Review – Argo

It’s frankly remarkable Argo has taken this long to reach the big screen – a film with a you-just-couldn’t-make-it-up storyline in which Hollywood comes out smelling of roses.

More than 50 Americans were held hostage for 444 days after Islamist protestors and militants stormed the US embassy in Tehran, Iran, in 1979.

Argo is the kind of superior political thriller that all-too-rarely gets made these days

The story of their long ordeal has been well documented. What isn’t as well-known is the plight of six Americans who made it out of the country as a result of an extraordinary CIA plot led by operative Tony Mendez in which an elaborate cover story was hatched to pass the group off as a Canadian film crew scouting locations for a sci-fi movie called Argo.

It wasn’t until 1997 when President Bill Clinton declassified the CIA files that the story officially came to light and only now do we have the movie ‘based’ on Mendez’s historical account courtesy of actor/director Ben Affleck.

Much like Steven Spielberg’s Munich (2005), Argo adopts the look and feel of such classic 1970s nail-biters as Dog Day Afternoon (1975) and The Taking of Pelham 123 (1974), right down to the old Warner Bros logo at the front end of the movie and the use of old film stock to provide a suitably grainy look. Affleck also mixes things up with fast zooms, long lens shots and close-ups to crank up the tension.

The use of handheld cameras during the scenes in Iran give the action a confused, panicked quality that is effectively handled and works as a parallel to the comical exchanges between Mendez (Affleck), make-up artist and CIA contact John Chambers (John Goodman) and veteran producer Lester Siegel (Alan Arkin) as they work against the clock to put flesh on Argo‘s bones.

This is most powerfully demonstrated during the scene when a speech given by a spokeswoman for the militants outlining to the world’s media their political position is intercut with a script reading of Argo featuring actors in ridiculous costumes.

CIA agent hatches a so-crazy-it=might-just-work scheme to save a group of Americans in Ben Affleck's Argo

CIA agent Tony Mendez endeavours to save a group of Americans in Ben Affleck’s Argo

In lesser hands you would have heard someone dramatically declare “it’s crazy, but it might … just … work”. However, Affleck has matured as a director since his admirable 2007 debut Gone Baby Gone and shown he can helm claustrophobic action in his follow-up The Town (2010).

Affleck makes emphatically clear the life or death stakes facing the group and the paranoia and queasiness that fear can exert. You get a very real sense that one false step by any of them will mean the game’s up for all.

That being said, the wheels begin to fall off somewhat in the film’s final third. Lest we forget, this is a Hollywood picture, and as the embassy staff and Mendez make their tortuous way through Tehran Airport it’s difficult not to feel like you’re being deceived just as much as the security guards.

"It's so crazy it might just work". CIA agent Tony Mendez (Ben Affleck) teams up with Hollywood producer Lester Siegel (Alan Arkin) and make-up artist John Chambers (John Goodman)

“It’s so crazy it might just work”. CIA agent Tony Mendez (Ben Affleck) teams up with Hollywood producer Lester Siegel (Alan Arkin) and make-up artist John Chambers (John Goodman)

That’s not to say Affleck doesn’t handle the group’s final escape well – it’s a masterful, pulse-quickening action sequence that pushes all the right buttons. But the contrivances of the plot (plane tickets being confirmed with seconds to spare and other moments I won’t spoil) are hard to swallow (in fact they’re plain inaccurate) and bring to mind the over-the-top denouement to the otherwise enjoyable The Last King of Scotland (2006).

With Iran having rarely been out of the news for the past few years, Argo‘s politics are inevitably going to be put under the spotlight. Affleck doesn’t let himself down here. While we’re under no illusion who the heroes of this tale are, from the opening sequence (filmed as a movie storyboard) where we get a short history lesson on the brutality of the Shah’s rule and the subsequent revolution that saw the birth of an Islamic republic, we are asked to  understand the anger of the Iranian people and why the embassy was stormed. This is no Black Hawk Down (2001) with an implacable, faceless and one-dimensional enemy.

While Affleck won’t win any prizes for historical accuracy (what Hollywood film does?), Argo nevertheless stands on its feet as the kind of superior political thriller that all-too-rarely gets made in Tinseltown these days.


  1. The Northern Plights · November 4, 2012

    I am actually considering paying too much to see this at the cinematographyflicks. Can I just clarify your Black Hawk Down reference? Are you suggesting it was an oversight of the film makers to make the ‘enemy’ faceless and one dimensional, or rather it was intentional to demonstrate our ignorance of who we were actually fighting?

    you know me, I’ll always stand up and defend ‘the Hawk’!

    • threerowsback · November 4, 2012

      I’m sure Ridley Scott would argue that his intention corresponded with your latter point; however, I’ll stick my neck out and say that showing the conflict from the Somali’s perspective wasn’t top of the agenda. BHD is the one of the ultimate boy’s own, fuck-yeah movies – there ain’t no shades of grey, there’s black and there’s white. Literally. Incidentally, you *know* I love that film!

  2. Natalie Stendall · November 20, 2012

    Excellent write up! I especially liked how this film didn’t seem to pass judgements on anyone. An intelligent and exciting movie that’s worthy of some awards.

    • threerowsback · November 21, 2012

      Thanks very much Natalie! Great blog by the way; will certainly be following what you have to say about the world of film.

  3. Joy · January 5, 2013

    The tension for me during the final third somewhat made up for what you very accurately sum up as a far-fetched airport set-up so I feel it can be overlooked once you’re immersed in it.
    I still don’t really ‘get’ Affleck; there is just something about him that grates but prejudices aside, he has done an immensely effective job of balancing taut political narrative with what could be described as a doffed hat to the Hollywood of yesteryear. Adkins and Goodman seem at times to be in a different film, such is the contrast between the two ‘subjects’ and you get the sense that they had a a lot of fun characterising and portraying out-there Hollywood heavyweights.

    • Three Rows Back · January 5, 2013

      Nice summation Joy! Affleck is the kind of director Hollywood loves – a serious, old-fashioned film-maker who’s intelligent but not preachy. I thought the two halves fused together quite well; the scenes with Goodman and Arkin were symbolic of the kind of popcorn entertainment that Tinsel town revels in. I welcome more of your thoughts on this and other films I’ve reviewed; feel free to ‘follow’ me!


Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s