Movies must stop changing history
An Iraqi child’s life is on the line in the opening of “American Sniper.”
The sniper in question is Navy SEAL Chris Kyle, portrayed by Bradley Cooper, who must decide if the child is indeed carrying a weapon and poses a threat to U.S. troops. Surprisingly, this tense scene is low among the reasons why “American Sniper,” a film that shattered box office records and earned six Oscar nominations, has caused an outpouring of well-deserved criticism.
Aleya Ericson
The film is based off on the autobiography by Kyle titled “American Sniper: The Autobiography of the Most Lethal Sniper in U.S. Military History.” The title hits the nail on the head, since the U.S. military credits Kyle with a record-breaking 160 confirmed kills between his four tours of duty. Many question Kyle’s status as a hero and protagonist of the film, since his main claim to fame involves death.
It is impossible to deny Kyle earned his place in history, due to his tremendous amount of dedication with four tours of duty and successful military service. While some parts of history may be unpleasant, it is a disservice to sweep Kyle under the rug and ignore his historic accomplishments. The filmmakers had a chance to capture something truly unique with adapting the autobiography of a man whose many tours of duty could offer a different perspective of war.
Unfortunately, the real Kyle does not match the moral rightness of the movie character. The Kyle of “American Sniper” is a religious man whose many tours of duty stem from a desire to save as many people as possible. The real-life Kyle may have had those intentions at one point, but he reportedly describes in his novel that killing hundreds of Iraqis was “fun” and viewed Iraqis as “savages.” Curiously, neither of these details are readily apparent in the movie.
Kyle’s book also includes several unverifiable details, such as punching a man he later identified as Jesse Ventura in the face or that the government placed him in New Orleans to kill looters taking advantage of Hurricane Katrina. Ventura even was awarded $1.8 million from a successful defamation lawsuit against Kyle.
The main failing of “American Sniper” is not a glorification of war or of the blood-stained accomplishments of Kyle, it’s that it ultimately fails to capture Kyle as a person. Instead of portraying the real, controversial person as he was, the film manipulates events to create clear winners and losers.
One instance of this manipulation in effect was the villainous character of the Butcher, an al-Qaeda enforcer who is famed for his brutality and serves as one of Kyle’s main antagonists. The hardest part of “American Sniper” to watch is when the Butcher shoves a drill through a screaming child’s leg to punish his family. To heighten the stakes and perception of the brutality of war, the entire character was invented. In reality, Kyle’s autobiography contains no mention of the Butcher.
“American Sniper” is just one of the latest victims to sacrificing historical accuracy for entertainment value. “Foxcatcher” and “Selma” are both films that have been widely hailed as Oscar worthy and widely questioned for elements of historical inaccuracy. It seems as though Hollywood writers and producers believe that movies based on actual events can’t fill seats.
Now, that’s not to say all movies based at all on history must evolve into documentaries. I will staunchly defend the entertainment value of “Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter” until the day I die. But if movies sell themselves as based on actual events, that claim should be substantiated.
It’s difficult to believe the creators of “American Sniper” could not find an engaging tale from a man with so many historical accomplishments without having to add to history. It’s sad to think people will leave the theater with a different impression of Kyle than who he really was, after watching the movie.
Aleya Ericson can be reached [email protected]