American Sniper - Clint Eastwood's latest movie (1 Viewer)

[MaxThreshold]

It is becoming clear why there are people who have so much hatred towards this movie. It counters their worldview that American soldiers are a bunch of uneducated savages who indescrimitavly slaughter women and children in peaceful-loving self-governing countries who are minding their own business. Most informed people would take issue with about a half-dozen things in that worldview, but those thoughts are wired in their brain. This movie is an assault on several of them. Their emotional response makes sense. Their words, not so much.

I haven't seen the movie, so I can't say I hate it. I'm positive that this is probably the most ridiculous post of the thread though. You're definitely living up to your reputation here. Congrats?

Thanks. Coming from an American/verern-hating nut job, that is a huge compliment.

Whose judgmental now?And you couldn't be more wrong. You have no idea how much of my family and friends are vets. You seem to be the one without a clue here. Congrats!

How many vets do you have in the family? And do you tell them to their face that they are murderers of women and children? Or do you save your courage and conviction for the privacy of the Innernets?

 

[SproutDaddy]

It is becoming clear why there are people who have so much hatred towards this movie. It counters their worldview that American soldiers are a bunch of uneducated savages who indescrimitavly slaughter women and children in peaceful-loving self-governing countries who are minding their own business. Most informed people would take issue with about a half-dozen things in that worldview, but those thoughts are wired in their brain. This movie is an assault on several of them. Their emotional response makes sense. Their words, not so much.

I haven't seen the movie, so I can't say I hate it. I'm positive that this is probably the most ridiculous post of the thread though. You're definitely living up to your reputation here. Congrats?

Thanks. Coming from an American/verern-hating nut job, that is a huge compliment.

Whose judgmental now?And you couldn't be more wrong. You have no idea how much of my family and friends are vets. You seem to be the one without a clue here. Congrats!

How many vets do you have in the family? And do you tell them to their face that they are murderers of women and children? Or do you save your courage and conviction for the privacy of the Innernets?

WTF are you babbling about? It is obvious you haven't read any of my other posts in this thread.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

I'm fine with what Sprout Daddy has to offer. I agree that some do obsess over patriotism but those completely discounting it really miss the spirit this nation was founded and then flourished under. I am of the mindset that everyone should have pride in where they are from, on a local, regional, and national level. The degree to how much would be dependent upon a number of things, but if you've ever noticed I fervently defend Detroit, the upper Midwest and the United States.

However I'm not a flag waiver, don't tread on me type either. I believe you should have respect for those who have fought to defend your country, but I don't expect you to throw flowers at the feet of veterans either. I did multiple tours in Afghanistan and also spent time in Iraq, there were never any homecoming ceremonies or for me when I returned home. I quietly got off a military aircraft at an Air Force Base, just like most of the rest of the guys I was out there with. The first time and the last time I heard someone say, "thank you for your service" it gave me the chills. The only thing I say is "you're welcome."

I offer this greeting to those still serving, rarely mentioning I served or where I served when I do it. Because it's not about me, it's about us. It's about being American and thanking each other for what a great country we are fortunate enough to have been born in. Now if you don't want to thank the troops, I'm cool. If you think they are baby killers, well I think you're a ####### ignorant moron who has no idea what we do out there, but I'm fine with that too. All I ask for is just a little bit of respect for our vets (especially our war vets), no more and no less. It's really just a courtesy to a fellow citizen is all, you don't have to agree with what our government sent these people to do. Hell I was and am one of the biggest opponents of ever going to Iraq, but I don't blame an Army Staff Sergeant for the work of politicians and policy makers.

 

[tommyboy]

People have no clue what the military is like unless they've done it.

 

[cstu]

All I ask for is just a little bit of respect for our vets (especially our war vets), no more and no less. It's really just a courtesy to a fellow citizen is all, you don't have to agree with what our government sent these people to do.

Spot on, DD.

Can I ask that when vets comes back that they don't write books proclaiming how much they hate the people of the country we invaded?

BTW, thank you for your service.

 

[chauncey]

I will never understand the level of admiration that people try and show the armed forces. I think a ton of it is the 'murica hell yeah side of it. I wish we gave the same accolades to cops and firefighters. I knew we were too far gone when I started seeing "veterans Only" parking at supermarkets.

If fat/lazy pregnant women get special parking privileges at Harris Teeter then I have no problem with veterans getting the same perk. I have yet to see these in my neck of the woods.

 

[jon_mx]

All I ask for is just a little bit of respect for our vets (especially our war vets), no more and no less. It's really just a courtesy to a fellow citizen is all, you don't have to agree with what our government sent these people to do.

Spot on, DD.

Can I ask that when vets comes back that they don't write books proclaiming how much they hate the people of the country we invaded?

BTW, thank you for your service.

You say that as if it is a common thing that most vets do. How many vets really do that? Why does something a few do make you say it like that? You might have well as phrased it as 'those people'. I think vets have earned the right to express their opinion.

 

[RBM]

It is becoming clear why there are people who have so much hatred towards this movie. It counters their worldview that American soldiers are a bunch of uneducated savages who indescrimitavly slaughter women and children in peaceful-loving self-governing countries who are minding their own business. Most informed people would take issue with about a half-dozen things in that worldview, but those thoughts are wired in their brain. This movie is an assault on several of them. Their emotional response makes sense. Their words, not so much.

I haven't seen the movie, so I can't say I hate it. I'm positive that this is probably the most ridiculous post of the thread though. You're definitely living up to your reputation here. Congrats?

Thanks. Coming from an American/verern-hating nut job, that is a huge compliment.

Whose judgmental now? And you couldn't be more wrong. You have no idea how much of my family and friends are vets. You seem to be the one without a clue here. Congrats!

