This movie is a prime example of modern propaganda. American Sniper is hardly any different from the propaganda film being premiered near the end of the movie Inglorious Basterds (2009). I think people have a hard time recognizing something as propaganda if the material is promoting ideas/ideology they already agree with.
The story of the sniper portrayed in this film is problematic in so many different ways. Even if we take his story completely at face value, why aren't we paying more attention to the deep ethical problems it raises? For example, at what point does the value of innocent lives outweigh our own need for security? This is not even to mention the many lies this man has been caught telling. Simply put, I'm just not buying it.
I believe in a lot of ways it could certainly be seen that way. This was one mans account of his time during war. A lot of his stories have been proven to be exaggerations at the best and lies at the worst. I'm not sure that killing, even during war time, should be glorified, it's a necessary evil.
I honestly don't understand why this movie has any support at all. It is so unbelievably jingoistic to the point of being reminiscent of Nazi propaganda. This movie is like the satire of propaganda films in Inglorious Bastards. Any movie glorifying a sociopath who claimed himself that "killing the savages was fun" and that he "wishes he could have killed all of them"
Forgetting for a second that, supposedly, the point of the Iraq war was to liberate these people and killing indiscriminately and calling them savages rings just a bit counter to this goal, no sane person has ever said that murdering over a hundred real, living human beings was fun.
Chris Kyle is a psychopath and American Sniper is an abomination.
I'm usually the first to call out a country for spewing bullsh*t propaganda, and as patriotic as this movie is, it's not propaganda. Just showing the story of an awesome sniper. Just because it's a "yeah, America!" kind of movie doesn't make it propaganda. I do however kind of associate it with the film shown in Inglorious Basterds, lol.
The truth is never controversial it is what is flat facts. You can worship him all you want but at the end of the day he was found to have in fact lied about his altercation with Jesse Ventura. Does this change what he did or reflect poorly on his character that's up to debate depending on what all as fabricated. He was a Navy Seal, he did have over 160 credited kills but that does not change the fact that he lied and defamed an innocent person and was profiting from its publicity. As for the film it blatantly ignores the truth of why we went to Iraq and couples it to 9/11 which is false. The country of Iraq while not innocent or a model state had nothing to do with 9/11 and the movie would have you believe the two are related.
Years after a certain piece of propaganda is released, people ask how something so obvious was seen as normal. Yet their generation will produce another and the cycle, if not stopped, will continue endlessly. Every group after another finds something incredibly problematic from past media, much like we see Nazi posters, films, etc. Usually, I believe it's best to stay collected in an argument, but this damaging piece of cinematography is a testament to how willing we are as humans to accept immoral things when masked by a front of a "heroic story". Our elders and our parents were are guidance for morality, whether we like it or not, so I propose you this: If are parents lived through the time when "Colored Only" signs were everywhere, are we going to see racism as okay? We won't. This is because we have our own minds, and we cannot let filth like American Sniper blur the lines between right and wrong.
I feel it was unintentional propaganda. Even though it was meant to tell the story about a war hero's experience with leaving war. It was directed to show the how difficult veterans have it, which I see as evidence that war only does harm in the long run. People on Fox News however are going to use for their propaganda against liberals. They have this mindset that we hate veterans, I don't were this came from, but it is their mind. They are pushing it for the wrong reasons. People will eventually see it as a movie about patriotism and completely miss the point of Chris Kyle's story. I honestly think that the movie was not intended for propaganda, but people will use it for that. Much like people use V for Vendetta as libertarian propaganda. Though it was mostly about revenge than the political message. These people never read the graphic novel, just like Fox News viewers, a lot of them at least, never read Chris Kyle's book. Granted I haven't either, but I haven't got around to it. I'm trusting some of my close friends who have read it.
I'm not going to lie, it is a good movie if you are willing to concede that certain events of it did not happen. Besides the obvious inclination to want to propagandize the "glorious" glamour of war. This is military propaganda at its best. I'm not saying that the guy didn't do his duty, that's not the problem, he did what he had to do. It's a war, I understand. But instead of the film having some sort of depth, it was all very black and white- Americans are good guys, anyone not American isn't. The best they could do was make an Iraqi or Afghan family (who could tell) impartial. The guy doesn't even battle his own demons. Wouldn't be surprised if a bunch of impressionable young guys went to their closest recruitment centers after watching this movie.
If you watch the film as I did, with no prior knowledge of Chris Kyle (I had literally never heard of him before), you instantly see this movie is not a movie glorifying what he did. This film is focused on showing that war is Hell, before, during, and after, and it will haunt you for life. He is emotionally in turmoil after killing a child and a women as his first two kills, and later he almost has to kill another child who is playing with an RPG launcher and is aiming it at a hummer. How is this "propaganda"? He silently pleads with the kid to drop the gun, and he nearly cries when the kid drops it and runs off, because he was almost forced to shoot him to prevent him killing his brothers in arms. The message of the film was clear to me: Chris Kyle was devoted to protecting his Country from men making conscious decisions to harm it. Regardless of ethnicity. Propaganda? Please, stop kidding yourself.
Movies that attempt to depict complex and polarizing people and events always run the risk of being declared propaganda by one political faction or the other. The role of a sniper in the military is one such example. There is no way to tell the story without being accused of either glorifying or demonizing it, depending on how it is told and who is doing the disapproving.
People that love this country and are willing to defend it do not need propaganda. Also people that are willing to lay their lives down to defend this country's interests do not care about how war is taken by everyone in this country. This is simply a story about an extraordinary individual and his time serving his country.
Calling it propaganda is just an excuse to hate it by people who can't understand what he had to do. To some of the people in the yes column, yeah he killed terrorists. Probably some innocents. But if someone was about to kill your entire squad of people closer than family, I'd like to see you sit by. Furthermore, if one innocent Iraqi has to die for ten terrorists to die, so be it. If each terrorist kills ten people, it's one or one hundred. It could be viewed as truthful propaganda (if that's a thing) but Chris Kyle is hero because he had the guts to make decisions for all of us to stupid or to do so.
This story is based on the life of Chris Kyle, a famed Navy Seal who happens to be one of the most lethal snipers in American History. How can it be viewed as Propaganda when its true? There were female suicide bombers in Iraq. For all of those who keep saying Chris Kyle is racist, you need to understand the emotional and physical stress soldiers had in the war. I think it is unfair to judge Chris Kyle based on one statement.
(He said sarcastically)
Allow me to start off with a quote:
""It was my duty to shoot the enemy, and I don't regret it. My regrets are for the people I couldn't save: Marines, soldiers, buddies. I'm not naive, and I don't romanticize war. The worst moments of my life have come as a SEAL. But I can stand before God with a clear conscience about doing my job."
He became a sniper to protect his comrades, not to kill people for the fun of it. I would be willing to bet that the people on the "Yes" side of this question have never bothered to read the book. If you bothered to read the book as I have, you would know the reason he was not "a racist psycho who raves about the joy of killing and wanted nothing more than more blood on his hands."
Furthermore, he only says that he can justify his kills, not that he liked them. I cannot stress enough how major a difference it is. Allow me to ask a question. If a man was threatening to kill your brother, would you stand idly by and let that person kill him? Or would you try to protect him?
Thank you for wasting my time :p