Ben Affleck on the set of 'Argo.' The film is nominated for Best Picture in the Academy Awards.
WARNER BROS./KEITH BERNSTEIN Enlarge
LOS ANGELES — Some years, Academy Awards voters just want to feel right about themselves, their industry, their country. And maybe honor one of their own who hasn’t always shared in the love of his peers.
That could explain why Ben Affleck’s Argo has gone from best-picture longshot to Oscar favorite over such competitors as Steven Spielberg’s stately but talky Civil War portrait Lincoln or Kathryn Bigelow’s brilliant yet contentious CIA thriller Zero Dark Thirty.
Argo is a feel-good thrill ride that’s patriotic enough to warrant a good “USA! USA!” chant as the credits roll. It’s all about how Hollywood helped save some lives. And a best-picture win could be viewed as righting a wrong after Affleck inexplicably missed out on a best-director nomination.
“There’s a surge to embrace Ben Affleck in the aftermath of his Oscar snub. It seems like such an outrage that his film is benefiting from it as a result,” said Tom O’Neil, who runs the awards Web site GoldDerby.com. “It really is a pro- Argo movement more than it is a kind of shrug off of Lincoln or a disparagement of Zero Dark Thirty. Hollywood is rallying around one of their wounded own.”
Argo is one of three true-life best-picture nominees steeped in different eras of U.S. history. Spielberg’s Lincoln, which leads the Oscars with 12 nominations and looked like the front-runner until Argo began winning top honors at other awards shows, is a towering study of Abraham Lincoln as he maneuvers to end the war and pass the 13th Amendment abolishing slavery. Argo tells of a little-known victory amid an otherwise enervating chapter in American foreign affairs during the Iran hostage crisis. Bigelow’s Zero Dark Thirty is a dark story of this last dark decade as the CIA builds leads that result in the Navy SEALs raid that killed Osama bin Laden.
In their way, all three are stories of American triumph, but told with wildly divergent tones. Lincoln is a saga of hope amid national tragedy, meticulously researched but a little emotionally remote because of its attention to Washington deal-making, 1860s-style. Zero Dark Thirty is a bleak tale of uncertain patriotism, also meticulously researched but at times more than a little emotionally repugnant because of the questionable means it depicts in a righteous cause.
Argo is the one that turns triumph into an end-zone dance. Affleck has taken knocks in the past over his acting, but in only his third film as director, he shows complete mastery of populist movie-making. He gives viewers great drama, great laughs, agonizing tension, and an exultant finale, all while playing loose with the facts in a way audiences can forgive in the name of a terrific piece of entertainment.
Much like the story Affleck tells. As Iranian militants stormed the U.S. embassy, where they held 52 people hostage for 444 days, six Americans escaped and took refuge with Canadian diplomats. CIA rescue specialist Tony Mendez, played by Affleck, organized a daring plot to get them out disguised as crew members of a fake sci-fi movie scouting locations in Iran.
Their unlikely escape by an outrageous scheme is a ray-of-sunshine footnote in the hostage story, a side story obscure enough that filmmakers could tweak it for all its worth in a way that would never work with such well-known narratives as Lincoln’s final days or the bin Laden raid.
That white-knuckle takeoff at the Tehran airport, with Iranian assault teams racing behind the jet down the runway? Never happened. In Mendez’s book Argo: How the CIA and Hollywood Pulled Off the Most Audacious Rescue in History, the six Americans’ passage through the Tehran airport and onto the plane was uneventful. The takeoff and two-hour flight out of Iranian airspace is told in just four sentences.
Much like the escape, Argo is Hollywood audacity at its best, taking the gist of a true story and dressing it up into a fun night out.
Meantime, the makers of Lincoln and Zero Dark Thirty may have tried to be too genuine. Based partly on historian Doris Kearns Goodwin’s Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln, Spielberg’s film is enormously entertaining yet professorial at times. Based on Bigelow and screenwriter Mark Boal’s painstaking research, Zero Dark Thirty has prompted a savage debate over its depictions of interrogations, with critics saying the film misleads viewers for suggesting that torture provided information that helped the CIA find bin Laden.
Lincoln gets a little dry in its history lesson, and Zero Dark Thirty gets a little ugly in its reflection of deeds done in our name. Or more simply, Lincoln hurts our heads, Zero Dark Thirty hurts our hearts.
While Argo is a big wet kiss, a crowd-pleaser that works at every level.
Some years, heavy, somber films win, like Bigelow’s The Hurt Locker over the sci-fi smash Avatar three years ago. And some years, Oscar voters want that big wet kiss. The great escape chronicled in Argo seems to be just the sort of escapism they’re looking for this season.
Guidelines: Please keep your comments smart and civil. Don't attack other readers personally, and keep your language decent. Comments that violate these standards, or our privacy statement or visitor's agreement, are subject to being removed and commenters are subject to being banned. To post comments, you must be a registered user on toledoblade.com. To find out more, please visit the FAQ.