Guess that makes you an ever bigger assbag than I originally thought.

 

[jdoggydogg]

American Sniper

Interesting movie to review. I really loved parts of American Sniper. But there is some really corny #### in here, as well. The parts that work well are the combat scenes, and I really liked that the movie sympathizes with the enormous struggle that the war creates for our soldiers. But man, some of this dialogue was awful. Cooper walks in on his girlfriend cheating on him, and she shouts, "I did this to get attention from you!" There are a lot of lines in this movie that aren't dialogue, they're more like notes from a college professor. "Add more metaphors here." "Character needs to show more emotion." The script should have been better.

I won't say much about the politics. People are complaining that the movie puts a stamp of approval on the war in Iraq. Well, I'm as commie Liberal as they come. But our soldiers don't get to pick the wars they fight in. I did not want America fighting in Iraq, but these men and women are taught to follow orders.

...and how about that plastic baby?

 

[LAUNCH]

This was the first movie since that I saw that people waited through a good portion of the credits before getting up since the Avengers. It felt like there was a guilty silence once people did get up.

 

[matuski]

It is becoming clear why there are people who have so much hatred towards this movie. It counters their worldview that American soldiers are a bunch of uneducated savages who indescrimitavly slaughter women and children in peaceful-loving self-governing countries who are minding their own business. Most informed people would take issue with about a half-dozen things in that worldview, but those thoughts are wired in their brain. This movie is an assault on several of them. Their emotional response makes sense. Their words, not so much.

Been hearing this a lot lately - I wasn't aware I had a "worldview", and I would be very interested to hear both exactly what my (or anyone else's) "worldview" is and how you came to know it before I did.

I'm assuming this is another poorly thought out post... if not I truly look forward to a response.

 

[jon_mx]

It is becoming clear why there are people who have so much hatred towards this movie. It counters their worldview that American soldiers are a bunch of uneducated savages who indescrimitavly slaughter women and children in peaceful-loving self-governing countries who are minding their own business. Most informed people would take issue with about a half-dozen things in that worldview, but those thoughts are wired in their brain. This movie is an assault on several of them. Their emotional response makes sense. Their words, not so much.

Been hearing this a lot lately - I wasn't aware I had a "worldview", and I would be very interested to hear both exactly what my (or anyone else's) "worldview" is and how you came to know it before I did.

I'm assuming this is another poorly thought out post... if not I truly look forward to a response.

I am shocked that you did not like the film. Just shocked. BTW, thanks for reinforcing what I said.

 

[matuski]

It is becoming clear why there are people who have so much hatred towards this movie. It counters their worldview that American soldiers are a bunch of uneducated savages who indescrimitavly slaughter women and children in peaceful-loving self-governing countries who are minding their own business. Most informed people would take issue with about a half-dozen things in that worldview, but those thoughts are wired in their brain. This movie is an assault on several of them. Their emotional response makes sense. Their words, not so much.

Been hearing this a lot lately - I wasn't aware I had a "worldview", and I would be very interested to hear both exactly what my (or anyone else's) "worldview" is and how you came to know it before I did.

I'm assuming this is another poorly thought out post... if not I truly look forward to a response.

I am shocked that you did not like the film. Just shocked. BTW, thanks for reinforcing what I said.

No I enjoyed the film (as stated early in the thread). I liked other recent war movies better, but I did enjoy this.

Which reinforces the poorly thought out post thing.

 

[matuski]

Can I pour my "worldview" into a river? Can I keep it in my pocket and show my friends? Can I forecast model my "worldview"?

 

[jon_mx]

It is becoming clear why there are people who have so much hatred towards this movie. It counters their worldview that American soldiers are a bunch of uneducated savages who indescrimitavly slaughter women and children in peaceful-loving self-governing countries who are minding their own business. Most informed people would take issue with about a half-dozen things in that worldview, but those thoughts are wired in their brain. This movie is an assault on several of them. Their emotional response makes sense. Their words, not so much.

Been hearing this a lot lately - I wasn't aware I had a "worldview", and I would be very interested to hear both exactly what my (or anyone else's) "worldview" is and how you came to know it before I did.

I'm assuming this is another poorly thought out post... if not I truly look forward to a response.

I am shocked that you did not like the film. Just shocked. BTW, thanks for reinforcing what I said.

No I enjoyed the film (as stated early in the thread). I liked other recent war movies better, but I did enjoy this.

Which reinforces the poorly thought out post thing.

If you enjoyed the movies then the post was not targeted towards you. It was about those highly critical of the movie and the statements they made. Either they want to attack America for being involved in the war and/or they want to attack the soldiers for being savage killers. It has been those viewpoints which seem to be the criticism of this movie almost upset that an American Soldier can be a heroic or even a sympathic complex person.

 

[matuski]

It is becoming clear why there are people who have so much hatred towards this movie. It counters their worldview that American soldiers are a bunch of uneducated savages who indescrimitavly slaughter women and children in peaceful-loving self-governing countries who are minding their own business. Most informed people would take issue with about a half-dozen things in that worldview, but those thoughts are wired in their brain. This movie is an assault on several of them. Their emotional response makes sense. Their words, not so much.

Been hearing this a lot lately - I wasn't aware I had a "worldview", and I would be very interested to hear both exactly what my (or anyone else's) "worldview" is and how you came to know it before I did.

I'm assuming this is another poorly thought out post... if not I truly look forward to a response.

I am shocked that you did not like the film. Just shocked. BTW, thanks for reinforcing what I said.

No I enjoyed the film (as stated early in the thread). I liked other recent war movies better, but I did enjoy this.

Which reinforces the poorly thought out post thing.

