• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."
  • Community Question: What makes a good motherboard?

What do you think about "American Sniper"

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

z1ggy

Diamond Member
May 17, 2008
9,929
54
91
Overall it was a good movie but suffers the same thing lone survivor did. People who cannot be bothered to research will take it as gospel even though it knowingly distorts the truth, and to a large degree. Fury was a much better war movie.
Fury was not a real story though... So....

I imagine some of the details in American Sniper were added in, or stretched to make the movie better, but largely everything else was most likely accurate. I have yet to read the book (purchased it) so I will be able to see what was actually added in just for the movie.

I'm guessing all the things about CK being a liar or fabricator of stories is also largely true. I'd think that he was maybe already kind of an egocentric person to begin with, and being "Legend" only made that worse. Couple that with seeing his buddies die and killing over 200 people, probably only made his mental state worse.
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
28,212
8,054
136
Fury was not a real story though... So....

I imagine some of the details in American Sniper were added in, or stretched to make the movie better, but largely everything else was most likely accurate. I have yet to read the book (purchased it) so I will be able to see what was actually added in just for the movie.

I'm guessing all the things about CK being a liar or fabricator of stories is also largely true. I'd think that he was maybe already kind of an egocentric person to begin with, and being "Legend" only made that worse. Couple that with seeing his buddies die and killing over 200 people, probably only made his mental state worse.
Here is a good run down of what the movie took liberty with:

http://www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat/2015/01/23/american_sniper_fact_vs_fiction_how_accurate_is_the_chris_kyle_movie.html
 

z1ggy

Diamond Member
May 17, 2008
9,929
54
91
Right. So the movie adds in some bits to glorify/justify his presence there & the war in general. Nothing too unexpected.

What the movie does fail to do is kind of portray that CK sometimes may have enjoyed, or at least found no remorse in killing any of the Iraqi people.

Either way, was a decent movie.
 

bshole

Diamond Member
Mar 12, 2013
8,302
1,203
126
Right. So the movie adds in some bits to glorify/justify his presence there & the war in general. Nothing too unexpected.

What the movie does fail to do is kind of portray that CK sometimes may have enjoyed, or at least found no remorse in killing any of the Iraqi people.

Either way, was a decent movie.
He enjoyed killing people and he loved war. I don't think I have ever read or heard of another soldier who said it was "fun" to kill people. A devout Christian who was compulsive liar and reveled in killing people, why am I not surprised.

As for his longest confirmed kill, Kyle targeted a roof-bound enemy insurgent aiming a rocket launcher at American troops outside Sadr City. And the shot did not, once made, alert Iraqi insurgents to their position and create a dramatic firestorm that disillusioned Kyle, as in the movie. (Elsewhere in his memoir he writes: “I loved what I did, I still do ... I’m not lying or exaggerating to say it was fun.”)
Like many soldiers, Kyle was deeply religious and saw the Iraq War through that prism. He tattooed one of his arms with a red crusader’s cross, wanting “everyone to know I was a Christian.” When he learned that insurgents had placed a bounty on his head and had named him al-Shaitan Ramadi—the Devil of Ramadi—he felt “proud.” He “hated the damn savages” he was fighting.In his book, he recounts telling an Army colonel, “I don’t shoot people with Korans. I’d like to, but I don’t.”
 
Last edited:

sportage

Diamond Member
Feb 1, 2008
8,898
1,167
126
I had it right.
And as I figured all alone, Eastwood now admitted this was indeed an anti war themed film.
Knowing Eastwood and his films of past always giving little digs and jabs at this idea of violence with no remorse.

Take his film UNFORGIVEN.
And considering Eastwood played a cowboy back in his early years.
In his film UNFORGIVEN, Eastwood challenges this idea that the wild wild west was all that wild.
That coldly gunning down a friend or foe had its consequences. And gun toting hard cord burley guys probably cried in private, haunted by the lives they took.

Then you have Million Dollar Baby. The glamor of prize fighting also had its consequences.
I'd guest the tragic story of Muhammad Ali might have had something to do with Eastwood making Million Dollar Baby.

And then comes American Sniper.
While this sniper felt well at home and had found his niche when touring over in Iraq, back in the states with his family was quite another reality for the sniper.
So much so that it nearly destroyed him and everything that was normal in his life.

Eastwood was making a point here too, and it wasn't American flag waving per se.
People left the theater feeling a sense of patriotic flag waving, but missed Eastwood's entire point.

