Argo Film Review

Argo

"Tense, thrilling and action packed" 

Argo -released October 2012- was produced by George Clooney, Grant Heslov and Ben Affleck (who also Directed and starred in the movie himself). 

As well as Ben Affleck the movie features: John Goodman, Alan Arkin, Bryan Cranston and many more stars who help to bring together an epic, thrilling, tense action packed movie.

Argo is based on real life events. The film uses clever cinematography and mise-en-scene to create the real life gripping tale of a group of US embassy workers who are not able to escape Iran. The hostile and violent protests by Islamist militants make the 6 Americans trapped as hostages. 

Tony Mendez (Ben Affleck) the CIA operative makes it his mission to bring the American hostages back safely from Iran by posing as a canadian film crew and creating a fake movie Argo. The plot is emotionally gripping and is guaranteed to keep you on the edge of your seat. 

So, if you like fast paced action packed films then this is the film for you. Argo is based on real life political events tied together with action, elements of comedy within the Hollywood scenes. 

The opening of the film really brings across the context of the real life events the film was based on. The Iranians start riots and cause 6 members of the American embassy to become hostages trapped in the country. Knowing that it is only a matter of time before the Americans get found out, CIA specialist (Ben Affleck) Tony Mendez comes up with a far fetch and incredibly risky plan to flee them from the country. Doing so undercover as a Canadian film crew. Scenes of the film persist of America and Iran. Hollywood is the uplift that a film with such a tense story line needs. Without Hollywood the film would be far too heavy and chaotic for anyone to be able to enjoyably follow. John Goodman and Alan Arkin play excellent roles and bring a comic effect to the film, especially with the 'Argo fuck yourself'.

The camera work and mise-en-scene used helped to bring a realistic feel to the film. When set in Iran, the camera work is shaky and unsteady. It makes the audience feel as though they are caught up in the chaos. The unsteady cinematography and grainy footage cause to audience to also, become unsteady. This helps to keep the audience on edge and tense. It helps to make the film become far more realistic and reminds the audience that the film is based on a true story. In the opening scenes this is apparent. As well as the camera work the sounds used when set in Iran give off an uneasy feel. The loud rioting mob inject panic into the audience and confusion as the Iranians are not speaking English. The American embassy created some brilliant and convincing acting from inside the building while the mob was outside. Seeing these scenes make the audience attached to the characters and this makes it even more thrilling and tense in the escaping scenes. The scenes featured in Iran keep the audience on their toes and the scenes pose an unsafe atmosphere.

However, the audience get to escape all the chaos to the 'safe zone' an area which projects happiness and safety. The micro ( editorial , sound , camerawork ) used in the Hollywood scenes is the complete opposite to the micro used in the scenes set in Iran. When in  Hollywood the actors used - John Goodman and Alan Arkin- are very uplifting. Great performances from these actors help to keep the film entertaining and bring the audience away from all the danger to the comic, far fetch story line. The mise-en-scene used in Hollywood also help to create this 'safe zone'. Like most comedy or light hearted movies, the camera work remains steady and brightly coloured. The sounds used in these scenes are familiar to the audience (car horns, busy crowds, directors shouting) and nothing like the uneasy use of sound in Iran. Including Hollywood to the dialogue not only gave the audience the safe zone which is much needed in an action packed movie like Argo but also helped to attract a wider range of audience to the movie. Itself, Argo has so many different genres and aspects the target audience is fairly wide. Just add in a few love scenes and pretty much everyone would have been happy!

The American CIA scenes contain camera work which is much darker and dimmer than that which is used in the Hollywood scenes. This is because the audience is not supposed to feel uplifted and this point in the movie. The scenes are much more fast pace and the audience is back on their toes with worry. Although the worry is not as evident in these scenes as it is in Iran. The audience is familiar with America and therefore feels safer in these scenes than in the scenes based in Iran. The camera work is similar to the likes of the Iranian scenes. However, there is no unsteady camera work and the editorial content is much less grainy and feels 'cleaner' and brighter.

As events unfold , the film comes to a pleasant ending. This comes after the over dramatic  final scenes of the hostages fleeing the country aboard Sweedish Airlines. Perhaps these scenes are too melodramatic that it loses the credibility to the fact that this film was supposed to be based on a true story. 

The plot is also insulting to the british. It took less than 5 minutes of research to discover that New Zealand and British diplomats did NOT turn away the American hostages. However this was stated in a scene of the film. The hostages actually stayed at a british house after then moving to the Canadians after Iranian policemen became suspicious. I know that the film stated 'based' on a true story and it is expected that the movie wont follow every true aspect of the event. However, this causes the film to lose credibility and insults the British with the lies in history. After critically analyzing the scene it then became evident that throughout the film Americans are backed up to look like heroes and it then angered me.

It isn't just the British who could potentially be insulted by Argo. The portrayal of the Islamic Republics 1979 revolution caused Tehran to plan to file a lawsuit. Iranian authorities were insulted over the 'unrealistic' portrayal of the country. Although the filming was not done in Iran the camera work and editing helped the audience feel as though they are in Iran. The dirty feel of the atmosphere and the rioting locals caused the Iranian authorities to become insulted. After reading about this law suit , I decided to watch a scene again. When Tony Mendez and the hostages roam the streets, the Iranian people become angered, rude and extremely loud. I agree, this may be insulting to some Iranians and Argo became known-in iran- 'The Hoax of Hollywood'.

Although the film had technical credibility issues it was still enjoyable and caused an emotional response while watching it. The problems I have with the film mentioned above, help to add thrill to the movie and make it more enjoyable to the audience.

Argos story line/plot provoked emotional responses. I found myself feeling uplifted in the Hollywood scenes yet anxious and unsafe in the Iran scenes which featured the America hostages. The film is definitely 'butt clenching' and 'heart racing', especially in the final scenes. After watching the events unfold the characters-especially the hostages- become more and more familiar and the audience can build a bond with the characters as if we are there ourselves. I found myself overwhelmed with happiness and relief as the hostages are safe again. After the entire car screeching and the tense background music the tension was built to a new high. 

The moment which created the biggest emotional response was as the plane was in the air and the hostess announces that Iranian land is cleared. The music and sounds used help to create overwhelming happiness and the proud accomplishments of Tony Mendez become apparent and this bought a tear to my eye. The slow emotional soundtrack helps to provoke a response like this.

The unique selling points of Argo were that it was based on real life events and this is fairly true other than the credibility points previously mentioned. Ben Affleck almost became a marketing technique in himself being director and main character Tony Mendez for the movie. The top actors and actresses help to market the movie and maybe this causes it to be over praised because of this. The trailer wasn't an accurate representation of the movie as it seemed a lot faster and action packed than it actually is in the movie itself. I felt the best parts of Argo were given away in the trailer. 

Argo assignment details

1.     How has ‘Argo’ been marketed? (What type of film are they trying to sell to the audience?)

They are trying to sell an action film to the audience, the audience mainly being males.

Political thriller with hints of comedy to entice a wide range of audience.

2.     Which of the film’s USPs are highlighted in the trailer?

 Based on a true story. Ben Affleck features and produced and directed. Use of real raw footage.

George Clooney-Director Producer. Political, violence, action themes. Different narrative strands

(Hollywood iran Washington intertwined)

 3.    Is this an accurate representation of the film?

 Not accurate, the trailers sound and music gives us an idea that it will be an action film and with the

Editing techniques it feels faster paced whereas the film is political.

4.      How are the technical elements utilised for the trailer?

The use of lighting changes throughout the film, the coloring gets much brighter and warmer when in Hollywood. The filming in Iran is very grey. 

 NARRATIVE STRANDS

Task: Identify the key narrative strands

 1.  Hollywood- making the fake film.

2.  Iran- The hostages

3. Washington- CIA agents organizing the operation.

4.  Tony Mendez/Kevin Harkins- see his family his narrative throughout the film. He links everything together.

5.  The captured 6

Task: Q - What is the role of each narrative?

 Hollywood creates a safe zone (opposes no threat). Also lightens the mood with a comic effect. The hostages remind you of the desperation and experiences. The differences between these two strands are the film quality and color palette. Hollywood is much cleaner and warmer.

Tony Mendez links all the strands together.

 Task Q - How do they compliment each other?

 Keeps you in suspense throughout and creates an emotional rollercoaster for the audience, going through each strand feeling safe in Hollywood and risky with the hostages. Hollywood is incorporated to maintain the interest of the wider audience. Although very stressful the CIA creates another safe zone with suspense and tension.

1.Synopsis - What are the story’s key plot points?

 Hollywood fake film. Press launch. Airport integration. The first scene. Hostages torturing.

 2.    What is the purpose of the opening sequence? What techniques were used in the opening sequence? Were they successful?

 Using a comic strip to give context to the rest of the story.

Grainy footage to look like raw footage to make it seem realistic to place you in that space and time. Jerky hand held footage.

Loud disturbing sound. Intercut riot footage showing two different sides. Tried to provoke a response. Fast footage trying to disorientate the audience.

