'Argo' (2012)

[Thomas]

That's because it does not focus on international relations. It's a morality play disguised as a tight procedural. I find it hard to judge if its political connotations are minimal and unimportant, a lot of Americans sure seem to think otherwise. But it doesn;t seem like it set out to be very political.

I don't think Argo is terrible. I'll rate it over Django and probably on par with SLP.
It is not in Affleck's interest at all to discuss the politics. I can understand why a lot of people vastly hate that and judge it as lazy storytelling. To me, it seems as if Affleck is aware of what plays to his strengths. I think he would be out of his depths if we had had a script that focused on the domestic implications of the whole thing. The political implications are indeed unimportant for Affleck, who focuses on the human drama.
And I think the outcome is solid. This is not the best film of the year but the Oscar winner never is anyway.

I agree, I just think Tomo was aggrandizing ZD30 to put down Argo in ways ZD30 doesn’t really deserve, because it’s about as political as Argo.

Yeah, I was being a little bitch there.
ZD30 is about the politics and not only the kill.
Argo is about the kill and not the politics.
Make of that what you will. I think it is clear that Bigelow had a far more exhaustive and difficult task. But for someone who is not a film director (ouch), Affleck's output is not terrible.

[McTeague]

I disagree, I think both are just about the kill. As Au says, ZD30 simply has more implications, but that's natural given the subject, it's not a willing effort by the writer and director. It does have a more self-doubting tone, but that doesn't qualify as political comment, in the least. Which still doesn't matter bbecause ZD30 is the better film by far, but notr for being more political, because it is not, or not significantly.

[Aurelius]

Oh, I certainly don't think Argo would be a terrible Best Picture winner. It's solid, and solid films usually win over the exceptional ones. It probably falls somewhere in the middle of the nominated pack for me. I'd rate it higher than Pi, SLP, Les Mis and Beasts. So that actually puts it right in the middle .

[Aurelius]

I disagree, I think both are just about the kill. As Au says, ZD30 simply has more implications, but that's natural given the subject, it's not a willing effort by the writer and director. It does have a more self-doubting tone, but that doesn't qualify as political comment, in the least. Which still doesn't matter bbecause ZD30 is the better film by far, but notr for being more political, because it is not, or not significantly.

It is more political in the sense that it handles a much more hot button topic than Argo. The political backlash was to be expected. With Argo, who is going to backlash against the events shown? Argo is much more your typical good guys vs. bad guys. Of course we root for the Americans. That divide is a lot narrower in ZD30. Here the Americans do questionable things, sanctioned by the highest powers, no less.

[faina]

Canadians?

[Thomas]

I disagree, I think both are just about the kill. As Au says, ZD30 simply has more implications, but that's natural given the subject, it's not a willing effort by the writer and director. It does have a more self-doubting tone, but that doesn't qualify as political comment, in the least. Which still doesn't matter bbecause ZD30 is the better film by far, but notr for being more political, because it is not, or not significantly.

LOL, one would think that with the subject given Argo would also naturally be more political.
The fact that there is no controversy over Argo whatsoever despite some really questionable decisions regarding the presentation of Iranians etc. shows that the makers of ZD30 were more gutsy than the Argoians.

It is more political in the sense that it handles a much more hot button topic than Argo. The political backlash was to be expected. With Argo, who is going to backlash against the events shown? Argo is much more your typical good guys vs. bad guys. Of course we root for the Americans. That divide is a lot narrower in ZD30. Here the Americans do questionable things, sanctioned by the highest powers, no less.

Exactly. But it is not important at all. The important question is: Will we get them out in time?
This is as textbook as Avatar.

[Aurelius]

Canadians?

The people saved are Canadian, but those that come to the rescue are American.

[faina]

The people saved are Canadian, but those that come to the rescue are American.

You asked who is going to backlash. I said Canadians are.

[Aurelius]

You asked who is going to backlash. I said Canadians are.

Oh, I didn't get that . LOL, since when do Americans take notice of Canadians? I mean, we all ignore Sage.