Eastwood tends to stick to the theme in his films of challenging this idea from some disillusioned people that action not necessarily having a reaction.
And that reaction not having its downside consequences.

What gets me is Eastwood registered as a republican, given his liberal views in film making.
Or... Is he up to something?
If Eastwood should ever come out with a film about conservative politicians, republicans better run for the hills and take cover. I suspect it won't be pretty. ;)
 

rudder

Lifer
Nov 9, 2000
19,431
82
91
Overall it was a good movie but suffers the same thing lone survivor did. People who cannot be bothered to research will take it as gospel even though it knowingly distorts the truth, and to a large degree. Fury was a much better war movie.
American Sniper was not a documentary. It was based on the book by Chris Kyle. You just cant squeeze a book into 2 hours of film and often time dramatizations are added... well because it is a business product and again, not a documentary.

I really liked the movie BlackHawk down. That movie, though, took many liberties in telling the story of that battle in Mogadishu... combining characters etc.

Then you have movies like U-571 that presented a tense action packed story that totally re-wrote history. Undoubtedly people will go watch The Imitation Game and say WTF... I thought Americans captured the enigma machine.

With American Sniper I believe Clint Eastwood accomplished what he was trying to do in telling this story.
 
Last edited:

Blanky

Platinum Member
Oct 18, 2014
2,457
12
46
Fury was not a real story though... So....

I imagine some of the details in American Sniper were added in, or stretched to make the movie better, but largely everything else was most likely accurate. I have yet to read the book (purchased it) so I will be able to see what was actually added in just for the movie.

I'm guessing all the things about CK being a liar or fabricator of stories is also largely true. I'd think that he was maybe already kind of an egocentric person to begin with, and being "Legend" only made that worse. Couple that with seeing his buddies die and killing over 200 people, probably only made his mental state worse.
Largely everything wasn't accurate. He killed a lot of people but apparently the movie completely misportrayed the guy that the movie is exactly about. I would say portraying kyle as a modest, head-down go home and be quiet individual is willingly and massively dishonest as he was nothing of the sort.

Fury's lack of being a real story is exactly why I was able to enjoy it. Other than a final scene in which americans take on an unrealistic battle competency the rest of the movie came across to me as extremely believable and in fact it was more honest than american sniper up until the end.
 

Blanky

Platinum Member
Oct 18, 2014
2,457
12
46
American Sniper was not a documentary. It was based on the book by Chris Kyle. You just cant squeeze a book into 2 hours of film and often time dramatizations are added... well because it is a business product and again, not a documentary.
Deliberate lies are not dramatizations, and this movie like lone survivor, like many war movies, doesn't simply shrink things down to fit in a movie, it materially changes them to misrepresent what is knowing to not be actual, real truth. The argument that "it's just a movie" that I see so often thinks that saying that alone accounts for wanton lying. For me it doesn't.

I've already said that lone survivor was a huge piece of shit, though. That movie was way, way worse than american sniper for making up crap. Overall AS was a good movie and I think it has things to be learned from it, even though it could have been made more honestly. Probably if they showed Kyle as enjoying killing people, which he said he did, people wouldn't take the message so well.

I'm not really surprised he enjoyed killing people. Many people fail to realize that many soldiers have trained for a long time and are chomping at the bit to get out there and start kicking ass. It's one of the things war does; it often makes soldiers enjoy what they are doing. This is less a slight on Kyle than an accurate reflection of war. The enemy is dehumanized and turned into nothing more than a target to shoot at, then high five your buddy when somebody's head flies off. Few soldiers want to admit how fun it can be juiced up on adrenaline with your buddies reigning down hell on an enemy.
 

cabri

Diamond Member
Nov 3, 2012
3,617
1
81
I had it right.
And as I figured all alone, Eastwood now admitted this was indeed an anti war themed film.
Knowing Eastwood and his films of past always giving little digs and jabs at this idea of violence with no remorse.
I have not read about such; not questioning you of the fact, but where did you hear/read of such?
 

z1ggy

Diamond Member
May 17, 2008
9,929
54
91
Deliberate lies are not dramatizations, and this movie like lone survivor, like many war movies, doesn't simply shrink things down to fit in a movie, it materially changes them to misrepresent what is knowing to not be actual, real truth. The argument that "it's just a movie" that I see so often thinks that saying that alone accounts for wanton lying. For me it doesn't.

