Part 1/5 – Review of American Sniper by Clint Eastwood

By Request

Reactions to recent posts have had an unintended consequence of making me believe you wouldn’t mind reading more about my military related struggles with the hopes of understanding your less talkative family members’ own strife (using the timely film American Sniper as a vessel). I am flattered and have decided to accept the charge. As you’ll see, though, while I began doing it with you in mind, I gained a clarity relevant to my own life. I saw how this challenge will help me. So that’s why I’m really doing it. But I believe that help is help is help, and that means if it helps me, it might help someone else. So here we go. Together.

Today I’ll set the stage with my criteria for the film review. Throughout the rest of the week we’ll get into the nitty gritty.

A magazine writing course taught the importance of asking yourself what your article, your story, is about about. Lucky for you and I, I recently came across a movie review that put that concept a bit more clearly. “It’s not what [the story’s] about. It’s how it’s about it.”

American Sniper is about PTSD. There should be no argument there. How does Eastwood go about PTSD? Lazily. Embarrassingly so. (Want a movie that doesn’t go about PTSD lazily? Check out David Ayer’s Harsh Times.)

Sniper’s story is fairly straightforward. There’s this tragedy that is inconceivable. Top US sniper Chris Kyle who only recently is beginning to overcome PTSD’s effects is killed by a veteran he was helping to overcome PTSD. Though you don’t find this out until just before the credits roll.

Surprise endings don’t do it for me. They never have. Consequently, I don’t mind spoiling this movie because the issue–PTSD–far outweighs any entertainment value that the surprise ending provides. Let’s be honest, movies don’t change the world anyhow. Stories do. And for me, if a story relies on a surprise ending for strength, besides being lazy, its power is diminished upon each subsequent telling. This thinking inevitably leads to: any story that loses power with each telling isn’t worth telling in the first place. (Test the Greatest Story if you don’t like my thinking.) But again, it’s not Sniper’s story that is lazy (powerless), it’s Eastwood’s telling of it–how he went about it.

Maybe I’ve just seen more movies than most folks, but I was bored during the first half of the film. For most of it really. Not because I’ve been there or done that. But because every other recent contemporary war movie has been there or done that, and in most cases done it better. Two examples stand out prominently. The Hurt Locker for juxtaposition of home life vs. deployed life (ref cereal debate) and Zero Dark Thirty for realism (ref “Usama…Usama” whisper). As moviegoers, we’re not in a vacuum. Eastwood should’ve known better. He had a story that is so inherently powerful there was no reason to tell it in such a way that places it alongside those two films in my mind. Yet there it sits. Rather than do the story right, he (lazily) chose to compete and he loses. Like my brother often says, “It would have been a good movie…if every other movie hadn’t already come out.” In my words, American Sniper is a lazy telling of a story whose intended audience deserves better.


Outline For The Week:

Tuesday – Was it relevant that he had more confirmed kills than any other sniper?

Wednesday – Never mind how I felt while I watched the funeral procession, how do I feel now?

Thursday – But, then, what do I know? I don’t have PTSD.

Friday – Or do I?



  1. mcbeales

    Think my problem with film is that it feels unfinished. The ending had to be curtailed for legal reasons as I believe case still ongoing, but there is a whole different movie in those last few minutes. At the very least there would have been a cohesive theme if the movie had been made in, say, a year from now.

    Liked by 2 people

  2. noelleg44

    I’m interested in your viewpoint, coming from a vet. I deliberately did not see Hurt Locker or Zero Dark Thirty because as a military Mom, those movies would make me way too anxious. I did want to see American Sniper, though, largely because of its enormous popularity. Interesting that the west coast and northeast showings of the film were not well attended, most of the popularity being in the south and mid-west. Based on some of the comments coming from the Hollywood elite, with their god-like pronouncements, I can understand why.

    Liked by 2 people

  3. gene

    I’m no military expert, I just enjoy watching movies and I liked American Sniper. Apparently a lot of others did as well because it just became the second highest-earning war film of all time. Its a movie, not a documentary on War, PTSD or anything else…just a movie. That’s what Hollywood does, it makes movies and we go see them, most aren’t all that good…this one just happens to be better than most I’ve seen lately.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Pete Deakon

      Hey Gene,

      I can’t tell if you’re looking to debate or just wanting to chime in. If debate is your intent, I’ll first offer Mark Twain’s, “Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect.” Then I’d like to remind you that my review isn’t complete yet. Four more glorious days of discussing this movie are in store. lol Lastly, I do not believe there is such a thing as objectivity when it comes to things on screens. Meaning, documentaries are just a dry way of telling a story. Not some higher level of fact or truth or whatever. Where you and I agree is that most movies aren’t great, and this affirms my thought that someone with as much power (budget) and capacity to tell a story as Eastwood need do better than just be better than the rest.


      Liked by 1 person

      • gene

        Not debating, everyone is entitled to an opinion and in this case I seem to find myself on the side of the majority – which in itself is a little scary when I think about it! I intend on reading the rest of your review.

        Liked by 2 people

  4. Bowrag

    I’m eager to read the rest of your thoughts. I do find it interesting that you thought it was lazy. I tend to agree with Gene above…. Its a movie. Its meant to tell a story, entertain, make us think. Most that see it don’t understand PTSD as much as military folks and their families. I don’t know much but I do know that I enjoyed it. And the theatre full of people were just in shock and awe at the end. Deathly silent. In the toilet every man at the urinal agreed when I said, “Hell of a flick”. Others tend to agree to with the enormous amount of money it has generated. So…. who knows?

    Liked by 1 person

  5. Pingback: Part 1/5 – Review of American Sniper by Clint Eastwood | All Things Chronic

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s