Both films are biopics focusing on real people. This makes for an interesting and tricky adaptation for the filmmakers. They’re working towards making a hero, or a statement at least, out of a real person who had flaws and regrets and ice cream flavor preferences. Both films tried, but ultimately I think American Sniper did a much better job of deifying its hero, the late U.S. Navy SEAL Chris Kyle.

There are a few critical ways in which Selma failed to create as resonating of a hero out of King. Part of that has to do a lot with the subject material. There are a few theories out there that the reason why a hero like Harry Potter and Neo from the Harry Potter franchise and The Matrix respectively, lacks in any real personality is so that they can maintain a sense of relatability to the audience. The hero needs to be just unique enough to justify picking up the mantle of hero, but not so much that the audience cannot identify with them. And the way to allow a broad audience identify with a character is to make him as much of a blank canvas as possible. The easier it is to project upon him, the easier it is to imagine ourselves as the hero.

This means that King’s character is fighting an uphill battle. Due to a lot of messed up reasons, a white, heterosexual male is the default in the American culture for a relatable character. King’s blackness already puts up into the “underdog” category for protagonist narrative and not in the “hero” one. It also explains why I felt, as I mentioned in the podcast, that Kyle was soooo booooring and didn’t have any sort of character development. The entirety of American Sniper was plot, with Kyle just going from scene to scene. Bradley Cooper does his best as an actor to show Kyle internalizing his actions and developing PTSD. But at a certain point the lack of dialogue or artistry is just an indication of poor character development. But it also resulted in allowing me to project more onto Kyle than onto King.

Another aspect in which Selma had a tough break is its genre. American Sniper is a war film with the macho-est soldiers the American audience could dream up: the Navy SEALs. The movie is basically about a guy being really good at killing other guys. Selma is a film of non-aggressive protesting that uses scenes of violence to demonstrate the deadly stakes at risk for the black population. While we teach our kids to not hit in Pre-K and laud the actions of Dr. King, Jr., there is still a very strong narrative at play in the United States of a hero needing to be violent. We can look to any big blockbuster for evidence of this, but even myths globally support this.

Many of the bigger deities today are those who support pacifist methods of change. Jesus Christ and the Buddha are two of the biggest. But if we look at the local level of a lot of cultures, heroes who exhibit physical dominance tend to take the spotlight. From the Greek heroes to the Pandava princes to the Hero Twins Hunahpú and Xbalanqué, we see heroes who use wit and, most importantly, strength to save the day. They play active roles in deposing their enemies. While you can certainly make the argument that passive protesting is taking an active role, using a gun is waaaaaay cooler (and fits into the narrative the common American audience member thinks a hero should do) than exercising their constitutional and legal rights.

This speaks volumes for what our culture, but also humanity at large, values as a hero. Everything in our cultural history has shown that we prefer a hero who swings in with a weapon and intelligence to beat and outwit the villain rather than a hero who comes in with rationality. Myths and films have also proven that we prefer a hero who is self-reliant and doesn’t need to depend on the support of others. And that’s my biggest reason for why American Sniper developed the better hero than Selma.

In Selma, we see King rely on just about everyone in his team. Every time he is not in a public forum, we see King turning to his friends for support and guidance. This is completely understandable when you think about this realistically. He is fighting against the tide. He is fighting for the basic rights of his fellow blacks and the risk is death. He is going through marital troubles. King is stressed. But we can’t, as an audience, root for him if every time he feels the pressure he turns to someone else for words of wisdom. Kyle, on the other hand, doesn’t turn to anyone and internalizes all the trauma in American Sniper, proving that he’s a hero because he don’t rely on no one.

Now, I completely disagree with this model of heroism. Turning to others when you are in need is pretty much proven to be the right way to deal with your problems. From regular daily stress to the traumas of war, telling our stories is a healthy way of processing our experiences. Unfortunately, our culture does not value this. We want the hero who could do things on his own and tolerates his teammates. In American Sniper, we actually get a scene where Chris Kyle single handedly shows the Marines how to search a home, finds a lead, and negotiates a deal with a local informer. In Selma, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. is demonstrably utilizing his team to organize his march. You know who else depends on the support of a team? Underdogs. Sports movies. Kids movies. Old people who get a second shot at life. The person who learns to not be selfish. You get Bad News Bears, not a hero.

Another, more technical problem with the supporting cast of Selma is that we get so many supporting characters with no real introduction. But they are played by big name actors (Oprah Winfrey, Common, André Holland)  and have big roles in the film. Turns out these are real people who get on screen epilogues which completely belie their continued contributions to the civil rights movement. For an educational compilation of the real-life counterparts to the side characters we saw in Selma, and their activities after the Selma to Montgomery marches, check this out. Again, a lot of cool and impacting people to whom we don’t get much, if any, introduction. That’s a shame.

Meanwhile, over in American Sniper, we get smaller, interchangeable supporting characters, none of whom get a proper introduction either. The thing is, these characters are all interchangeable. Sure, the former seminary student SEAL functions as the trigger for moral ambiguity for Kyle. Ultimately, though, these soldiers are irrelevant and we could have had the same film with Chris Kyle doing the entire invasion of Iraq by himself.

• 

• 

• 

In conclusion, Selma had a lot of industry and culture problems keeping it from even being on the same level as American Sniper. Both films were trying to create tributes to these two men. Unfortunately, Selma didn’t use the tools of narrative to its advantage. I am positive Chris Kyle relied on his team much more than American Sniper showed. He was a Navy SEAL, after all. The armed forces are all about camaraderie. But the film didn’t showcase that (maybe a reason why it performed so much better than last year’s Lone Survivor). While I rationally identify and prefer the message Selma was conveying, American Sniper left me feeling more like I had seen a historical hero. Thank goodness we as a culture are becoming more aware of the historical contributions and extraordinary work of our black, pacifist heroes.

As for what I’ve been watching lately, this past week has been full of fun movies, like Seventh Son and Force Majeure. The latter was definitely better than the former, but I still enjoyed watching them both. I love films that show real conversations between couples that I know I’ve had before.  Force Majeure blew me away with that. It was such a great study of gender roles and expectations. Seventh Son was just a fun, fantasy movie. Fluffy, predictable, and unsurprising – just the way I like ’em.

That’s it for me today. Let me know which film you think did the better job on building up a hero; Selma or American Sniper. See you next time!