If you enjoyed the movies then the post was not targeted towards you. It was about those highly critical of the movie and the statements they made. Either they want to attack America for being involved in the war and/or they want to attack the soldiers for being savage killers. It has been those viewpoints which seem to be the criticism of this movie almost upset that an American Soldier can be a heroic or even a sympathic complex person.

My question is about your "worldview" efforts here. The conservative talk show hosts bandy this around a lot (Glenn Beck is a fan) and you seem to have enough understanding with it to describe to us what the hell it means.

Or you don't (this is what I am predicting).

So I will ask again. What is a "worldview"? How do you know what someone else's "worldview" is? How would you know what it is before they even know they have one? Why does a "worldview" affect whether or not I like a fictional movie?

 

[jon_mx]

It is becoming clear why there are people who have so much hatred towards this movie. It counters their worldview that American soldiers are a bunch of uneducated savages who indescrimitavly slaughter women and children in peaceful-loving self-governing countries who are minding their own business. Most informed people would take issue with about a half-dozen things in that worldview, but those thoughts are wired in their brain. This movie is an assault on several of them. Their emotional response makes sense. Their words, not so much.

Been hearing this a lot lately - I wasn't aware I had a "worldview", and I would be very interested to hear both exactly what my (or anyone else's) "worldview" is and how you came to know it before I did.

I'm assuming this is another poorly thought out post... if not I truly look forward to a response.

I am shocked that you did not like the film. Just shocked. BTW, thanks for reinforcing what I said.

No I enjoyed the film (as stated early in the thread). I liked other recent war movies better, but I did enjoy this.

Which reinforces the poorly thought out post thing.

If you enjoyed the movies then the post was not targeted towards you. It was about those highly critical of the movie and the statements they made. Either they want to attack America for being involved in the war and/or they want to attack the soldiers for being savage killers. It has been those viewpoints which seem to be the criticism of this movie almost upset that an American Soldier can be a heroic or even a sympathic complex person.

My question is about your "worldview" efforts here. The conservative talk show hosts bandy this around a lot (Glen Beck is a fan) and you seem to have enough understanding with it to describe to us what the hell it means.

Or you don't (this is what I am predicting).

So I will ask again. What is a "worldview"? How do you know what someone else's "worldview" is? Why does a "worldview" affect whether or not I like a fictional movie?

If you can read it was explained. They blame American intervention for all the problems of the world, see other countries as peaceful nations, and see our soldiers as stupid pawns/savages who deserve no praise. It is those that carry such world views who are most vocal about their hatred of this movie.

 

[matuski]

It is becoming clear why there are people who have so much hatred towards this movie. It counters their worldview that American soldiers are a bunch of uneducated savages who indescrimitavly slaughter women and children in peaceful-loving self-governing countries who are minding their own business. Most informed people would take issue with about a half-dozen things in that worldview, but those thoughts are wired in their brain. This movie is an assault on several of them. Their emotional response makes sense. Their words, not so much.

Been hearing this a lot lately - I wasn't aware I had a "worldview", and I would be very interested to hear both exactly what my (or anyone else's) "worldview" is and how you came to know it before I did.

I'm assuming this is another poorly thought out post... if not I truly look forward to a response.

I am shocked that you did not like the film. Just shocked. BTW, thanks for reinforcing what I said.

No I enjoyed the film (as stated early in the thread). I liked other recent war movies better, but I did enjoy this.

Which reinforces the poorly thought out post thing.

If you enjoyed the movies then the post was not targeted towards you. It was about those highly critical of the movie and the statements they made. Either they want to attack America for being involved in the war and/or they want to attack the soldiers for being savage killers. It has been those viewpoints which seem to be the criticism of this movie almost upset that an American Soldier can be a heroic or even a sympathic complex person.

My question is about your "worldview" efforts here. The conservative talk show hosts bandy this around a lot (Glen Beck is a fan) and you seem to have enough understanding with it to describe to us what the hell it means.

Or you don't (this is what I am predicting).

So I will ask again. What is a "worldview"? How do you know what someone else's "worldview" is? Why does a "worldview" affect whether or not I like a fictional movie?

If you can read it was explained. They blame American intervention for all the problems of the world, see other countries as peaceful nations, and see our soldiers as stupid pawns/savages who deserve no praise. It is those that carry such world views who are most vocal about their hatred of this movie.

Now you are even breaking up the word you used multiple times above with apparent confidence. Your attempt to runaway from it even makes no sense.. who specifically are you referring to here that "see our soldiers as stupid pawns/savages who deserve no praise"? Who here blames American intervention for ALL the world's problems? Do these things encompass a "worldview"? Jesus Christ man.

What the hell is a "worldview", or even the new backpedal version "world view"?

I know what I think it is, an attempt to label people you disagree with in order to take a weak swipe at them. If I have this wrong please feel free to answer the questions I've asked repeatedly so I don't have to make this assumption.

 

[jon_mx]

It is becoming clear why there are people who have so much hatred towards this movie. It counters their worldview that American soldiers are a bunch of uneducated savages who indescrimitavly slaughter women and children in peaceful-loving self-governing countries who are minding their own business. Most informed people would take issue with about a half-dozen things in that worldview, but those thoughts are wired in their brain. This movie is an assault on several of them. Their emotional response makes sense. Their words, not so much.

Been hearing this a lot lately - I wasn't aware I had a "worldview", and I would be very interested to hear both exactly what my (or anyone else's) "worldview" is and how you came to know it before I did.

I'm assuming this is another poorly thought out post... if not I truly look forward to a response.

I am shocked that you did not like the film. Just shocked. BTW, thanks for reinforcing what I said.

