two additional hours of Chris Kyle getting drunk and raging at pussy liberals and watching Fox News or something? Snowman_McK fucked around with this message at 07:37 on Mar 4, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 07:34
|
|
|
Smoothrich posted:I dont think Chris Kyle is a monster, just an rear end in a top hat. What did the movie do so wrong? Didn't pepper his dialogue with enough ethnic or religious slurs? It means nothing. Chris Kyle was a soldier with a family, was highly decorated for his success at his role of being a sniper, and was a victim of murder. You want two additional hours of Chris Kyle getting drunk and raging at people and watching Fox News or something? I didn't want that but I think a lot of the people criticizing the movie did in the interest of historical accuracy. rear end in a top hat is a better way to put it. Monstrous was used by people in this thread, so I referred back to it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 07:34
|
|
|
Snowman_McK posted:There's absolutely other ways to interpret the scene, if you have any knowledge about the world beyond what that scene gives you. Based only on what the film gives you, you can only judge it in purely practical terms. Which you'll notice is also the terms in which Kyle did the correct thing, trading 1 Iraqi child for several American soldiers. The interpretation I'm talking about is that horrific things are done in war which should make people question why we're in that war and what we're hoping to accomplish. Snowman_McK posted:You're discussing some other, hypothetical film which has an objective view. This does not describe American Sniper at all. Actually, it's pretty reliable about giving people answers (the answer is always "Badass American hero Chris Kyle did the right thing, though he was a bit sad about it afterwards.") Exactly right. The answers are not satisfactory. Badass hero doing the right thing is NOT satisfactory. Might make some people think a bit. If you're saying that people don't bring any context with them into a movie which informs their viewing of it, then we just disagree.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 07:45
|
|
|
Smoothrich posted:I dont think Chris Kyle is a monster, just an rear end in a top hat. What did the movie do so wrong? Didn't pepper his dialogue with enough ethnic or religious slurs? It means nothing. Chris Kyle was a soldier with a family, was highly decorated for his success at his role of being a sniper, and was a victim of murder. You want two additional hours of Chris Kyle getting drunk and raging at pussy liberals and watching Fox News or something? You talked about "Root Causes" earlier, but if you don't include the human ("rear end in a top hat") aspects of him, then the movie can't speak to this: quote:I should be sympathetic to people who I disagree with when there are root causes to people becoming racist violent crazy people The movie isn't about a racist violent crazy person, so it can't examine the root of what might make someone become that. The movie is about a living saint who gave his life for the viewer. The reason your posts are getting the reaction they are is because, while you seem to acknowledge that PTSD can gently caress a person up, you also seem to demand that this PTSD sufferer only be portrayed as a saint and anything else would be disrespectful. How can you really talk about PTSD if the only people you are allowed to show with it are moral paragons who can do no wrong?
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 07:48
|
|
|
socketwrencher posted:The interpretation I'm talking about is that horrific things are done in war which should make people question why we're in that war and what we're hoping to accomplish. quote:Exactly right. The answers are not satisfactory. Badass hero doing the right thing is NOT satisfactory. Might make some people think a bit. You might as well say that Braveheart is really going to get people to ask questions about whether Scotland fighting for freedom was the right thing to do. Because it's so simplistic and one sided that there's no way it was all meant unironically. Or that Fox news is secretly trying to turn people into Obama supporters because their criticism of him is so cartoonish an inept...actually, that one sounds sort of plausible. Anyway, of course people bring context in with them, and I'm not suggesting that American Sniper should have been a character assassination. But it could have asked some questions of its audience without even breaking stride. For instance, in Black Hawk Down, when the two snipers are protecting the second crash site, one of the many Somalis they shoot yells out in genuine pain as he's shot. In the middle of what dumbass 13 year old me thought was a cool gunfight (I was super dumb), a bloody reminder that that's a human being that just got killed. "Bad guys" don't cry out in pain like that, because it reminds you that they're human, which triggers our empathy, and a film where you're empathising with the bad guys is a very different film. Then again, the more I look at it, the more Black Hawk Down is completely amazing and about 10 years ahead of its time.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 07:59
|
|
|
Mormon Star Wars posted:
i think the movie wants to honor veterans, and sanitizes Kyle's story to make him more representative of the average soldier so more civilians can relate.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 08:02
|
|
|