 3.    Cinematography – How does the camerawork create an emotional response?

 Hand held camera to make you feel as if you’re in the crowd. Realistic technique. When in the mini van past the crane the camera slows down for a reminder of the context. Disorientate the audience with sped up editing and jerky camera effects. Editing style very Hollywood for light entertainment style. Slower longer shots the actual look of the film was smoother and nicer.  CIA in Washington was fast pace cutting used to reflect that these people have to act fast.

4.Acting performance – How do the actors create empathy with the audience?

 Each hostage dealt with the situation differently (2 couples dealing with the situation in different ways) One couple breaking up whilst the other were supporting each other. Emotional response as the cleaner does not want to betray her own country but wants to do the right thing. Those in the safe zone were not there to provide empathy but there to create tension and give information. The producer and make up guy are there to create a safe zone so the audience isn’t tense the whole way through the film.

5.    Editing – How does this aid in our emotional involvement? (Consider the last 20 mins)

 Three or four narrative strands running parallel running back and forth-Difference in sound, diegetic sound to create a feeling. There is a jerky camera fast pace lots of cut aways. Raw footage and replication of raw footage gives a realistic believable world.

6.    How important is the fact that this is based a ‘real events’ and the use of ‘raw footage’ when generating an emotional response in the audience?

 An emotional response is created easier when the audience knows that the film is based on real events. It creates empathy.

 7.    What emotions did you feel whilst watching the film? What techniques were used to provoke these?

 8. What techniques created a believable world?

Diegetic sounds create effects that you’re in Iraq.  Raw footage was important due to the bad quality and real sound. The performance and cinematography created a real response and believable world. The actors and the makeup look very much like the real people, which make it believable.

Film review structure

·      General intro stating title, director, producer, genre, cinematographer, actors, release date etc.

·      A detailed target audience.

·      An outline of the plot

·      A subjective, informed response which will include reference to macro (narrative/plot) and micro (sound, cinematography, MES, editing)

·      Analysis of 3 key scenes to illustrate critical points.

·      Audience’s emotional response

·      The different responses/reaction/feelings during the film

·      Who might like the film and why

·      Include positive and negative points

·      Refer to marketing techniques used to sell the film- was it accurate?

·      Remember your target audience and refer throughout to audience response.

Word count 1000-1200

The film must be in italics (argo)

Refer to the actors playing the characters

Audience Theory Essay

Audience Theory Essay

The Effects Theory shows how media can affect society and how society can affect the media.The Effects model is not a grounded theory. 

The Effects theory suggests that the audience is passive and that being exposed to media will influence the behavior of the audience. This theory suggests that the audience exposed to certain forms of media are a very passive audience who are vulnerable and will end up copying behavior which they have seen.

One problem with the effects theory is the drawback of 'copycat' effect.
For example  in 2004 a teenage boy committed murder in the style of a killing in a video game as a result , the game ManHunt was banned in the UK. Due to the media labeling its audience as passive and therefore weak/vulnerable (an audience who will copy media) then that means that for people who would have enjoyed the game they cannot play due to the media viewing every user as passive. 

The theory also links with moral panic. Moral panic is where there is a threat represented to moral order in a situation that is out of control in some way. And with this theory suggesting that the audience is passive it means that nobody will question the situation which is out of control and it will be easier for moral panic to begin. This is another problem with the effects theory model. 

The studies in which the theory is based on are artificial:

• The Bobo doll experiment with kids, watching them assaulting a doll reenacting what they had just seen adults do on a TV.The criticism is that the children are young and vulnerable.Children are easily manipulated however not all of the audience are (like the theory suggests).

• ThePavlov's Dog was widely criticized as they gathered evidence from a science lab in which animals were tested. However animals are not comparable with Human actions.

The effects theory is also known as the Hypodermic Needle Theory. The reason for the name, being, that the theory suggests that media injects content into its audience' mind without them questioning anything that they are being told. Therefore labeling the audience as passive. Another reason is that the theory suggests that media is like a drug which addicts its audience. 

Suggesting the power lies with the consumer , the uses and grats theory puts more focus on the audience instead of the message itself. The theory does this by asking "what people do with media" rather than "what media does to people". This theory is the opposite of the effects theory suggesting that the audience are not passive but instead take an active role when interpreting forms of media. 
These are examples of the Uses and Gratifications theory in which the theory looks into what the audience do with media rather than what effect media has on its audience.

The problems with the Uses & Gratifications theory are that many people believe that the public have no control over the media and what it produces. The theory is also too kind the the media letting them not take responsibility for what they produce. The model assumes that the media identify individuals needs and provide material to gratify them. But we are more likely to want to feel categorized in the active reader sector rather than passive readers who are being 'duped' by the media. 

