Slightly better than Zero Dark Thirty... but still a weak film

Rating: 6/10 (1 December 2013)

Argo is alongside Zero Dark Thirty the most undeserving and weakest films in the Oscars, and is not hard to understand why. As i already made a review about the horrible Zero Dark, i will make a review about this one now, explaining how it also was a fail film.
Argo is a generic film when it comes to the cinematography subject, subject that i highly appreciate and definitely adds a lot of meanings and expands the limits of any film. If well utilized, of course. So, -1 point. The soundtrack is barely noticeable, but i guess that this kind of film has no business in that aspect anyways.
The plot is pretty average. The dialogs are ridiculous sometimes, no offenses. A quick and effective example would be the analogy made by Affleck's character in the reunion table, near the beginning of the film, comparing his mission with an abortion. That was proud of universal sorriness. Definitely ridiculous_ again, no offenses_.
Some events are ridiculously dramatized as well. In that aspect, it is very similar to his fellow film about CIA in the year, because both of them depicts the agents doing seriously anti- professionalism actions which threatened lives of people. That is something that wont happen in real life. No way a so carefully managed corporation as CIA would allow his employees to act in such a passionate way. A example would be Brian Cranston and Affleck's characters, who contributed to the rescue of the refugees simply by doing stupid emotional decisions. That is ridiculous.
Also, the constant TV news popping out and fading almost every time were super annoying. It looked like the film was trying constantly to remind us how it was based in true Informations and how it has historical receipts. That was pretty stupid, and prejudiced the film.
I do not recommend this film, it don't adds nothing that you can't found out for yourself in a fast research in wikipedia. 6.0/ 10