I've already said that lone survivor was a huge piece of shit, though. That movie was way, way worse than american sniper for making up crap. Overall AS was a good movie and I think it has things to be learned from it, even though it could have been made more honestly. Probably if they showed Kyle as enjoying killing people, which he said he did, people wouldn't take the message so well.

I'm not really surprised he enjoyed killing people. Many people fail to realize that many soldiers have trained for a long time and are chomping at the bit to get out there and start kicking ass. It's one of the things war does; it often makes soldiers enjoy what they are doing. This is less a slight on Kyle than an accurate reflection of war. The enemy is dehumanized and turned into nothing more than a target to shoot at, then high five your buddy when somebody's head flies off. Few soldiers want to admit how fun it can be juiced up on adrenaline with your buddies reigning down hell on an enemy.
Last paragraph I agree with, and is def. a big theme in Fury. All those guys LOVED killing SS, I mean, they really seemed to enjoy it. Then again, the army almost makes you get that way. I can't say how because I've never been in the military, but I know plenty of folks who are/were. I agree and think AS was extremely biased toward making all the Iraqi people look like shit. Obviously, there were tons of bad guys there... but the movie elevated CK to a virtual God/hero. There was a classic antagonist/protagonist, when that simply wasn't the case. I think that's my biggest issue with the movie. Soldiers being brainwashed/coerced into enjoying killing people, is no shocker to me.
 

Caravaggio

Senior member
Aug 3, 2013
508
1
0
It is based on a partly true ghost-written story about a US Navy Seal sniper. He survived the Iraq war and was fatally shot by an American on his return to the US.
Snipers are considered a special sort of soldier. They are skilled, for sure, but their attachment to repeated cold-killing of human targets earns them some distaste in military circles. In the UK forces they are called "sneaky f***ers". Clever, but morally incomplete.
Kyle killed hundreds of people and to cope with this guilt he labelled them all 'bad'. Snipers have steady hands, good eyesight and stunted human insight.

Clint Eastwood has made a fortune embellishing that stereotype which is very popular in gun-loving USA.
For my money there was not enough on the science and ballistics necessary for long-range accurate shooting.
 
Last edited:

bshole

Diamond Member
Mar 12, 2013
8,302
1,203
126
Sidebar:

Elite snipers are soon to be an anachronism anyways. The technology is rapidly reaching the point that any joe six pack can be an elite shooter.

Someday soon, I imagine Americans will use completely automated sniper rifles that need nothing other than installation in the sniper hole.

The new TrackingPoint sniper rifle doesn’t fire when you pull the trigger. Rather, it fires when it knows it will hit the target you’re aiming at. And then streams video to the included iPad mini to allow you to share your hunting or sharpshooting experience with Facebook, YouTube, or maybe even Al Jazeera.

Now, the company says, everyone can be an expert marksman.

“With TrackingPoint, even a novice shooter can become an elite long-range marksman in minutes, accurately and effectively engaging targets out to 1,200 yards,” the company said in a press release.
:
:
The shooter simple tells the rifle what he or she is aiming at by locking a laser on the target. The gun’s built-in laser range finder, compass, environmental sensors to gauge wind speeds, inertial measurement unit, ballistics computer, and networked tracking engine then engage. But the rifle only fires when you’re holding it in exactly the right direction to hit the target, ensuring that even the unsteadiest and untrained hands can deploy death from a distance. And every shot is recorded and streamed to your nearby iPad.


http://venturebeat.com/2013/05/18/this-22k-sniper-rifle-comes-with-a-wifi-server-usb-ports-an-ipad-mini-and-aims-itself/
 
Last edited:

Nebor

Lifer
Jun 24, 2003
29,586
11
76
Sidebar:

Elite snipers are soon to be an anachronism anyways. The technology is rapidly reaching the point that any joe six pack can be an elite shooter.

Someday soon, I imagine Americans will use completely automated sniper rifles that need nothing other than installation in the sniper hole.



http://venturebeat.com/2013/05/18/this-22k-sniper-rifle-comes-with-a-wifi-server-usb-ports-an-ipad-mini-and-aims-itself/
Lots of people can shoot, not many can be a sniper.
 

rommelrommel

Platinum Member
Dec 7, 2002
2,743
338
136
Sidebar:

Elite snipers are soon to be an anachronism anyways. The technology is rapidly reaching the point that any joe six pack can be an elite shooter.

Someday soon, I imagine Americans will use completely automated sniper rifles that need nothing other than installation in the sniper hole.



http://venturebeat.com/2013/05/18/this-22k-sniper-rifle-comes-with-a-wifi-server-usb-ports-an-ipad-mini-and-aims-itself/
Marketing. Those systems are a long ways away from being able to gauge wind conditions, although they do an excellent job at calculating come up. They are also mostly useless on moving targets. I'm sure those things will come tho, or maybe DARPA's guided bullet will be the solution.
 

rommelrommel

Platinum Member
Dec 7, 2002
2,743
338
136
Last paragraph I agree with, and is def. a big theme in Fury. All those guys LOVED killing SS, I mean, they really seemed to enjoy it. Then again, the army almost makes you get that way. I can't say how because I've never been in the military, but I know plenty of folks who are/were. I agree and think AS was extremely biased toward making all the Iraqi people look like shit. Obviously, there were tons of bad guys there... but the movie elevated CK to a virtual God/hero. There was a classic antagonist/protagonist, when that simply wasn't the case. I think that's my biggest issue with the movie. Soldiers being brainwashed/coerced into enjoying killing people, is no shocker to me.
With a General like this:

“Men, you are the first Negro tankers ever to fight in the American army. I would never have asked for you if you weren’t good. I have nothing but the best in my army. I don’t care what color you are, so long as you go up there and kill those Kraut sonsab*tches!” — George S. Patton

“I’m proud to fight here beside you. Now let’s cut the guts out of those Krauts and get the Hell to Berlin.” — George S. Patton

“We are going to kill German b*stards. I would prefer to skin them alive, but gentlemen, I fear some of our people at home would accuse me of being too rough.” — George S. Patton

“We’ll win this war, but we’ll win it only by fighting and by showing the Germans that we’ve got more guts than they have; or ever will have. We’re not going to just shoot the sons-of-b*tches, we’re going to rip out their living Godd*mned guts and use them to grease the treads of our tanks. We’re going to murder those lousy Hun c*cksuckers by the bushel-f*cking-basket. War is a bloody, killing business. You’ve got to spill their blood, or they will spill yours. Rip them up the belly. Shoot them in the guts. When shells are hitting all around you and you wipe the dirt off your face and realize that instead of dirt it’s the blood and guts of what once was your best friend beside you, you’ll know what to do!” — George S. Patton

“Sure, we want to go home. We want this war over with. The quickest way to get it over with is to go get the b*stards who started it. The quicker they are whipped, the quicker we can go home. The shortest way home is through Berlin and Tokyo. And when we get to Berlin, I am personally going to shoot that paper hanging son-of-a-b*tch Hitler just like I’d shoot a snake”. — George S. Patton
 

Caravaggio

Senior member
Aug 3, 2013
508
1
0
I can't say how because I've never been in the military, but I know plenty of folks who are/were.
Well, if you want to know more about what happened then, read "Doing Battle" by Paul Fusserl.
You mention the film Fury. Fusserl was in the US infantry at that place and time. He saw his buddies shoot German prisoners and describes the nerves a grunt gets a few minutes before he attacks, in an uphill assault, a strongly held German position. He became a US prof. of Literature. He has a conscience and can express his ideas clearly and with power.
Something you don't get explicitly from 'Sniper'.
 

z1ggy

Diamond Member
May 17, 2008
9,929
54
91
With a General like this:
The part I hate most about any war is that the military turns what are normal, caring and harmless people, into hateful, blood lusting murderers. At least it did back when their was drafts. Now with a volunteer military, I'd suspect there are many less "harmless" people. I would guess many go in looking to fight.

Not that all people turn out this way. But the fact that command tries to dehumanize and portray all of the enemy as evil, is gross. But... It's war and what needs to be done.
 

rommelrommel

Platinum Member
Dec 7, 2002
2,743
338
136
The part I hate most about any war is that the military turns what are normal, caring and harmless people, into hateful, blood lusting murderers. At least it did back when their was drafts. Now with a volunteer military, I'd suspect there are many less "harmless" people. I would guess many go in looking to fight.

Not that all people turn out this way. But the fact that command tries to dehumanize and portray all of the enemy as evil, is gross. But... It's war and what needs to be done.
With a draft you really do need to bring out that killer instinct I am sure. There have been studies done on how often people would actually direct fire at the enemy, and especially in the civil war and ww1/ww2 the numbers were very very low, I think 1 in 10 or so. The rest would purposely miss, pretend to shoot, fire blindly, or simply not engage the enemy. The numbers went up in Vietnam via training to overcome resistance to shooting a human being... human shaped targets, concerted efforts to dehumanize the North Vietnamese, etc.
 

smackababy

Lifer
Oct 30, 2008
27,028
75
86
I would guess many go in looking to fight.
Having been in the military recently and having interacted with quite a few military (both past and present), this is just not true.