Snowman_McK posted:You'd be right if the film itself didn't immediately have a character ensure us that Kyle did the right thing. That character saying that is probably more realistic than him questioning or condemning it. Do you give viewers any credit at all for thinking beyond what they see? Snowman_McK posted:Why would anyone think or ask questions when they've spent two hours being reassured that Chris Kyle was doing the right thing and shooting brown people for our freedom? (because of 9/11) Because I think most people believe that war should be the last resort and that which we shouldn't be in Iraq. I don't think this movie would persuade someone who's on the fence to become pro-Iraq War. Snowman_McK posted:You might as well say that Braveheart is really going to get people to ask questions about whether Scotland fighting for freedom was the right thing to do. Because it's so simplistic and one sided that there's no way it was all meant unironically. Or that Fox news is secretly trying to turn people into Obama supporters because their criticism of him is so cartoonish an inept...actually, that one sounds sort of plausible. Ha. Nice one. Snowman_McK posted:Anyway, of course people bring context in with them, and I'm not suggesting that American Sniper should have been a character assassination. But it could have asked some questions of its audience without even breaking stride. Agreed on all. I don't like the idea of a movie not only showing every dot but connecting them as well, but there are things that would have made the message clearer and stronger without as you aptly put it "breaking stride." American Sniper is not a perfect movie, or even a great one. I just don't think there's only one message being taken away from it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 08:13
|
|
|
socketwrencher posted:i think the movie wants to honor veterans, and sanitizes Kyle's story to make him more representative of the average soldier so more civilians can relate. Yes that's what it is. Make a broader message to sell more tickets and be more relatable to mainstream audiences. People call it propaganda but it's not selling us war it's selling us movie tickets and a sense of respect. Not specifically for Chris Kyle but veterans and their families in general. People can't get over the fact that Chris Kyle was documented to be an rear end in a top hat. I saw the movie before I knew the story behind it and had a radically different experience then many it seems. I recently saw The Pacific again and if you guys wanna see the dark inhumanities of war that was the goal of that series and it's wonderfully made but really extreme. Of course it didn't resonate with audiences that well though and no one talks about it today. Eugene Sledge in that series and his memoir With The Old Breed is the story of a man on the abyss of depravity, stopped short by his hardened buddy from digging the gold out of a dead Japanese soldiers mouth as the defining moment, who through years of struggling at home eventually learned to live with what he endured. A southern boy and avid hunter, one of the most powerful scenes I ever read or seen is him hunting with his dad, who's trying to reach his distant depressed son, and breaking down crying unable to kill a living thing again. But he's a different person than Chris Kyle and it's a different story. Smoothrich fucked around with this message at 08:46 on Mar 4, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 08:38
|
|
|
Cole posted:It was unambiguously wrong for us to invade Iraq in the first place. I will always agree to that. It is one of the biggest foreign policy fuckups in United States history. Actually Kyle (both movie and real Kyle) reenlisted multiple times. You can't say you are just following orders when you choose repeatedly to follow said orders once out of the situation.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 12:59
|
|
|
mugrim posted:Actually Kyle (both movie and real Kyle) reenlisted multiple times. You can't say you are just following orders when you choose repeatedly to follow said orders once out of the situation. You know it wasn't until a few years into the war we really realized how hosed everything was. By then though, many soldiers must've felt an obligation to see the mission through, out of loyalty to their fellow soldiers still there if anything. I've read numerous examples of WW2 veterans who got wounded and had their ticket back to the states to get back to their families and live in peace. But instead they'd break out of hospitals and rejoin their units out of a feeling of duty to their fellow men. In the movie it's very clear Chris Kyle doesn't see it as his mission to get revenge for 9/11 or end Saddam's tyranny and ensure free elections in Iraq, at least after a while. It's because his mission is to protect other Americans fighting overseas, as a sniper watching their backs. He'd be, in his mind, letting people down and directly be responsible for American soldiers being killed in action if he wasn't there, taking the shots he was gifted at making. I mean the movie is called American Sniper for a reason. He didn't want or know how to be anything else. It's a real legitimate problem with military veterans. In The Pacific there's a great scene when Eugene Sledge is applying for college and a lady keeps asking him what skills he learned that would translate to an academic field to study. He tells her ma'am the Marines taught me how to kill Japs and survive, it was a killing war and I got real good at killing. If that's not a course here I'm sorry. But someone had to do it, and most of my buddies were killed or wounded in the process. Many veterans are involved with NGOs and stuff trying to get military training to count as college credits or offering job programs catered to the skills people picked up in our wars in Iraq and Afghanistan but it's hard. Once again, when wars are over many veterans are forgotten and they become homeless or drug addicts and crap. You sound very ignorant when you criticize people like that. Smoothrich fucked around with this message at 13:27 on Mar 4, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 13:24
|
|
|
Most people keep reupping becuase it's their career. Once you've served 8-10 years you are pretty invested and will try to stick it out till 20. The military is very banal and making comparisons to WW2 isn't very helpful because yhe nature of the conflict and society are very different.
