Well, Monday Update and stuff. What? I can’t come up with witty things to say forever! Let’s talk about Argo.
Argo – Best Picture of 2012, you say? I think we may want to take a second look right there.
2012 always appeared a year where nothing of unbelievable artistry or narrative innovation came about; mostly, we got the same old thing we always get. Hey, that quirky offbeat and R-Rated romantic dramedy! Oh, is Quentin Tarantino offending us again? And Steven Spielberg joins in on the action? What about the film with the kid in the boat with a tiger? How about the weird childhood allegory or the foreign film about marriage? You may not have seen any of these films before, but they all fit into their respective categories as “interesting, but not exemplary”. To contrast, a silent black and white film won best picture last year, and probably deserved it (even though I haven’t seen The Artist, at least we were going for something different).
So the Academy, in their grand old white male wisdom, decided they would give their prestigious award to one of two political/terrorist related thrillers. Either Zero Dark Thirty’s brand of realistic procedural thriller of modern times would win, or a film about a related issue (again, Muslim terrorists of some kind) set in the past. One’s not going to press any buttons or favor the current administration, so Argo won by default.
This isn’t to demean Ben Affleck’s accomplishment! Argo’s a pretty good film, but I’m not sure it’s a Best Picture film. The man, originally portrayed as America’s next actor heartthrob became the Robert Redford of our time (except Redford isn’t dead yet). He makes films, stars in them, but unlike my aforementioned example, refuses to attach any real (or, at the very least, obvious) political message. Personally, I prefer a film with a subtle message or none at all to one that wishes to manipulate my feelings and emotions towards a certain point of view; I’d rather the events speak for themselves. A good director lets us insert ourselves into the experience and interpret what occurs on screen.
Still, when I watch a Affleck film (I hope I never need to say that phrase, because it sounds really pretentious and awkward), I never feel anything amazing actually occurred or I learned something new. Contrary to, say, Spielberg’s portrayal of Lincoln (Theology Gaming’s Best Picture of 2012 Given The Nominee List…or was it the Vampire Hunter one?), the issues here don’t lend themselves to complexities. Have you heard of Argo? It’s a fake movie used to smuggle six American embassay workers out of Iran during the 444 day hostage crisis. That’s the entire plot in a nutshell. Sure, there’s the occasional fun times, and the whole setting does a great job of ratcheting the tension, but let’s be honest – you know the ending before you go into the theater/slap it into your DVD player. That’s fine because the interest lies in what actually happened there, and the film does this really way. I especially appreciate that the film holds your interest solely through well-written dialogue, some great performances by everyone except Ben Affleck, and a rather convincing send-up of the late 1970s/early 1980s. Affleck doesn’t really transcends the film, nor does he need to do so – his character arc starts flat and ends flat in the most expected place. But, like any good team, you’ve got to have a straight man take the role of the protagonist or it won’t work. Argo certainly works well enough to entertain you.
Me? I’m a sucker for character actors and well-written dialogue, especially if it happens to take the place of senseless violence (also entertaining, but not when it just goes on forever). I don’t care about violence necessarily unless violence exists to prove a point – in this genre, anyway. Affleck, though, films each setting as if we’re watching a documentary. Surely parts of the film exist purely for the sake of drama, but it feels less like an exciting flick and more a police procedural. It’s quite dry and very aloof, and while the subject matter underneath still remains interesting throughout, it’s missing that extra something that makes a film timeless. I’m a closet Law and Order fan when there’s nothing else to watch, but even this felt too rout and too stubbornly fixated on a particular historical authenticity that seems to hamper the film’s better qualities.
Maybe it’s just my bias against Mr. Affleck. I’ve never seen him as an amazing director – competent’s more the word. When I watched The Town and its depiction of Southie, the Boston crime world and all that jazz, the concept sounds great. Jeremy Renner is great in it. Yet, as a whole, the film offers nothing we did not see in other similar films. I’m not lamenting the lack of common human themes (honestly, there’s about six-seven different plots with a million variations out there), but it’s all in the telling when you have a medium with visual and audio qualities. Yet, The Town felt as exciting as watching paint dry at times. And we’ve got such exciting settings and a great subject! Why must this go through the motions as if it were dedicated to genre tropes?
While Argo doesn’t particularly fall into a genre, neither does it portray a message either. It’s a historical documentary wrapped in film trappings. So I ask you: what makes it the best film of the year that I am not seeing? I’m sure there’s something there, considering my two point scale for film quality – entertaining or not entertaining – so please enlighten me if you can! Also, is it the worst thing in the world to say that a film’s solid, merely average, rather than amazing? Honestly, I’ve got no dog in this fight; as far as Best Picture nominees go, I’d pick exactly zero of them. My vote goes toward the Hobbit, but no one expects objectivity from me when it comes to my love of the LoTR film trilogy (and now a second trilogy). So what exactly did I miss here?
———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————–
So me talking about movies like I know something. Wonderful, right? More PAX stuff, somehow, this week!