No I enjoyed the film (as stated early in the thread). I liked other recent war movies better, but I did enjoy this.

Which reinforces the poorly thought out post thing.

If you enjoyed the movies then the post was not targeted towards you. It was about those highly critical of the movie and the statements they made. Either they want to attack America for being involved in the war and/or they want to attack the soldiers for being savage killers. It has been those viewpoints which seem to be the criticism of this movie almost upset that an American Soldier can be a heroic or even a sympathic complex person.

My question is about your "worldview" efforts here. The conservative talk show hosts bandy this around a lot (Glen Beck is a fan) and you seem to have enough understanding with it to describe to us what the hell it means.

Or you don't (this is what I am predicting).

So I will ask again. What is a "worldview"? How do you know what someone else's "worldview" is? Why does a "worldview" affect whether or not I like a fictional movie?

If you can read it was explained. They blame American intervention for all the problems of the world, see other countries as peaceful nations, and see our soldiers as stupid pawns/savages who deserve no praise. It is those that carry such world views who are most vocal about their hatred of this movie.

Now you are even breaking up the word you used multiple times above with apparent confidence. Your attempt to runaway from it even makes no sense.. who specifically are you referring to here that "see our soldiers as stupid pawns/savages who deserve no praise"?

What the hell is a "worldview", or even the new backpedal version "world view"?

I know what I think it is, an attempt to label people you disagree with in order to take a weak swipe at them. If I have this wrong please feel free to answer the questions I've asked repeatedly so I don't have to make this assumption.

You are being both intentially stupid and annoying. I clearly explained the view I was referring to. You came in here making false statements about the type of people who join the army, then posted studies which showed the exact opposite of what you were trying to say and now you are trying to deflect and confuse things with more ignorant statements and accusations. Be gone.

 

[matuski]

It is becoming clear why there are people who have so much hatred towards this movie. It counters their worldview that American soldiers are a bunch of uneducated savages who indescrimitavly slaughter women and children in peaceful-loving self-governing countries who are minding their own business. Most informed people would take issue with about a half-dozen things in that worldview, but those thoughts are wired in their brain. This movie is an assault on several of them. Their emotional response makes sense. Their words, not so much.

Been hearing this a lot lately - I wasn't aware I had a "worldview", and I would be very interested to hear both exactly what my (or anyone else's) "worldview" is and how you came to know it before I did.

I'm assuming this is another poorly thought out post... if not I truly look forward to a response.

I am shocked that you did not like the film. Just shocked. BTW, thanks for reinforcing what I said.

No I enjoyed the film (as stated early in the thread). I liked other recent war movies better, but I did enjoy this.

Which reinforces the poorly thought out post thing.

If you enjoyed the movies then the post was not targeted towards you. It was about those highly critical of the movie and the statements they made. Either they want to attack America for being involved in the war and/or they want to attack the soldiers for being savage killers. It has been those viewpoints which seem to be the criticism of this movie almost upset that an American Soldier can be a heroic or even a sympathic complex person.

My question is about your "worldview" efforts here. The conservative talk show hosts bandy this around a lot (Glen Beck is a fan) and you seem to have enough understanding with it to describe to us what the hell it means.

Or you don't (this is what I am predicting).

So I will ask again. What is a "worldview"? How do you know what someone else's "worldview" is? Why does a "worldview" affect whether or not I like a fictional movie?

If you can read it was explained. They blame American intervention for all the problems of the world, see other countries as peaceful nations, and see our soldiers as stupid pawns/savages who deserve no praise. It is those that carry such world views who are most vocal about their hatred of this movie.

Now you are even breaking up the word you used multiple times above with apparent confidence. Your attempt to runaway from it even makes no sense.. who specifically are you referring to here that "see our soldiers as stupid pawns/savages who deserve no praise"?

What the hell is a "worldview", or even the new backpedal version "world view"?

I know what I think it is, an attempt to label people you disagree with in order to take a weak swipe at them. If I have this wrong please feel free to answer the questions I've asked repeatedly so I don't have to make this assumption.

You are being both intentially stupid and annoying. I clearly explained the view I was referring to. You came in here making false statements about the type of people who join the army, then posted studies which showed the exact opposite of what you were trying to say and now you are trying to deflect and confuse things with more ignorant statements and accusations. Be gone.

I am trying to understand your own words.

You have gone from using it multiple times, to breaking it up, to now removing "world" from the word. I will accept this as you completely backing away from it because it was poorly thought out in the first place.

 

[Juxtatarot]

Back to the movie, I'm interested in what others thought the theme of the movie was.

A main criticism I have is it didn't commit to being either a war action movie or a drama about the struggles of a returning solider. By trying to be both, it just seemed confused and to lose the effectiveness of either. At the end, I asked myself, "What was that about? What was the point?" Perhaps the goal was to raise those questions for the viewer but that leads to thoughts about war that I assume we all have thought about before.

 

[top dog]

I'm fine with what Sprout Daddy has to offer. I agree that some do obsess over patriotism but those completely discounting it really miss the spirit this nation was founded and then flourished under. I am of the mindset that everyone should have pride in where they are from, on a local, regional, and national level. The degree to how much would be dependent upon a number of things, but if you've ever noticed I fervently defend Detroit, the upper Midwest and the United States.

However I'm not a flag waiver, don't tread on me type either. I believe you should have respect for those who have fought to defend your country, but I don't expect you to throw flowers at the feet of veterans either. I did multiple tours in Afghanistan and also spent time in Iraq, there were never any homecoming ceremonies or for me when I returned home. I quietly got off a military aircraft at an Air Force Base, just like most of the rest of the guys I was out there with. The first time and the last time I heard someone say, "thank you for your service" it gave me the chills. The only thing I say is "you're welcome."