Sure, a few might join up because they "want to fight", but it I doubt they make it far. Most of these guys didn't make the choice to go to war. And, they are put in a kill or be killed situation. It has little to do with dehumanizing the enemy, as much as humanizing those oppressed by them AND a bond forged through hardship with those around you (be it simply in training or in battle).

We see all the time (even in this movie) that the Iraqis are all against us, even in secret. That simply isn't the case. While some were (and still are), a lot of them are also very grateful of the improved conditions they have with Saddam gone.

And, trust me, the military doesn't turn innocent, harmless civilians into rampaging murders. We are already, as a race, violent and emotional beings. American Idol and sports fandem easily turn just as many into raving lunatics. Traffic jams? Watch out. I'm sure quite a few members would come to blows here in real life if the discussion about AMD vs NVIDIA were brought up.

If anything, service members are far more restrictive in their outbursts, due to the nature of them being brought into a strict discipline pattern of obeying authority unless it is illegal.
 

Fern

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Sep 30, 2003
26,916
172
106
I have not read about such; not questioning you of the fact, but where did you hear/read of such?
I've heard that too.

It was reported on TV, so no link etc.

Fern
 

Fern

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Sep 30, 2003
26,916
172
106
Sidebar:

Elite snipers are soon to be an anachronism anyways. The technology is rapidly reaching the point that any joe six pack can be an elite shooter.

Someday soon, I imagine Americans will use completely automated sniper rifles that need nothing other than installation in the sniper hole.
-snip-
I think you're confusing 'snipers' with 'marksmen'. A sniper is much more than a good marksman.

Fern
 

Fern

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Sep 30, 2003
26,916
172
106
What do you think about "American Sniper"
1. It's a Clint Eastwood movie so may well be pretty good. I liked Unforgiven and Gran Torino.

2. I may see it when it's available at Redbox.

Fern
 

bradly1101

Diamond Member
May 5, 2013
4,690
293
126
www.bradlygsmith.org
This quote from his book helps me realize I could never show any interest in him or the movie: “I hate the d*** savages, and I’ve been fighting and I always will. I love killing bad guys. Even with the pain, I loved what I was doing. Maybe war isn’t really fun, but I certainly was enjoying it.
 

unokitty

Diamond Member
Jan 5, 2012
3,349
1
0

The part I hate most about any war is that the military turns what are normal, caring and harmless people, into hateful, blood lusting murderers. At least it did back when their was drafts. Now with a volunteer military, I'd suspect there are many less "harmless" people. I would guess many go in looking to fight.

Not that all people turn out this way. But the fact that command tries to dehumanize and portray all of the enemy as evil, is gross. But... It's war and what needs to be done.
“A true war story is never moral. It does not instruct, nor encourage virtue, nor suggest models of proper human behavior, nor restrain men from doing the things men have always done. If a story seems moral, do not believe it. If at the end of a war story you feel uplifted, or if you feel that some small bit of rectitude has been salvaged from the larger waste, then you have been made the victim of a very old and terrible lie. There is no rectitude whatsoever. There is no virtue. As a first rule of thumb, therefore, you can tell a true war story by its absolute and uncompromising allegiance to obscenity and evil. ” ― Tim O'Brien, The Things They Carried
O'Brien was drafted in '68. I was drafted in '69.

He was a grunt. I was a dog soldier.

In your post, you state that that makes us both either 'hateful, blood lusting murderers' or "harmless" people.

Okay with me, if you want to think that.

But, tell me, what does that make President Obama?

After all, with his drone program, he has a much, much higher body count than any sniper has ever had.

And what about the defense contractors that make millions selling war materials? All the time contributing millions to politicians like President Obama.

Are they are morally superior because they never see the people that they, or their materials, kill?

And what about the tax payers? They paid for my weapons, my ammunition, and my transportation? They morally superior as well?

Fact is that War is a Racket. Always has been.

It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives.

A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of the people. Only a small "inside" group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few, at the expense of the very many. Out of war a few people make huge fortunes.
Blame the 'hateful, blood lusting' murdering soldiers if you want. The politicians, and their defense contractor supporters, will you love you for that...

Uno
 
Last edited:

ASK THE COMMUNITY