This is not the first movie, that attempts to commemorate America's "National treasure"s , but perhaps the winner amongst losers for the most implausible and condemnable pontifications of American greatness.
The Plot ? Don't worry this is not a spoiler, in fact it's history.
In 1979, Iranian Revolutionary Militia ran over the US Embassy in Tehran, taking more than 50 hostages.
The hostages were to be freed in return, for extradition of the former Shah , a violent dictator and Saddam Hussain's brother from an american mother.
"the hostage-taking was seen (by America) as an outrage violating a centuries-old principle of international law granting diplomats immunity from arrest and diplomatic compounds' inviolability."
Jullian Assange may have cracked a smile.
Plot and history are as connected as marble rolling inside a matchbox.
The narration conveniently omits significant events in the timeline in order twist one of America's biggest international embarrassments into a story of triumph and righteousness.
While 50 hostages were kept at gunpoint, 6 US nationals manage to escape the scene only to be holed up inside the Canadian ambassadors residence.
So the plot my dear, is how a lone CIA agent manages to rescue these 6 people, against all odds, while simultaneously risking the lives of the remaining 50 hostages, and stealing from the noble nation of Canada the credit that they rightly deserved for their assistance during this crisis.
Argo is not a shabby movie, it's just winner's history. Luckily you can Wiki-search for another version of events. Julian Assange wouldn't mind the irony.
The actual story is touching. The characterization is strong, as are the screenplay & production values. If Argo was isolated from the of actual historical events it is based on, it might just make a compelling spy-flick.
But does it deserve a watch ? Ar-go-f#$#-yourself.
The Plot ? Don't worry this is not a spoiler, in fact it's history.
In 1979, Iranian Revolutionary Militia ran over the US Embassy in Tehran, taking more than 50 hostages.
The hostages were to be freed in return, for extradition of the former Shah , a violent dictator and Saddam Hussain's brother from an american mother.
"the hostage-taking was seen (by America) as an outrage violating a centuries-old principle of international law granting diplomats immunity from arrest and diplomatic compounds' inviolability."
Jullian Assange may have cracked a smile.
Plot and history are as connected as marble rolling inside a matchbox.
The narration conveniently omits significant events in the timeline in order twist one of America's biggest international embarrassments into a story of triumph and righteousness.
While 50 hostages were kept at gunpoint, 6 US nationals manage to escape the scene only to be holed up inside the Canadian ambassadors residence.
So the plot my dear, is how a lone CIA agent manages to rescue these 6 people, against all odds, while simultaneously risking the lives of the remaining 50 hostages, and stealing from the noble nation of Canada the credit that they rightly deserved for their assistance during this crisis.
Argo is not a shabby movie, it's just winner's history. Luckily you can Wiki-search for another version of events. Julian Assange wouldn't mind the irony.
The actual story is touching. The characterization is strong, as are the screenplay & production values. If Argo was isolated from the of actual historical events it is based on, it might just make a compelling spy-flick.
But does it deserve a watch ? Ar-go-f#$#-yourself.