I offer this greeting to those still serving, rarely mentioning I served or where I served when I do it. Because it's not about me, it's about us. It's about being American and thanking each other for what a great country we are fortunate enough to have been born in. Now if you don't want to thank the troops, I'm cool. If you think they are baby killers, well I think you're a ####### ignorant moron who has no idea what we do out there, but I'm fine with that too. All I ask for is just a little bit of respect for our vets (especially our war vets), no more and no less. It's really just a courtesy to a fellow citizen is all, you don't have to agree with what our government sent these people to do. Hell I was and am one of the biggest opponents of ever going to Iraq, but I don't blame an Army Staff Sergeant for the work of politicians and policy makers.

Where I start to shake my head is when people start to paint our military as guys who do it because they weren't smart enough to do anything else, etc. DD is one of the most intelligent posters on this forum. Too bad he didn't have any other options

My son is currently in the Army. My future son in law has done a tour in Afghanistan. My best friends daughter is also active army. I have super respect for what they are willing to do. Like DD said, it's not about immortalizing those that serve, but having respect for what they are willing to do for YOU.

Are all veterans heroes? Absolutely not. When we start throwing that "hero" term out there for everyone, it marginalizes those who ARE true heroes. They aren't heroes, but they are doing a job that most of us can't or won't do. That should earn you a little bit of respect.

These aren't baby killers and savages... These are people that have decided for a multitude of reasons to put their ### on the line for the rest of us. If you can't respect that, I don't know what to tell you.

 

[BustedKnuckles]

I'm fine with what Sprout Daddy has to offer. I agree that some do obsess over patriotism but those completely discounting it really miss the spirit this nation was founded and then flourished under. I am of the mindset that everyone should have pride in where they are from, on a local, regional, and national level. The degree to how much would be dependent upon a number of things, but if you've ever noticed I fervently defend Detroit, the upper Midwest and the United States.

However I'm not a flag waiver, don't tread on me type either. I believe you should have respect for those who have fought to defend your country, but I don't expect you to throw flowers at the feet of veterans either. I did multiple tours in Afghanistan and also spent time in Iraq, there were never any homecoming ceremonies or for me when I returned home. I quietly got off a military aircraft at an Air Force Base, just like most of the rest of the guys I was out there with. The first time and the last time I heard someone say, "thank you for your service" it gave me the chills. The only thing I say is "you're welcome."

I offer this greeting to those still serving, rarely mentioning I served or where I served when I do it. Because it's not about me, it's about us. It's about being American and thanking each other for what a great country we are fortunate enough to have been born in. Now if you don't want to thank the troops, I'm cool. If you think they are baby killers, well I think you're a ####### ignorant moron who has no idea what we do out there, but I'm fine with that too. All I ask for is just a little bit of respect for our vets (especially our war vets), no more and no less. It's really just a courtesy to a fellow citizen is all, you don't have to agree with what our government sent these people to do. Hell I was and am one of the biggest opponents of ever going to Iraq, but I don't blame an Army Staff Sergeant for the work of politicians and policy makers.

Where I start to shake my head is when people start to paint our military as guys who do it because they weren't smart enough to do anything else, etc. DD is one of the most intelligent posters on this forum. Too bad he didn't have any other options

My son is currently in the Army. My future son in law has done a tour in Afghanistan. My best friends daughter is also active army. I have super respect for what they are willing to do. Like DD said, it's not about immortalizing those that serve, but having respect for what they are willing to do for YOU.

Are all veterans heroes? Absolutely not. When we start throwing that "hero" term out there for everyone, it marginalizes those who ARE true heroes. They aren't heroes, but they are doing a job that most of us can't or won't do. That should earn you a little bit of respect.

These aren't baby killers and savages... These are people that have decided for a multitude of reasons to put their ### on the line for the rest of us. If you can't respect that, I don't know what to tell you.

I know what to tell them ...it starts with MOVE TO ANOTHER COUNTRY and it ends with words that would surely get me banned for life

 

[KarmaPolice]

Is it possible for your "worldview" to not influence how you read into art, movies, etc?

 

[jon_mx]

Is it possible for your "worldview" to not influence how you read into art, movies, etc?

Certainly. You can appreciate a good movie or art even if it is at odds with your viewpoint. In fact it should be educational and help you appreciate the perspective a bit more. A lot of the criticism for this movie comes from people who want to tell a different story and reject the story being told.

 

[KarmaPolice]

Is it possible for your "worldview" to not influence how you read into art, movies, etc?

Certainly. You can appreciate a good movie or art even if it is at odds with your viewpoint. In fact it should be educational and help you appreciate the perspective a bit more. A lot of the criticism for this movie comes from people who want to tell a different story and reject the story being told.

i disagree, but i also cared 0 about the politics of the movie. Completely average movie with terrible dialogue.

 

[rockaction]

My question is about your "worldview" efforts here. The conservative talk show hosts bandy this around a lot (Glenn Beck is a fan) and you seem to have enough understanding with it to describe to us what the hell it means.

Or you don't (this is what I am predicting).

So I will ask again. What is a "worldview"? How do you know what someone else's "worldview" is? How would you know what it is before they even know they have one? Why does a "worldview" affect whether or not I like a fictional movie?

Everyone thinks I get too abstract anyway, so let me attempt to explain this and settle a debate. Feel free to correct me.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_view

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/worldview

world·view

(wûrld′vyo͞o′)

n.1. The overall perspective from which one sees and interprets the world.
2. A collection of beliefs about life and the universe held by an individual or a group. In both senses also called Weltanschauung.
So that's the definition and the philosophical history of the word. As it relates to philosophy and politics, the best I understood it, the modern use of "worldview" was a common term actually originally adopted by the multiculturalist and cultural relativist left in response to the criticism that concepts such as "right," "justice," "freedom," and other such words that claimed universal absolutes in their ability to explain the world, and therefore world politics and morals, actually displayed a cultural prejudice by one side, and that this prejudice, when projected onto other cultures, was unfair.

