PTSD and the toll of war on the soldier's psyche

Rating: 7/10 (4 June 2015)

I went into this film with a little trepidation due to the extremely polarized reactions I saw online. Beyond that, I really wasn't too familiar with the film or Chris Kyle's life outside of the tragic way he died. Now that I've seen it, I can say that it's a good film, although its subtlety might be the reason some people read it the way they do. Far from being a pro-war statement (or anti-war, for that matter), its primary focus is in showing the toll that war takes on the soldier's psyche.
A run-down of plot details isn't really necessary because you can just pick up Chris Kyle's autobiography if that's what you want. The basic structure is a series of sequences that go from Chris's home life to each of the four tours he served in Iraq. After each tour, you can see the effect that his job as sniper has on him psychologically. This is perhaps the film's best asset, although it doesn't really start to pay off until about halfway through. Before that, you have to deal with about 30 minutes of rote setup that establishes Chris's character: an all-American guy with simple values and morals. Odds are, this is what the more conservative viewers in the audience are drawn to, although to take what Chris says at face value is to miss the psychological underpinnings and point of the film.
What works against the film is, unfortunately, the direction. Clint Eastwood might have been Chris's dream director (according to his wife, at least), but it's quite apparent that he was merely a hired gun. The battle sequences, which one would expect to have some flair, were competently staged but executed rather stiffly. That's not to say they were all bad, though. There were a couple of moments that really worked on a visceral and emotional level, one of which was used as a selling point in the trailers. In the scenes back home, Eastwood steps back further and lets the characters and drama unfold naturally but the whole thing still feels anonymous from a directorial perspective.
Of course, given that I enjoyed the film there is plenty to give it credit for doing right. Chief among these are Bradley Cooper and Sienna Miller, who I feel were perfectly cast. They looked like their real life counterparts, and Bradley Cooper did some DeNiro-level character work in terms of turning himself into Chris Kyle. However, given the film's focus on war's toll on the human psyche and its effect on family, Sienna Miller did an amazing job portraying a wife who only wants to have her husband return to her alive and mentally be there. Even though it takes a while for the film to show its hand, once you see Chris Kyle's struggle to return to normal life after returning from the battlefield, all of the simplistic setup somehow feels worth it.
Overall, I don't see what people got so up in arms about. No, the film doesn't question American involvement in the Middle East or the morality or war in general. It also doesn't paint Chris Kyle as some savage-killing hero/real-life Rambo. Even in the few moments where Kyle is referred to as a "legend" he never feels quite at ease with the designation. To him, being a sniper was a job he did to protect his fellow soldiers. Simplicity of character should not be mistaken for the film itself being simplistic. Despite the unspectacular direction (and some ridiculous CGI bullet time), I thought American SNIPER was a subtle, maybe too much so, examination of the detrimental effect that war can have on the mind of a soldier and the lives of their family.