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 14:05
|
|
|
Armyman25 posted:Most people keep reupping becuase it's their career. Once you've served 8-10 years you are pretty invested and will try to stick it out till 20. The military is very banal and making comparisons to WW2 isn't very helpful because yhe nature of the conflict and society are very different. Well WW2 has the best movies just like the best Call of Dutys. But the military teaching you skills that don't translate very well outside the military seems true then and now from what I hear. Though the GI Bill seems very helpful. People always say how boring and repetitive military life is, but was that true even during the height of the Iraqi War? Especially for a Navy SEAL sniper or other highly trained operative? Smoothrich fucked around with this message at 14:54 on Mar 4, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 14:50
|
|
|
mugrim posted:Actually Kyle (both movie and real Kyle) reenlisted multiple times. You can't say you are just following orders when you choose repeatedly to follow said orders once out of the situation. Pop quiz: what did I say about people being brainwashed? Pop quiz: what part of my post did you completely ignore? The military is very effective at training you to 1) believe in the mission or 2) serve for no other purpose than the guy next to you. If the guy next to you is going to Iraq, you should too. Seriously, did you just pinpoint in on a couple sentences and then see red, and completely ignore the rest? Cole fucked around with this message at 15:48 on Mar 4, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 15:40
|
|
|
I'm going to just watch Full Metal Jacket again and forget this movie exists.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 15:53
|
|
|
Cole posted:Pop quiz: what did I say about people being brainwashed? I certainly did not miss it. It's interesting to me personally that you think humans are uninfluenced by a major movie in pop culture watched by millions who never read a thing about Iraq, but that they are so malleable that someone who enlists is forever blameless and without agency no matter how many times they sign back up for any terrible thing they do.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 16:07
|
|
|
mugrim posted:I certainly did not miss it. It's interesting to me personally that you think humans are uninfluenced by a major movie in pop culture watched by millions who never read a thing about Iraq, but that they are so malleable that someone who enlists is forever blameless and without agency no matter how many times they sign back up for any terrible thing they do. Are you really comparing the viewing experience of a two hour movie to 9+ weeks of basic training/boot camp?
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 16:10
|
|
|
Cole posted:Are you really comparing the viewing experience of a two hour movie to 9+ weeks of basic training/boot camp? All that 2 hour movie needs to accomplish is to connect a few dots in the popular zeitgeist that Iraq was justified and that Iraqi's/arabs/Muslims are just trying to kill us. This is a pretty easy thing to do in a narrative. That 9 weeks of boot camp you are saying will so radically change someone that killing children is something people can't judge, even years down the line when the option exists (multiple times) to stop killing kids. Are you saying that 9 weeks of boot camp absolves someone's decisions for the rest of their life?
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 16:19
|
|
|
mugrim posted:All that 2 hour movie needs to accomplish is to connect a few dots in the popular zeitgeist that Iraq was justified and that Iraqi's/arabs/Muslims are just trying to kill us. This is a pretty easy thing to do in a narrative. You're really comparing a two hour movie to 9+ weeks of basic training and boot camp... Ok dude. I'm just gonna let you have this one. You win.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 16:30
|
|
|
Cole posted:You're really comparing a two hour movie to 9+ weeks of basic training and boot camp... The first merely changes some opinion through saturation, the second removes agency from people for killing kids years later. Its traditionally much easier to change some peoples opinion through mass media than convincing people its a-okay to shoot kids. Do you disagree?
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 16:43
|
|
|
mugrim posted:The first merely changes some opinion through saturation, the second removes agency from people for killing kids years later. Its traditionally much easier to change some peoples opinion through mass media than convincing people its a-okay to shoot kids. Do you disagree? I already said you win. Learn to be a good winner.  "2+2 is 6" "No.. it's 4" "You are right." "IT'S loving FOUR YOU PIECE OF poo poo"this is how your life works isn't it
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 16:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 22:24 |
|
|
Cole posted:I already said you win. Learn to be a good winner. I'm more interested in your answer than "winning"
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 16:56
|
|