Instead of using universalist, concrete terms, "worldview" is, etymologically, a combination of how one "views" the "world." This is necessarily subjective, because sensory perceptions like sight are empirical, and can never be fully objectively proven. All one has is evidence, experience, and perception. Hence, "worldview."

This sort of political adoption of specific terms in the mid-to-late 20th century is reminiscent of Allan Bloom's complaint that the word "values" had slipped into our lexicon of politically-loaded philosophical terms, because "values" implied a "valuation," or a rank ordering of preferable moral concepts and actions, instead of the reliance on moral absolutes and a striving for absolute truths. He argued that if all one can do is "value" something hierarchically, one can never ascertain the truth of the concepts involved, nor can one insist that one's own conception of something is the correct one. Things are merely personally valued according to each particular, personally subjective situation. One no longer strives for the "good," one simply makes do with circumstances as dealt.

That jon_mx is using a fairly known concept and getting called on it by the left is ironic. It would be even more ironic if, as matuski claims, the right had adopted it without thinking about it. Much like "family values." Whoops.

I also do not mean to be terse or pedantic or make judgments about the debate. I'm just saying that jon_mx is well within normal discourse when he uses that word, and he's kind of using it correctly. Whether it is fair to impute a worldview to you is another thing. But the word and concept itself are normal.

 

[tommyGunZ]

It is becoming clear why there are people who have so much hatred towards this movie. It counters their worldview that American soldiers are a bunch of uneducated savages who indescrimitavly slaughter women and children in peaceful-loving self-governing countries who are minding their own business. Most informed people would take issue with about a half-dozen things in that worldview, but those thoughts are wired in their brain. This movie is an assault on several of them. Their emotional response makes sense. Their words, not so much.

Is that what you really think Liberals believe?

I'm beginning to wonder if this life long perception I've had of liberals historically having difficulty differentiating between soliders and policy is just a meme perpetrated by folks like jon_mx. Were the Vietnam protestors as disrespectful and violent as many/most of us were told, or was it political spin from folks like jon_mx in the 60s and 70s who were wrong on war policy and thus reaching for whatever spin they could find?

 

[Sabertooth]

I'll say that it let a lot of the air out of this movie when I read on History vs. Hollywood that Kyle stated in multiple interviews that he was deployed as a sniper to stop looters after Katrina and also that he shot two would-be carjackers and killed them. These stories wreak of BS and could not be corroborated. Couple that with the Jessie Ventura thing and it casts a lot of doubt on the veracity of this whole movie. Then again he did have PTSD so maybe his mind had a bit of trouble telling reality from fantasy or whatever.

It doesn't take away what he did for his country though. I'd love to watch a feature length documentary on him.

 

[jon_mx]

It is becoming clear why there are people who have so much hatred towards this movie. It counters their worldview that American soldiers are a bunch of uneducated savages who indescrimitavly slaughter women and children in peaceful-loving self-governing countries who are minding their own business. Most informed people would take issue with about a half-dozen things in that worldview, but those thoughts are wired in their brain. This movie is an assault on several of them. Their emotional response makes sense. Their words, not so much.

Is that what you really think Liberals believe?

I'm beginning to wonder if this life long perception I've had of liberals historically having difficulty differentiating between soliders and policy is just a meme perpetrated by folks like jon_mx. Were the Vietnam protestors as disrespectful and violent as many/most of us were told, or was it political spin from folks like jon_mx in the 60s and 70s who were wrong on war policy and thus reaching for whatever spin they could find?

Did I mention liberals anywhere? The comment was specifically targeted towards people who hate the movie because of the way it portrays America's involvement and its soldiers.

 

[gump]

$361M worldwide box office...wow.

 

[Clifford]

gonna see this tonight.

judging from the opening box office records, this movie is going to be awesome

See Jack, Kangaro

 

[cstu]

It is becoming clear why there are people who have so much hatred towards this movie. It counters their worldview that American soldiers are a bunch of uneducated savages who indescrimitavly slaughter women and children in peaceful-loving self-governing countries who are minding their own business. Most informed people would take issue with about a half-dozen things in that worldview, but those thoughts are wired in their brain. This movie is an assault on several of them. Their emotional response makes sense. Their words, not so much.

Is that what you really think Liberals believe?

I'm beginning to wonder if this life long perception I've had of liberals historically having difficulty differentiating between soliders and policy is just a meme perpetrated by folks like jon_mx. Were the Vietnam protestors as disrespectful and violent as many/most of us were told, or was it political spin from folks like jon_mx in the 60s and 70s who were wrong on war policy and thus reaching for whatever spin they could find?

Debunking A Myth

By John Zutz (Reviewer)

The Spitting Image: Myth, Memory, and the Legacy of Vietnam, by Jerry Lembcke (New York University Press, 1998)

Many Vietnam veterans repeat a common litany: anti-war protesters spit upon them. This book attempts to debunk what Lembcke concludes has become a modern urban myth.

How does one attempt to prove a negative - that something didn't happen? This author does it by examining the positive side and failing to find any conclusive proof that it occurred. Along the way he finds many indications that it is indeed a myth.

His research examined newspapers from New York and San Francisco, as well as police reports detailing the interaction between protesters and veterans. No spitting incidents were reported, and the observers noticed that over time the veterans assumed leadership positions among the protesters. Lembcke did find newspaper reports of spitting during demonstrations in the late 1960s, but they referred to hawks spitting on anti-war protesters.

