A tense and straightforward biopic that aims for the apolitical story

Rating: 8/10 (8 February 2015)

Having bought the ticket for this movie with a recommendation by a military friend in service close to his retirement, I came in with the expectation the movie is supposed to be apolitical that neither preach to the choir nor criticize the war.
Apolitical it is, which is a notable achievement as it's tempting to roll with the rah-rah propaganda, for the right, or self-righteous condemnation with critical approach, for the left. Director Clint Eastwood and screenwriter Jason Hall, adapting the autobiography book, did the stellar effort with deft directing and tenacious focus on the psychological cost of the war in combat that affect the home life.
I am more impressed that despite Clint Eastwood's back and forth political alignment between libertarian and republican party as a voter and in belief as a moderate, not to mention Clint's (in)famous lecture to the empty chair at 2012 Republican National Convention (which, while pointed, was embarrassingly bizarre, with Clint's last-minute request to bring in the empty chair besides the podium), Clint, working with Jason Hall trying to be respectful to the source material and the late Chris Kyle himself, chose to be tenacious with the aim of making an entirely apolitical movie, without overtly questioning or promoting support of the war.
There have been criticism of the movie by the left -- lame one-note actors, jealous-of- success directors and dogmatic online publications like The Huffington Post and, most egregiously, Salon -- that need not to be rebutted or challenged. Let the criticism speak for themselves. Suffice to say the criticism is ridiculous and unfounded, after viewing the movie and finding no fault.
American Sniper is, in the final analysis, not a propaganda movie. It never set out to be this way.
Clint and Jason tried something extraordinary -- to make the movie as apolitical as possible without offending the sensibilities of one type of audience or another. Interestingly, only the left-wing complained like Seth Rogen and Michael Moore, only to backtrack with excuses why they had the first impression that purport to be condemnatory.
Clint knew the propaganda value of film, that led to his denial of accepting the role in thematically anti-Iraq war movie "In The Valley of Elah" that was supposedly written with him in mind. Hence his aversion to making the movie with overt political statement that might offend the audience who lean conservative.
Clint knows the majority of the conservative audience is the "rare breed" to catch as the moviegoer base that vote with their wallet. Not to exaggerate, but this base is by and large powerful to make the movie succeed or fail, depending on the movie's message that is either politically neutral (or subliminal), or not at all. This is why the recent slate of the liberal-tilted anti-war movies (e.g. Robert Redford's "Lions for Lambs" with major stars including Tom Cruise and "The Green Zone" with Matt Damon) had tepid returns at the box office.
Politically conservative moviegoers, for the most part -- like me -- seldomly go to the movies, if never in a long time, because of the antagonistic and amoral content in the movies, not to mention self-serving as the conduit for liberal propaganda that condescend, denigrate and offend the moviegoers. Hence the shrinking movie-going public that befuddle Hollywood and the analysts, negating the shift towards movie streaming and other convenient means of watching at home. Hollywood can only count on the demography of 19-45 year old (R rated), teenagers (PG-13) and parents with children (PG and G) to go to the movies for the bottom line of profit.
Clint Eastwood, working with screenwriter Jason Hall, consciously avoided the minefield of political bias to choose to tell the story as apolitical as possible as the only viable way to contain the movie's themes without offending either side.
This is highly commendable indeed. I could not find anything obviously or subtly biased in the movie.
The sum of the movie's theme is "war is hell" requiring sacrifice that include the psychology of self in patriotic service for the country -- right or wrong.
The movie is not without flaws. (Not the fake baby scene, it went by quickly.) These flaws made me ask the question, why is this odd? was this even true? (You'll know towards the ending.)
Still, a very good movie with tense combat sequences and occasionally poignant moments. Bradley Cooper did a great job, duplicating Chris Kyle in Texan drawl and stoic and tough yet psychologically vulnerable, tender and deity-believing mannerism.
If American Sniper wins Best Picture Oscar, I should expect Clint Eastwood to announce retirement to the standing ovation. Splendid effort despite some flaws, not to mention frequently profane and graphic that shock and perturb some reticent conservative moviegoers who have not gone to the movies in a long time, that, with the timely story and its perfect apolitical approach, translate to the tremendous turnout not seen since The Passion of the Christ (which I also went to in a sold-out screening).
With respect for the core audience for which the story is thematically appealing come the big box office return. This is something Hollywood could learn from if they aren't so colored by their evidently pompous and didactic liberal belief, as conservative-aligned film critics Michael Medved and John Nolte always point out.
By the way, I have never been to the movie screening where the entire audience sat silent, solemn and still when the moving ending credit began for a few minutes, until this movie. Moved all of us to tears and lumps in the throat. Remarkable movie-going experience as a phenomenon.
Thank you Clint, Jason, Bradley & co. for the respectful tribute to the late war hero and patriot Chris Kyle and his compatriots. Even though I never agree, to this day, with President Bush II and the second Iraq war.
***1/2 out of 4