I don't think the intention of the movie is to attack the Iranians and their image. The purpose of the movie is to make money so the producers might have exaggerated the conflict. This is a hollywood movie and not a documentary of the real event, so of course not all the details are included. I think Iran are being too sensitive about it, and all that will do is help bring more attention to the movie so more people will watch it.
I've seen Argo a few times now and the film definitely does not do the country of Iran any favours, as far as image goes. However I seriously doubt Ben Affleck's intentions were to attack Iran. The film definitely was more about the characters and the story, the dramatisation of Iranian people were simply used as a device to move the story forward. A film like this obviously doesn't come without controversy however. Even the actual Canadian ambassador during the crisis had spoken out, saying Ben Affleck had undermined Canada's role in the operation and didn't give Canada enough credit. The ambassador expected a thank you in Affleck's Academy Award speech -- which eventually was given, along with a thank you to Iran.
A movie is basically a story told in moving pictures, and it is arguably the most powerful way of presentation. Like all other stories, a protagonist was established, in this case, the Americans and the Canadians. With the establishment of a protagonist, an antagonist was formed, which would be the Iran. To make a story more heroic, so it would either inspire more people, or more likely, make money in its directed market. Hollywood, as well as all story tellers, favoured one side over than other, thus they would omit and dramatize the side they support, making them more heroic. In the case of “Argo” certain information was ignored, such as the attack on the Iranian plane that killed around 200 innocent civilians. In conclusion, Hollywood dramatized another film to glorify their courageous agents who risk their lives in an act of true patriotism.
I personally do not think the movie was made to attak Iran or purposefully tarnish it's image. I think that Ben Affleck simply wanted to show the heroic efforts that were made by all the people who rescued the hostages. Hollywood always dramatizes things, thats how movies sell. I think it is clever for Iran to respond with their own movie. There are always 2 sides to every story and it would be interesting to see the story from their perspective.
Hollywood has a reputation for making any country that's not the United States look horrible in any sort of espionage or war movie. This was no exception, I do believe Hollywood intentionally made Iran look that way to increase profits from American patriots who want to feel like America is the hero in every conflict. To stimulate the feeling of patriotism in Americans, they needed to make Iran look as offensive as possible, so the protagonists would seem better in comparison.
I can see how Iran (Iranian people) might be offended by the film, as it may exaggerate certain things, not giving justice to what actually happened. However, the thing to remember is that it IS Hollywood, so naturally they are going to want to make a movie that is going to make money, they want to make a movie with a lot of action and suspense so that as many people as possible will want to go and see it. If they did exaggerate some things, I think it would be for the purpose of ensuring the success of the film, not directed at offending Iran, therefore I don`t see why the lawsuit is necessary.
I don't think the intention of the movie is to attack the Iranians and their image. The purpose of the movie is to make money so the producers might have exaggerated the conflict. This is a hollywood movie and not a documentary of the real event, so of course not all the details are included. I think Iran are being too sensitive about it, and all that will do is help bring more attention to the movie so more people will watch it.
ReplyDeleteI've seen Argo a few times now and the film definitely does not do the country of Iran any favours, as far as image goes. However I seriously doubt Ben Affleck's intentions were to attack Iran. The film definitely was more about the characters and the story, the dramatisation of Iranian people were simply used as a device to move the story forward. A film like this obviously doesn't come without controversy however. Even the actual Canadian ambassador during the crisis had spoken out, saying Ben Affleck had undermined Canada's role in the operation and didn't give Canada enough credit. The ambassador expected a thank you in Affleck's Academy Award speech -- which eventually was given, along with a thank you to Iran.
ReplyDeleteA movie is basically a story told in moving pictures, and it is arguably the most powerful way of presentation. Like all other stories, a protagonist was established, in this case, the Americans and the Canadians. With the establishment of a protagonist, an antagonist was formed, which would be the Iran. To make a story more heroic, so it would either inspire more people, or more likely, make money in its directed market. Hollywood, as well as all story tellers, favoured one side over than other, thus they would omit and dramatize the side they support, making them more heroic. In the case of “Argo” certain information was ignored, such as the attack on the Iranian plane that killed around 200 innocent civilians. In conclusion, Hollywood dramatized another film to glorify their courageous agents who risk their lives in an act of true patriotism.
ReplyDeleteI personally do not think the movie was made to attak Iran or purposefully tarnish it's image. I think that Ben Affleck simply wanted to show the heroic efforts that were made by all the people who rescued the hostages. Hollywood always dramatizes things, thats how movies sell.
ReplyDeleteI think it is clever for Iran to respond with their own movie. There are always 2 sides to every story and it would be interesting to see the story from their perspective.
Hollywood has a reputation for making any country that's not the United States look horrible in any sort of espionage or war movie. This was no exception, I do believe Hollywood intentionally made Iran look that way to increase profits from American patriots who want to feel like America is the hero in every conflict. To stimulate the feeling of patriotism in Americans, they needed to make Iran look as offensive as possible, so the protagonists would seem better in comparison.
ReplyDeleteI can see how Iran (Iranian people) might be offended by the film, as it may exaggerate certain things, not giving justice to what actually happened. However, the thing to remember is that it IS Hollywood, so naturally they are going to want to make a movie that is going to make money, they want to make a movie with a lot of action and suspense so that as many people as possible will want to go and see it. If they did exaggerate some things, I think it would be for the purpose of ensuring the success of the film, not directed at offending Iran, therefore I don`t see why the lawsuit is necessary.
ReplyDelete