Reinforcing his myth hypothesis, Lembcke cites a Harris poll reported to Congress in 1972 that indicates 93% of returning veterans found their homecoming friendly, while only 3% found it unfriendly. The poll also reported that over 75% of returning vets were opposed to the war.

The first documented reports of being spit upon don't begin to appear until the early 1980s. According to the author, who is currently an associate professor of sociology, the time delay is a strong indication that the story is a myth. So where did the myth come from?

First, remember that we lost the war. There are historical examples of mistreatment myths in which the abusers are said to be traitors to the national cause. In post-WWI Germany, the Fascists exploited similar rumors to arouse popular anger toward Jews, homosexuals, and women. After France's defeat in Indochina, the contrast and conflict of the male warrior image with the more feminine factors of society were blamed for the defeat.

Second, right after the Vietnam War, the U.S. economy went into the tank. The working-class boys and girls who had served were hit the hardest by the lack of jobs combined with inflation. When they lost their jobs they began to doubt their worth.

Perhaps most important in producing the myth were political machinations. The image of the Vietnam vet in the early 1970s was strongly anti-war. There is no place in the American memory for the factually accurate image of vets throwing their medals back at Congress. This image had to be changed if the United States ever wanted to go to war again.

The image began changing when Nixon lost popular support for the war. He created the notion that society should support the war because the troops were there: we needed to keep fighting to bring the POWs home. The anti-war veteran image was changed further when the Nixon administration alluded that anti-war vets were effeminate and mentally suspect. This attitude was bolstered by popular film images of Post-Vietnam Syndrome (later Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, or PTSD).

The Bush administration used the idea that Vietnam vets had met with malevolence to rally support for the Gulf War, arguing that opposition to the war was tantamount to disregard for the troops' well-being. By the time the bombing began, the troops' presence in the Gulf became the reason for the fighting.

Though no definitive proof can be produced to absolve activists, or to confirm their innocence, one can examine existing records and determine that, with the lack of positive proof and in the face of other events, it is unlikely any spitting occurred.

The author, who served in Vietnam and joined VVAW on his return, comments that on announcing that he was exposing the myth he was met by two reactions, "Myth, hell, it happened," or "It's about time." Personally, I'm glad he did.

 

[BobbyLayne]

I'll say that it let a lot of the air out of this movie when I read on History vs. Hollywood that Kyle stated in multiple interviews that he was deployed as a sniper to stop looters after Katrina and also that he shot two would-be carjackers and killed them. These stories wreak of BS and could not be corroborated. Couple that with the Jessie Ventura thing and it casts a lot of doubt on the veracity of this whole movie. Then again he did have PTSD so maybe his mind had a bit of trouble telling reality from fantasy or whatever.

It doesn't take away what he did for his country though. I'd love to watch a feature length documentary on him.

Three lies? Hell that just another morning for William Tecumseh Sherman.

 

[BobbyLayne]

Are people actually claiming worldview/Weltanschauung is something new (or doesn't exist)? Weird exchange.

Oh, and I call bull#### on anyone who claims they don't view everything through the prism of their own life experience.

Fully expecting the next argument in this thread to deny the existence of the human condition.

 

[tommyboy]

I finally went to see it tonight. I'm watching Zero Dark Thirty now just to make me feel better.

Really tough movie for me to watch, but its great and ill buy it and watch it 20 more times

 

[Jack White]

Adam Kokesh uses Socratic drilling as he talks with people who have just seen American Sniper.

Kokesh is a veteran of the Iraq war, serving a tour of duty in Fallujah in 2004.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

Do you have a sovereign citizen tramp stamp?

 

[Moonlight]

This was the first movie since that I saw that people waited through a good portion of the credits before getting up since the Avengers. It felt like there was a guilty silence once people did get up.

Saw it today and the same thing happened. My wife said it was like the respectful silence you have being at a funeral.

Enjoyed the movie very much.

 

[T J]

Saw it. Really liked it. Made me proud to be an American.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

I finally saw this about a week about a week ago in a medium sized cinema and I was surprised to find that it was still very full.

I'm genuinely surprised at the controversy in this thread and elsewhere, I think it's an example of how politicized our society has unfortunately become.

From an art/movie standpoint I thought it was terrific, it deserves the best picture nom it's received. Eastwood's career has really been something else. From the pretty boy tv star to the deconstructed Sergio Leone caricature to more caricature in Dirty Harry to what is perhaps one of the defining, best directors of our time. he tells the story, that's it, and somehow allows the viewer the opportunity to see his character's perspective. That's really something.

It's been mentioned before further up but Eastwood has previously shown the soldier's perspective, basically incapable of being understood, even by other soldiers. I don't know if anyone's wrong here, but I do think people are wrong if they inject politics into it. There have been "good" wars, say WW2, but the soldiers in every war including that one have the same inherent conflict, good men (often) who had to do unspeakable, inhuman things which cut right into the core of who they were as humans. And they (often, typically) did it from idealism, from love of country, love of family, even love of mankind. Ultimately it becomes about survival. And what does that do to you afterwards? You can be haunted by a hundred things, one of them is what about the thought that you could have saved others? Or that you owed your life to others who are now dead? And how do you get over the nightmares and find purpose and redemption when it's over and return to normal living.

It's heavy stuff that people who have not been in war cannot see or comprehend, except maybe abstractly. And that's a good movie and a good director that can take the viewer and put him into a character's perspective, even moreso if the character was a real person. I think that explains the silence at the end of these showings.

