skizzerflake

skizzerflake

Audioholic Field Marshall
This is such a tense movie. Even though I knew how it turned out in real history, I was on the proverbial edge of my seat the whole time. It's 1980, Iran Hostage Crisis time and 6 US embassy employees get out of the complex during the riots and take shelter in the Canadian embassy. The revolution is not honoring any of the niceties of diplomatic behavior, so these people are at greater risk than the hostages. The CIA is full of BS ideas on how to save them (e.g., let them ride 500 miles out of the county in winter on bikes) and knows it's really up sh*t creek since they have NO control over what is happening in Iran and nobody inside that they can trust.

Enter Tony Mendez, an "exfiltration" specialist. He conjures up a fake sci-fi movie project, to be filmed in Iran, and used as a cover to get the hiding people out. With costumes, stateside publicity about the fake movie and pure courage, he goes to Iran to save the people.

This movie is very tense, very satisfying in a righteous, patriotic sort of way and very well written and directed. Ben Affleck directs and stars. He's a deadpan character, not much of an acting challenge. Most of the rest of the cast (except for Bryan Cranston and the delightfully profane Alan Arkin) are no-name, but they are quite good at seeming NOT like actors.

The history isn't quite right in its details, but it's good enough to fit into a 2 hour movie. In light of all the bad publicity about CIA failures, this operation is a real high point. The film is tightly directed, completely on-target for the story it tells and really invests itself in an authentic period look, both for the Americans and the Iranian revolutionaries.

If you're in the mood for a heart palpitating political drama, with just the right amount of black-comic relief, this is the movie for you. I really liked it.
 
Last edited:
skizzerflake

skizzerflake

Audioholic Field Marshall
Being a fan of both movies and history puts one in a strange position. Whenever I see a historical movie I know that when it says "based on true events" I know that either it might be a good movie that stretches, embellishes, re-writes, condenses or completely confuses history or that it might be a historically accurate movie that audiences find boring, or, even worse, it might be both. Argo fell on the side of the line that made a good movie and didn't do terrible damage to history.

Truth is (as I see it at least), as an amateur historian, I think that any movie that arouses interest in real history and doesn't completely re-write it, is at least OK. Truth also is, that most people's knowledge of history is so bad that you get to the point where you want to say something like, "that's as much as you probably will ever need to know", like that Lincoln "freed the slaves", which is way better than that Lincoln hunted vampires. The one sentence summary of Argo, that a CIA exfiltration specialist got 6 terrified Americans out of revolutionary Iran, is probably as good as that Lincoln freed the slaves for movie purposes.
 

Latest posts

newsletter

  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top