Argo

Had this movie been made twenty years from now, when facts become distorted, the people who followed the details are either dead or indifferent, and the whole thing is pretty much ancient history, this would be a great story. Just like "The Charge of the Light Brigade" is a fun movie, even if it is about ninety percent inaccurate. This is because the producers would like you to believe all of the near misses, the interventions, and so on were truly what happened. There are enough people on the internet who will happily discount them, using good evidence to do so. Now, this leads us to an interesting pass. Can we accept any historical movie as being well done when those making it didn't have the wherewithal to see the events. LIke historical fiction, as soon as we quote dialogue, we are on untrustworthy waters. However, this would dismiss many great movies. I'm afraid this one is still too fresh in our consciousness. I'm wondering if someone in 2045 will see this and comfortably absorb the "facts" as presented. Divorcing myself from reality, I can see this as a great yarn. Like "The Killing Fields" or other historical dramas where people face their mortality at every juncture, can we enjoy the very intense situations that our people have been thrown into. This is a very individual thing. I enjoyed this movie for the most part because I found the characters engaging, the "enemy" human and righteous (considering our connection to the Shah), and the situation terrifying. I expect this will get a lot of attention at awards time. I saw Jimmy Carter at Obama's second inauguration the other day. This movie must not be a pleasant experience for him because he was vilified because of his performance. Reagan was able to pick up the pieces because the Iranians had already humiliated Carter, which was part of their agenda. Watch with a grain of salt and realize this is not a documentary.