7. Solid, inoffensive, gets the job done.
7. Solid, inoffensive, gets the job done.
9.
Alongside SLP as my favourite of the Oscar season.
"It's better to over analyse than not analyse at all." NM. 2000.
I'd give it a 6. It's a sleek and mildly entertaining film, but it made me feel and think nothing. Nowhere near the best film of the year.
A weak 7. It'd be a shame for this to win Best Picture this year, especially when, like, seven of the other nominees are much, much better films. It's still a riveting, engaging thriller, but it's a matinee entertainment movie.
The opening was very effective. As a thriller, the whole thing works quite well, if the Hollywood angle feels stretched. I was fairly concerned at the rah rah America overtones even if I do think the film makers at least attempted a balance. It's easy to see why the will win Best Picture. It's entertaining. Ben Affleck is becoming a capable director. Go movies! Go America! Etc.
MARCH 2013 PLAYLIST
Yeah, Oscar, I know. Like these people had Academy Award nominations in third grade.
The film is well made and acted, but it somehow already feels dated to me, if that makes any sense. It's like this movie should have won BP in the 70's--everything about it is so completely conventional. The Iranians are evil, the Americans are good, and the whole thing goes down like ice cream on the 4th of July.
Man locals will hate on this even more (pointlessly) if indeed ARGO does win.
Movies recently reviewed by RRA:
Star Trek (2009)
Pain & Gain (2013)
Oblivion (2013)
Jurassic Park III (2001)
The Lost World: Jurassic Park (1997)
Although Argo was initially greeted on AD with a generally positive reception, iirc, it seems like vocal condemnation of the film as mediocre/bad has become the socially acceptable response, as it continues to sweep all of the Best Picture precursor awards.
I, for one, still think it's a generally good movie (7-8 out of 10?). It's formulaic, but entertaining, IMO, and a bit undeserving of the vitriol that some are spewing at it.
In contrast, I cared for The Artist much, much less.
I'd consider myself more often than not a defender of Picture frontrunners that get picked on around here - I was especially vocal about Slumdog not being Satan in Celluloid Form like many seemed to think it was, and will continue to defend The Artist - but even though it's a very solid film, something about Argo being such a universally loved frontrunner really annoys me. I said this a month ago in the criticism thread for it, but it's basically a dude's version of The Help - a modestly-budgeted, middle-of-the-road historical Hollywood film whose #1 priority is crowd-pleasing, a task it does very well...but there's not much else there of actual substance despite a heavy subject. The Help got its fair share of awards, but because Argo comes from a far more prestigious genre (Chick flick vs. ESPIONAGE THRILLER) and has a vaguely well-respected Hollywood star at the helm...Awards galore! I kinda want to write a lot more about this, but it feels like a big old Hollywood love-in with the love for this movie, something that hasn't really happened since Crash.
"I shall immediately after I'm done watching Homeland." - DirkDiggler on his voting priorities
If it wins Best Picture, it falls in the 'okay/good but forgettable' group for me, with Slumdog Millionaire and Gladiator, I guess, but if it stays memorable in any way, it's cause of the lack of a directing nod. The campaign should make an effecive narrative out of this, but the buzz is on right now, and the voting's yet to begin. If it wins BAFTA, it's over, unless Spielberg takes DGA or something.
I know I've got a big ego, I really don't know why it's such a big deal, though.
I liked it when I first saw it, I watched it again this weekend and still like it quite a bit. It's a movie movie, if that makes any sense. It's very easy, unchallenging, uses all possible classic movie tropes, alters history for cinematic purposes and is completely formulaic (as you say) but is virtually impossible to dislike.
I feel exactly the same about this as I did when I first saw it. This is safe, simple, overly conventional entertainment with a good beginning, a bad ending, and a mediocre middle. I don't hate anything but the tidiness of that third act and I think Affleck has a fine career ahead of him as an easily accessible director. I'm just no more excited by this movie than I am angered by it. If things go according to plan from here on out, Argo will be another lame Best Picture winner, but we should all be used to those by now.
You disagree with lots of people? Gee what a tragedy.
Of course then again I piss on the notion that BP winners must "say something" important and substantive. Nobody ever bought LPs of ABBEY ROAD and THRILLER and then threw them in the trash because they didn't say anything meaningful.Why we can't do for some movies like we do for music, I'll never understand. There is nothing wrong with great entertainments winning the Oscar. I mean how many ADers picked SILENCE OF THE LAMBS in my top 10 BP winners list thread?
No ARGO isn't as good or well-made as SOTL. But I guess I just can't get worked up or upset about ARGO winning.
Movies recently reviewed by RRA:
Star Trek (2009)
Pain & Gain (2013)
Oblivion (2013)
Jurassic Park III (2001)
The Lost World: Jurassic Park (1997)
LOL, and you dare accusing me of anything Les miz-related? Is there a single anti-Argo post that goes un-replied by you? Is there a great work of art, from Casablanca to Abbey Road or the Taj Mahal, left for you to strangely and baselessly compare Argo to it?