With the 1970’s WB logo, Argo throws us into the seventies, already providing an image of violence and disconnect. The black and red logo like blood seeping through a black canvas preps us, all before we’re given a summary of the United States and Great Britain’s relations with Iran, their coup d’état of the Ayatollah Khomeini in 1959 in favor of their more preferred Shah Reza Pahlavi, his acts of terrorism against his own people, and the subsequent takeover of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran.
Dramatic irony holds the most sway over the narrative here. We’re aware that the hostages were held for 444 days, dispelling one character’s assertion that it would only last “24 hours.” We know Carter was unable to broker a deal, and we know how the situation turns out. In a sense, this makes Argo a beautifully shot, solidly written film.
First and foremost, Ben Affleck (who also stars at Tony Mendez, CIA operative assigned to get the six absconded Americans out of Iran) has proven that he is adept behind the camera – and, truth be told, he’s pretty solid in front of the camera here as well. He trades in his built, pretty boy image for a bearded, brooding, stranger. Argo, on the heels of The Town and Gone Baby Gone, gives Affleck an irrefutable three-for-three as well as a likely Oscar nomination, and better-than-average odds of winning.
Secondly, the screenplay works on our familiarity with history, creating comedy amidst tragedy, somehow balancing the farce of egotistical Hollywood writers, directors, and producers with the sincere tragedy of those six trying to flee the country. It sets us up to foresee an execution mercilessly performed by Iranians, only to leave us understanding why their intention is to instill fear, no take lives. This, much like last year’s A Separation, forces us to adjust our gaze on Iran in general. Argo does not defend the Iranians; nor does it condemn them. If nothing else, it shows the juxtaposition of our patriotic demagoguery fueled by media buzzwords “terrorists” and “hostages” with aspects of history that we revise through revisionism. After all, “if you want to sell a lie,” “get the press to sell it for you.”
At the same time that it displays this convolutedness of politics, Argo uses Hollywood – poking fun of it liberally, blatantly suggesting we could “teach a Rhesus monkey to be a director in a day” – to show how detached we are from global politics. The narratives that we scribble about imperialism, vast exotic wastelands filled with savagery, and heroes that fight for their independence and relevance mirror events across the globe, but are often transformed into Science-Fiction tales and fantastical stories that become safely removed from our scope of reality. In transition, they are lost, and we feign ignorance to the absence. The subject matter of Argo, the film on which this ruse to rescue the absconded six is based, is an allegory for the freedom fighters rebelling in Iran. It looks at the oppressive hand of the imperialist and the misinformation disseminated from them.
It is lost on the producers, actors, and directors as they capriciously agree to imaginary deals that will never produce a movie.
What’s most impressive about Argo, the film now, is that it’s simple. Really, it’s about people travelling through security at an airport. And, then it’s about them getting on a plane. I’m not belittling the film here; rather, I’m lauding the suspense that it masterfully creates. The tension is palpable. The head games displayed are believable. As is the fear evoked by the six and the fervor of the Iranian guards.
Clearly, a film about revisionist history and perspective will most likely fall prey to its object of criticism, but Argo tries hard to play diplomat here. It gently handles the Iranian and American perspectives, focusing mostly on the plight of the six. It also manages to offer a redemptive look at America in 1979, suggesting that the most successful heroes go unnoticed and without applause. If Tony Mendez “wanted applause,” he “would have joined the circus.”