[shooter_mcgavin]

Yeah hell no.

The Departed is a hyper-complex morality play, although it’s also entertaining as hell and people don’t pay attention to its many subtexts and layers of meaning, but it’s way, way deeper than Argo. And only in visual terms alone way out of Affleck’s reach.

The Departed did have a moral tale to play but even Scorsese himself admitted this was the first film he made that was built around a plot. I am taking away anything from The Departed or LOTR since they were my favorite winners during the last decade. Though I say Argo does have the certain qualities that, much like The Departed, stands out from the rest of it's genre. Argo is a thriller first before anything else but I say the film did a good job in creating contrasting environments between Hollywood, Iran at the time, and the CIA. And the film does show a certain amount of triviality of Hollywood and the entertainment industry especially when the other side of the world there are countries in the brink of implosion and American fearing for their lives. And for many people who weren't alive during the Iranian Hostage Crisis it also becomes a window to that part of our history and that deserves some form of respect, doesn't it?

[haqyunus]

The Departed did have a moral tale to play but even Scorsese himself admitted this was the first film he made that was built around a plot. I am taking away anything from The Departed or LOTR since they were my favorite winners during the last decade. Though I say Argo does have the certain qualities that, much like The Departed, stands out from the rest of it's genre. Argo is a thriller first before anything else but I say the film did a good job in creating contrasting environments between Hollywood, Iran at the time, and the CIA. And the film does show a certain amount of triviality of Hollywood and the entertainment industry especially when the other side of the world there are countries in the brink of implosion and American fearing for their lives. And for many people who weren't alive during the Iranian Hostage Crisis it also becomes a window to that part of our history and that deserves some form of respect, doesn't it?

As a thriller, it is textbook and nothing new at all.

As for being politically realistic and true reflection of the hostage crisis, Iranians or CIA, I don't think at all that is the case It is as Hollywood escapism as it comes (Starting from Bryan Cranston's 70s hairdo ) So for me there was nothing in this film other than good production values.

[faina]

Oh, I didn't get that . LOL, since when do Americans take notice of Canadians? I mean, we all ignore Sage.

[Artimus]

What does "political" mean? Because neither Argo nor ZDT is about politics (though both involve some—domestic and international).

[steve4922]

What does "political" mean? Because neither Argo nor ZDT is about politics (though both involve some—domestic and international).

Just the question I was about to ask before I scrolled down to the bottom of the thread and saw you already asked it. By "political" do people mean a film like "Z" or even "All the Presidents Men", which are generally about politics, but also have very clearly defined good guys and bad guys?

[Artimus]

Maybe they mean something like An Inconvenient Truth or Wall-E, which argue explicit political points.

[shooter_mcgavin]

As a thriller, it is textbook and nothing new at all.

As for being politically realistic and true reflection of the hostage crisis, Iranians or CIA, I don't think at all that is the case It is as Hollywood escapism as it comes (Starting from Bryan Cranston's 70s hairdo ) So for me there was nothing in this film other than good production values.

I say the approach is in between. It doesn't really delve in the political aspects (just enough to add that layer historical depth in the film) but neither does it cheapens it. Sure the airport scene's urgency is embellished but most films that dramatize real events do the same as well.

[Bean]

This was a profoundly 6.5/10 movie.

[CINNAMON]

This is a well made film that is ultimately forgettable.

[Josh_The Original]

This is a well made film that is ultimately forgettable.

This was pretty much my view... I really loved it when I saw it the first time, but I watched it again last night... and it really doesn't hold up well to a second viewing.

[affy18]

I saw this again because I missed the first 10 minutes the first time.

Yeah, the beginning is the best part, for sure. I wish the movie had kept that dynamism for the rest of its run. What remains is a solid and well-crafted but ultimately forgettable Hollywood entertainment. I actually felt more underwhelmed by it even if I recognize its strong points and competent filmmaking.

If this wins Best Picture, it'll be even more forgettable than The King's Speech and The Artist, which is utterly depressing. Please AMPAS, award something else.