American Sniper: Moving Target

American Sniper presents a moving target for those who intend to critically assess it or its director, Clint Eastwood.  Should the film be assessed primarily as a true account of Chris Kyle or as a work of fiction?  If one intends to assess American Sniper as a docudrama of Chris Kyle’s service in Iraq, then Mr. Eastwood has less license to deviate from the known facts.  Alternatively, if one proposes to assess this movie as a film based on true events, then Mr. Eastwood has greater license to deviate from the known events in pursuit of his artistic vision.  Without first selecting the type of film American Sniper purports to be, the basis for assessing the movie is likely to shift before one can meaningfully discuss it, especially given the emotional reaction engendered by the film’s underlying theme--Iraq.  Nonetheless, in either case, Mr. Eastwood has license to deviate from the known facts.  It is the degree and way in which he deviates that is the basis for criticizing this film.

There are two key criticisms of the film.  First, it fails to sever the erroneous and deceitful link the Bush administration tried to forge between September 11 and Saddam Hussein’s Iraq.  If one approaches this movie as a docudrama of Chris Kyle’s service in Iraq, then the presence of a link between September 11 and Iraq, however false, is justifiable.  Similarly, as a film based on true events the director had the dramatic license to link or de-link September 11 to Iraq.  In either case, however, exploring the veracity of the linkage could have provided dramatic tension.  Instead, director Eastwood chose to let the false connection stand.


Second, the movie focuses on violence directed against individuals as a remedy for the political issues underlying the Iraq Was.  The deaths attributed to Chris Kyle or his unit are portrayed as an effective tactic for defeating Iraq.  Yet, the reality, apparent during Kyle’s four tours, was that shooting Iraqis was not effective, although quite costly.  Journalists, diplomats, and politicians recounted the failure of U.S. efforts to establish democracy, or at least, to reduce the violence in Iraq.  It was rather difficult not to notice this downward spiral, although the Chris Kyle portrayed in this movie did not notice.  He simply continued to do his duty and kill individuals while IEDs continued to take its toll on Americans.

The deaths attributed to Chris Kyle or his unit are portrayed as an effective tactic for defeating Iraq.  Yet, the reality, apparent during Kyle’s four tours, was that shooting Iraqis was not effective, although quite costly.  

Related to the celebration of individual violence is the way Iraqis are portrayed; they are almost irrelevant to the events concerning Iraq.  Even when Eastwood recognizes an Iraqi, it is an archetypical villain created for Kyle to combat, and eventually kill.  The villain is an Iraqi sniper named Mustafa, a character that departs from the actual events of Kyle’s life.  Mustafa is an artifact of director Eastwood’s dramatic license, but one with only a back story as an Olympic shooter. Why does Eastwood use an Olympic “hero” as a villain?  Mustafa represents a substantial deviation from the true facts of Kyle’s story and shows that other deviations certainly could have been made.  Even when an Iraqi is introduced, the fictional Mustafa has no cause, no conflicts, and no motive other than his malevolence. 

If Mr. Eastwood or supporters of American Sniper want to argue that the intent was to stick as close to the actual events of Kyle’s life as possible, then a more basic question is why Mr. Eastwood picked Kyle as a character on which to base a movie.  The Kyle portrayed in the film is one dimensional with no real friends or enough intellectual curiosity ask why the U.S. in Iraq with inadequate body armor and Humvees, assuming he believes it is necessary to stop Mustafa and the rest of the Iraqis from invading the U.S.  The film has little of the nuance or texture that Mr. Eastwood has shown in other films.  In a film where violent death is a key element, Mr. Eastwood passes over the meaning of death.  As one quote from Eastwood’s The Unforgiven illustrates, he is more than able to imbue his films with philosophical undertones about death, “it's a hell of a thing, killing a man. Take away all he's got and all he's ever gonna have.  Why doesn’t Mr. Eastwood pose issues like these for Kyle to address? 

In a film where violent death is a key element, Mr. Eastwood passes over the meaning of death. 

Here the only philosophical meaning in the American Sniper comes from Kyle’s father who tells the young Kyle that there are three types of people: sheep, wolves, and sheepdogs who protect the sheep from the wolves.  Has Mustafa’s father given his son the same parable?  If the U.S. has invaded Iraq, who is the wolf?

Regardless of whether this is film is a docudrama or based on true events, Eastwood had the dramatic license to present more context than he has.  One reason for why he has not is to propagandize Kyle’s life is to support the Iraq War and conservatism in much the same way as he attempted to support a conservative agenda by talking to an empty chair.  In both cases the reality was missing and all we get is Eastwood’s delusions.