As for the desire to explore the reality of non-reality of some of what Kyle wrote, it seems like tabloid fodder almost, the desire to tear into someone's life and see what's real and what's false. We know he had the kills he is credited with, I don't think anyone has doubted that. I think the men who knew him in and around the military during and after his service genuinely loved him and appreciated what he did. And he served our country, and us, and that has to be appreciated. The details about Katrina - it's been written about here in NO, by Jarvis DeBerry among others. I don't know the details of his story, I haven't read them. I do know a nurse who worked at Baptist Hospital told me there was indeed a sniper where she was because looters and a33hls were shooting at rescuers. As for Ventura, he's a whackjob and just as prone to lying maybe moreso than most; the fact that he hired expensive attorneys to prosecute a case against a man who wasn't there to defend or explain himself doesn't impress me much. I'm not saying the Katrina and Ventura stories are true, I'm just saying it's fascinating how intent some are to focus on that instead of what we know is true, his service.

It's an excellent movie, and even if you don't believe some or a lot of Kyle's story I do think his story is that of a lot, maybe most soldiers, complex, dedicated, loving, impossibly tough, partly broken, entirely admirable.

If you ever volunteer consider helping vets. If you have an older vet without support in your neighborhood or building, check in on him.

I will add about the movie, the ending score is by Ennio Morricone, who of course is known for his work in Eastwood's and Leone's own spaghetti westerns, I thought that was a nice surprise.

 

[The General]

The only thing I didn't care for in the movie was the over the top created storylines that didn't need to be put in the movie. Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't believe the guy running around with the drill was a real person and the scene in the courtyard was entirely made up. The end scene was completely over the top and didn't need to be enhanced to a point where it was almost ridiculous.

These writing elements were not needed and were pretty lazy attempts to manipulate the audience. Should have kept the story as it was written.

Enjoyed the movie, thought it could have been better. Pretty hard to deny that it had some amazing scenes - like the opening. Did not enjoy all the politics that surrounded it but can understand why it happened. Attacking Kyle is pretty low taste regardless.

 

[cstu]

I was brought up extremely patriotic. So if my country is going to go to war - whether I believe in the politics behind it or not I definitely want to be there. And it's not for blood lust it's to make sure I can protect anyone who is out there.

That's actually Chris Kyle, not a Nazi soldier during WWII.

 

[jon_mx]

I was brought up extremely patriotic. So if my country is going to go to war - whether I believe in the politics behind it or not I definitely want to be there. And it's not for blood lust it's to make sure I can protect anyone who is out there.

That's actually Chris Kyle, not a Nazi soldier during WWII.

Wtf.

 

[flapgreen]

Got a couple buddies who did a couple tours in Iraq and Afghanistan. They both thought it was really good.

 

[flapgreen]

I was brought up extremely patriotic. So if my country is going to go to war - whether I believe in the politics behind it or not I definitely want to be there. And it's not for blood lust it's to make sure I can protect anyone who is out there.

That's actually Chris Kyle, not a Nazi soldier during WWII.

huh

 

[flapgreen]

The only thing I didn't care for in the movie was the over the top created storylines that didn't need to be put in the movie. Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't believe the guy running around with the drill was a real person and the scene in the courtyard was entirely made up. The end scene was completely over the top and didn't need to be enhanced to a point where it was almost ridiculous.

These writing elements were not needed and were pretty lazy attempts to manipulate the audience. Should have kept the story as it was written.

Enjoyed the movie, thought it could have been better. Pretty hard to deny that it had some amazing scenes - like the opening. Did not enjoy all the politics that surrounded it but can understand why it happened. Attacking Kyle is pretty low taste regardless.

They Hollywood up every movie. It's just how it is.

 

[jon_mx]

The only thing I didn't care for in the movie was the over the top created storylines that didn't need to be put in the movie. Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't believe the guy running around with the drill was a real person and the scene in the courtyard was entirely made up. The end scene was completely over the top and didn't need to be enhanced to a point where it was almost ridiculous.

These writing elements were not needed and were pretty lazy attempts to manipulate the audience. Should have kept the story as it was written.

Enjoyed the movie, thought it could have been better. Pretty hard to deny that it had some amazing scenes - like the opening. Did not enjoy all the politics that surrounded it but can understand why it happened. Attacking Kyle is pretty low taste regardless.

They Hollywood up every movie. It's just how it is.

Zero Dark Thirty kept itpretty real. For the most part Sniper was pretty realistic, but they did take it way overboard in a few spots. A movie that is suppose to be based on a real story, should not make you roll your eyes. It takes away from the experience.

 

[jon_mx]

I was brought up extremely patriotic. So if my country is going to go to war - whether I believe in the politics behind it or not I definitely want to be there. And it's not for blood lust it's to make sure I can protect anyone who is out there.

That's actually Chris Kyle, not a Nazi soldier during WWII.

huh

That comment is really ####ed up.

 

[flapgreen]

The only thing I didn't care for in the movie was the over the top created storylines that didn't need to be put in the movie. Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't believe the guy running around with the drill was a real person and the scene in the courtyard was entirely made up. The end scene was completely over the top and didn't need to be enhanced to a point where it was almost ridiculous.

These writing elements were not needed and were pretty lazy attempts to manipulate the audience. Should have kept the story as it was written.

Enjoyed the movie, thought it could have been better. Pretty hard to deny that it had some amazing scenes - like the opening. Did not enjoy all the politics that surrounded it but can understand why it happened. Attacking Kyle is pretty low taste regardless.

They Hollywood up every movie. It's just how it is.

Zero Dark Thirty kept itpretty real. For the most part Sniper was pretty realistic, but they did take it way overboard in a few spots. A movie that is suppose to be based on a real story, should not make you roll your eyes. It takes away from the experience.

Zero Dark Thirty was awesome.