Expertly Crafted, Standard Espionage Thriller

Rating: 8/10 (10 March 2013)

Why you shouldn't see it:
The strength of Argo also happens to be its weakness. More so than a lot of modern Hollywood fare, this is a film about its story, and that story is about people in a not envious situation. It has been branded as a "thriller," but despite a riot at the beginning and some brief "action" at the end, the majority of this movie's "thrills" and plot advancement are presented in the form of dialog and tense expressions. Accordingly, if you aren't one to care about the story of a hostage crisis in the early 80's, you probably won't care about this movie, since there isn't much in the way of real exciting set pieces or even off-color moments to take your mind off of the tension of it all.
As I'm sure you're aware, Argo is based on true events. I can't speak for everyone, but movies that are supposed to have any relation to true events can make me uncomfortable. Did you know that Texas Chainsaw Massacre and Silence of the Lambs were both "inspired by" the same events? I'm a big fan of getting things right if you're going to try to tackle actual history, or you may as well just make up your own story and let it succeed (Silence of the Lambs) or fail (Texas Chainsaw Massacre) on its own merits. I can't speak for the veracity of any of these true events, since they're based on a top secret operation that no one even knew about until 20 years after it happened. Even now most people just remember the events surrounding this movie and not the events of the movie itself. That can be a smart move by a filmmaker, as it means you can tell the story how you think it needs to be told. On the other hand, it can be a risk, because you're telling a story about which no one necessarily cares.
Why you should see it:
Ben Affleck. I know what you're thinking. You're thinking, "Blake, I've seen Ben Affleck, and I've seen enough Ben Affleck." Well you're kind of missing the point. Honestly, he does a fine job acting in Argo, though I wouldn't say his work is anything special. But did you know that Affleck also directs movies? He has only directed two movies (Gone Baby Gone and The Town) previous to this one, but I wouldn't rate either of them below "very good," and this one follows in their quality footsteps.
I just finished saying that Argo is about very little other than its story about people talking about a stressful situation. To further complicate the task for the filmmaker, everyone already knows how the story ends. And yet, despite these handicaps, Affleck somehow makes a suspenseful movie! There was a woman next to me in the theater, saying things aloud to the screen, along the lines of, "No, don't go through that door!" It's hard to explain how exactly this suspense is pulled off, but I think it has mostly to do with skilled actors playing identifiable characters in intimate settings. When the embassy gets stormed, you feel like you're about to get blindfolded and gagged by the mob yourself. When Affleck's Mendes is talking to Cranston's O'Donnell about how six Americans are about to get lynched for no good reason (depending on your viewpoint, I guess), you feel like you're standing right there next to them.
Speaking of Affleck and Cranston, it's possible I didn't give enough credit to the former earlier. The role of Mendes as a character is to be the steadying force for the rest of the characters and story, and he performs that role admirably. Because Affleck is able to pull this off, the character actors like Cranston, Goodman, and Arkin are able to present their own characters as the film's much needed engaging changes of pace. That being said, the highlights of the movie as far as entertainment factor goes are definitely those very same character actors. Their interplay with each other and Affleck is always worthy of screen time, and I spent a good deal of the movie waiting for the next time one of them would pop up.
In Short:
As you may remember me saying before, this movie isn't about anything more than a fairly straightforward story, so you're left at the end of it wondering in part what the point was. But I will say that the ability of the filmmakers to take a story that everyone knows the ending to and turn it into a suspense thriller is, well, impressive. Honestly, Ben Affleck as a capable storyteller doesn't come as a surprise, as he has a - admittedly limited - pedigree of making quality films. To make this particular quality film, he successfully turns an otherwise straightforward story into one of entertaining and empathetic characters in a surprisingly suspenseful situation. As far as talking movies go, I rate this one as an 8 out of 10, and I recommend it for anyone who can appreciate a good historical suspense/thriller/drama.
Exceptions to the recommendation: if you have had too much Ben Affleck; if you positively identify with revolutionary Iran; if you have incredibly sensitive ears; anyone for whom suspenseful situations lead to nothing more than stress and high blood pressure; individuals who would like to go on thinking that the "Canadian Caper" was, in fact, Canadian; if you prefer to keep Hollywood as far as possible away from your understanding of historical events; people who would like to remain blissfully unaware that Ben Affleck is a worthwhile Hollywood type when placed safely behind the camera.