Fact or fiction? 'Argo' fuels debate over 1979 hostage crisis


The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© 2013 AFP

©2020 GPlusMedia Inc.

Login to comment

Let's just say that Hollywood has a tendency to embellish and play up things that might or might not have happened, while the main story is faithful to the facts. On the other hand, you can assume that the Iranian government will dictate that the story and facts are completely changed to suit their agenda.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

That's Hollywood in a nutshell: one big lie.No one should ever think anything that comes out of there true.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

There is a very false and unfair line in the movie regarding the British and New Zealand governments too. Affleck said it was meant to raise the intensity and demonstrate how isolated the US diplomats were. Affleck was probably snubbed by the Academy for Best Director due to his lack of effort to come out and explain how he had made a true story so fictional. This movie is loosely based on the true story at best, and I hope that people do not start believing that this movie is an accurate portrayal of the true story.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Taking the diplomats hostage was an act of war, and if Jimmy Carter had stood up to the Iranians with the threat of armed force then, the US (and rest of the region) wouldn't be having so much trouble now. And the movie would have had a very different ending, probably one with mushroom clouds over Teheran.

-2 ( +2 / -3 )

I'm annoyed that the Canadian connection which was vital to the escape of the US is downplayed while it's more important to wave the American flag. This is why Canadians cringe. Time and again Canadian events and battles and details are downplayed and forgotten at American whims.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

The best line in the movie was" Argo F____yourself. Thrilling, great entertainment and a must see movie .

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Hollywood always over-exaggerates the American side of any story involving the military... or even changing history to suit the market. (Enigma code machine anyone?) I'm just waiting for a film which shows that US pilots won the Battle of Britain in Mustangs, lol.

But back to this story, and was that the event which had the shots of two burnt-out US helicopters all over the news? I was only 15 at the time so don't really recall the details. I DO know it was the revolution which saw the Shah of Iran toppled and that mad Ayatollah taking power.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

But back to this story, and was that the event which had the shots of two burnt-out US helicopters all over the news? I was only 15 at the time so don't really recall the details. I DO know it was the revolution which saw the Shah of Iran toppled and that mad Ayatollah taking power.

Not the same event, but it was the same revolution. The U.S. sent in an extraction force to rescue the 50 American hostages still at the U.S. Embassy using helicopters and they had to set down in the middle of the Iranian "no where" to refuel while inbound. In the process of taking back off, one of the helicopters lost power and crashed into another still on the ground. An investigation determined the probable cause was the helicopters weren't equipped with sand filters on the engine intakes, and the rotor wash kicked-up enough sand to damage the engines - resulting in loss of power.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Hollywood and History have a "checkered" relationship. As writer/director John Sayles noted:

"If historical accuracy were the thing people went to the movies for, historians would be the vice presidents of studios. Every studio would have two or three historians." (Past Imperfect -History According To The Movies c1995, p22)

It is amusing to watch all of the "sound & fury" whipped up by Argo and Zero Dark Thirty and the concerns with their lack of historical accuracy, when many of these same people see no problem with the historical distortions in films like U-571, Gladiator, 300, Saving Private Ryan or even Henry V. In the last case the distortions began with Shakespeare himself.

Of course, one man's action film is another man's travesty. The Greeks took offense at the portrayal of Alexander in Oliver Stone's film Alexander, while the Iranians were incensed by the treatment of their ancient king in Zack Snyder's 300. That film was noteworthy for it's visual artistry but totally worthless as history.

As Darryl F Zanuck observed: "There is nothing duller on the screen than being accurate but not dramatic." (p238)

This is somewhat ironic given that Zanuck's own film, The Longest Day, is still the most accurate Hollywood feature film about that 20th Century event. (Spielberg's own Band Of Brothers was an excellent corrective to the fiction in his film Pvt. Ryan.)

Argo and Zero Dark Thirty are exciting films, but they are not history. Views should always be concerned when a film starts: Based On A True Story. Yes, it's all true .... except for the parts we changed.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

As for the other movies that an equivalence failure. The people are still alive to tell the truth. Perpetuating a lie while the real participants are still alive not only diminishes the respect that should be paid to these people but replaces their actions with American jingoism. That's just sad and is not defensible.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I don't get the fuss about.

Of course Americans will emphasize their role inteh rescue, it makes for more dramatic, more commercial film. The American audience wouldn´t like a movie about how the Canadians helped the rescue, it's all about "American Hero" and all that.

If a true story helps to make a praise about the Americans they will do it. If a Sci-fi story does that, they will use that too... The Hero in "i am legend" is an American, the Heroes in ID4 were the Americans (and they saved the world!!!!)... there are very few movies in which the Hero is not a American that are successful (for example "the Jackal", the hero was Irish if I remember well, in Schindler's List the hero was a German who belonged to the Nazi party) So... Why they worry about? it's because the young generations don't study history, but whose fault is that? are you let a movie to teach history to your kids? next we will think that "the Passion of Christ" is true history.... or that "troy" happened excatly as the movie...


1 ( +1 / -0 )

Spot on about how this generation takes fiction for fact via Hollywood movies! Westerns had me believing the American Indians were the bad guys,Charlie Chan was really Chinese & John Wayne won WW2 with his bare hands! Reading Really IS Fundamental!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites