3/5
History has a way of
finding an audience through pop-culture.
The true story of Argo, wherein six American diplomats
were smuggled out of hostile Iran by the CIA disguised as a Canadian film crew,
was declassified seventeen years after it occurred, though I’m sure many
Americans even today aren’t aware of the operation’s existence. Actor-turned-director Ben Affleck has successfully
publicized the incident in the most extensive and enticing manner available to
him: He made a Hollywood movie about it.
The feature film, which
stars Affleck as the mastermind and operative behind the ruse, dramatizes these
bizarre historical facts with an uneven proportion of veneration and
fabrication, touches of levity, and a few incisive jabs at cinema’s inherent
fakery. The strongest section of
the film, when Affleck’s character goes to Burbank to do pre-production on a pretend
sci-fi yarn called Argo, is, witting to the director or not, a pointed
examination of how Hollywood turns history into artifice, into consumer escapism.
By the end, however,
Affleck diverts from such candor, and recreates the final steps of the rescue
with the nervous intensity, yet also the precise narrative tricks and empty gestures
of the blockbusters he’s supposedly deriding. It’s tempting to give Affleck too much credit, and posit
that the finale’s machinations further his thematic critique, showing a
progression from realism to sensationalism. However, I can hardly bring myself to grant amnesty to the
man who blighted the world with Gigli
and Reindeer Games. I’m half kidding, of course.
Argo
opens with the attack on the American Embassy in the Iranian capital on
November 4, 1979. The context of
that fateful day is cleverly setup in a prologue using storyboards and
photographs. As the inhabitants of
the building watch solicitously through the windows of their stronghold, an
ocean of protestors roar outside the gates before scaling the fortress
walls. The trapped employees act
pragmatically, burning and shredding important documents, calling for extra
security, though none arrives.
Before long, the mob have taken the Americans hostage, blindfolded them,
and turned their sanctuary into their prison. Affleck stages the reenactment scrupulously and artfully,
using nary a note of musical accompaniment, as he allows the terrifying
immediacy of the situation to speak for itself.
Back home, Americans are
livid. The film utilizes archival
footage of spontaneous assaults on Iranians to illustrate the vengeful backlash
the crisis engendered in the American people, evoking memories of more recent
anti-Arab sentiment. Fortunately,
six diplomats managed to escape the embassy during the coup and have found
solace at the home of Canadian Ambassador Ken Taylor (Victor Garber). The Iranian rebels, employing children
in the painstaking task of reassembling the shredded files, will soon discover
that six Americans have evaded capture and are hiding out in Tehran.
Enter Tony Mendez
(Affleck), a CIA specialist in “exfiltration”—the art of organizing escapes
from enemy territory. In the lead,
Affleck goes for affected understatement, but comes off flat, unreadable, and
mirthless, his defining characteristics being his beard and shaggy do. Plus, there’s a perfunctory subplot
about Mendez’ troubled home life, involving spousal upheaval and a child he
only speaks to over the telephone.
The film labors to make the family drama an essential part of its meager
characterization only to highlight its lack of depth and pertinence.
The aside does serve one important
purpose: A call home to his son and a disunited viewing of Planet Of The Apes inspires Mendez’ outlandish stratagem. He proposes that the CIA fund a fake
movie that would require shooting locations ideal for Iran’s terrain and
climate. Next, they’ll receive
phony Canadian passports and identities for the stranded diplomats, assign each
a position in the crew, and then Mendez, as “producer”, will fly them all out of
Iran himself. It’s a gamble, but
in a CIA pitch session where the only other suggestion is escape on bicycles,
Mendez delivers the “best bad idea” in the room—one that just might be crazy
enough to work. For legitimacy, they’ll
need a script, storyboards, shot lists, and advertising.
With the services of
producer Lester Siegel (Alan Arkin) and Oscar winning effects artist John
Chambers (John Goodman), Argo emerges as a fake movie with very real
consequences. The two showbiz vets,
on top of lending the film some invaluable moments of trenchant humor, best
epitomize Hollywood as a Mecca of deceit, and the movie observantly intimates
that only there, in a dreamland of surface razzle-dazzle, could such a huge lie
really be brought off with enough conviction to fool anybody. Transforming actors into preposterous
creations, Chambers trades in deception, and Siegel, his corporate counterpart,
is head to leagues of charlatans and sharks.
It’s revealing that Affleck
truncates the subject matter’s satirical potential in favor of a pulse pounding—and
far less resonant—final act. Mendez
travels east to rendezvous with the clandestine fugitives (Rory Cochrane, Scoot
McNairy, Kerry Bishe, Tate Donovan, Clea Duvall, and Christopher Denham), and
the movie marches on as straightforwardly as any genre potboiler. The conclusion is foregone, surely, but
with every turn of the screw, the director’s studied workmanship increases in
transparency (a vital phone call is answered at the last possible moment; the
Iranian rebels are either supernaturally perceptive or risibly dimwitted and disorganized,
depending entirely on how it will serve Affleck’s suspense schema).
In his auspicious debut, Gone Baby Gone, Affleck showed signs of Scorsese’s streetwise grit and Eastwood’s moral opacity. Argo is thrilling but squandered, an historical recreation that promises cinematic self-reflexivity, but climaxes with the calculated gratification of a Ron Howard crowd-pleaser instead. The director's worthwhile treatise on Hollywood’s garnishing of reality becomes his own final exam in the methods of that very same commercialized illusionism. The film ends with shots of movie merchandise: Do they reflect on our own consumption of synthetic historiography, or do they advertise Argo action figures? In Stores Now.
The film labors to make the family drama an essential part of its meager characterization only to highlight its lack of depth and pertinence.
ReplyDeleteIt’s revealing that Affleck truncates the subject matter’s satirical potential in favor of a pulse pounding—and far less resonant—final act.
Agree very much on the above two points. Superb review. You write very well. But I think you are a bit too harsh on this. Have a look at my review and let me know what you think.
Thanks so much for reading. I'm glad we agree on some points. And I really appreciate your compliments. I've gone back and forth about whether to bump this movie up to a 3.5. It really is a movie that lots of people are going to like. I did, to a degree. Like I said, I thought the family aspect was tacked on. (We don't even meet the wife until the last minute, and she has no lines, hardly a reconciliation). And the end, though exciting, felt too put together, too contrived, like Affleck had studied cheap ways to generate suspense (like the old last-second phone pickup). But overall, I did like the movie. And I recommend it to people when they ask, cause it's kind of the one to see in theaters at the moment. Thanks again.
ReplyDelete