The Uses & Grats Theory suggests that the audience rely on media and that it meets audience needs. 
For example watching soap operas:

• Part of regular routine 
• People use as a reward after work
• Escapism
• Preventing loneliness

The reasons are down to the individual member of the audience. And not just for soap operas but with day to day media. There are many examples pf media with multiple reasons for example , watching Quiz Programs for the audience to compare intelligence with player on the TV.Television can also be topic for social interaction. Watching the same program as a friend would begin a conversation. 

I would like to see myself as part of the active audience however I must admit that occasionally the media manages to 'dupe' me along with passive audiences. I may not question what I am being told and believe what I am being told. However I feel I am also part of the active audience. This is because , also , at times I question what I am reading in the newspaper or do not fully agree with what I am being told or think it is being exaggerated by the media. I feel aware and able to question what is being told to me by the media.

When I read a newspaper stating 'Burgers contain horsemeat' I had a passive response and believed the articles without questioning. I was powerless to resist. Another example is that I bought an IPhone after seeing all the advertisements claiming it was the must have phone , I was passive and ended up purchasing the product.
When I read an article stating 'no one should consume more than one rasher of bacon a day or it will send them to an early grave' I questioned this response and didn't believe the article fully and knew there would be exaggeration. 

Perhaps advertising companies rely on a passive audience in order to sell their products. Much like me, many people buy the newest apple product due to the brand and the label of Iphone etc. Many advertising companies aim to young kids to sell products as they are a very passive audience as they are young and vulnerable. For example, many children have the newest craze e.g trading cards and collectable items and they regularly buy the newest item for example new stickers for a sticker book. Marketing and advertising rely on a passive audience (gullible) in order to sell products. 
On the other hand, other media formats rely on an active audience to question things. Radio stations love to get a response from the audience giving their views , opinions and votes etc. 
They rely on an active audience in order to communicate with the audience and cause debates and voting polls online.  

The theory in which I find most convincing would be the Uses & Gratifications theory. This is because the theory is much nicer , suggesting that the media cater to the audience and the theory itself focuses more on the audience than the actual theory. Rather than thinking about medias effects on people it looks at what people do with media. Where as on the other hand the effects model groups together a whole audience and labels them as passive and suggest they do not challenge what they are being told by the media. 
The effects model is , however , interesting as it touches upon key points but groups a whole audience into one categorized audience of passive. I find both theories interesting but in my opinion the uses and gratifications theory is the better of the two theories.


There is an argument that these vulnerable individuals who are part of the passive audience should be protected from violent and explicit material in the media. Especially children. I think vulnerable audiences should be protected from explicit material in which the media produces. However, I feel most of the time the media is blamed for the content produced rather than the child or individual reenacting it. For example the video game Man Hunt being banned. I feel that instead of banning and blaming the media content , there should be stricter age restrictions and parents should take responsibility when purchasing their child, for example , a DVD or Game featuring content which is violent and will most likely influence them. The age restrictions on products are sensible and I feel that sensoring products is a better way to deal with the situation rather than banning it. 

Advertising is a very powerful media tool that aims to persuade us to buy certain products by claiming that we 'need' these items to make our lives better. I consider myself as passive when it comes to advertising. However, it does depend on the type of product being advertised. I do not receive any influence to buy a product when the advert is targeted to an audience that I do not fall into : Car owner (insurance deals, new cars) Home owner (insurance, loans , paying bills etc). Although I am not interested in these products, I still understand the message put forward by the advertising companies. 
Some adverts create an emotional response for me. For example the 3 mobile advert of the dancing horse is a feel good advert which makes me laugh.
Adverts for RSPCA and other fundraising ads also create an emotional response as they make me feel sad and make me feel like I should donate money. The techniques in these adverts are clever as they create emotional responses in order to receive donations.
TV adverts which promote new TV shows pull me in to want to watch them. 





Referring to Maslows Hierarchy of needs I made my own hierarchy of needs using Microsoft word. 

Reception Theory photography task

Reception theory

The reception theory suggests that each individual interprets things differently and has a different outlook on the matter depending on things like social class, race, age and gender.

We were asked to carry out a photography task in order to test this theory. In groups we created 3 different scenarios each with a photograph representing the subject, which is happening. We took three photographs representing a proposal, a fight and being hit by a car. 

The reception theory has three possible results when interpreting: The dominant reading where you see and agree with what is being displayed. The negotiated reading where you see and understand but indecisive about what to believe (sitting on the fence) and the oppositional reading where you see , understand but do not agree with what you are seeing.

 For this picture the dominant reading is a surprise proposal.The majority of people we asked agreed with the dominant reading and only sore and interpreted a proposal. There was one negotiated reading where there was some confusion with begging but other than that everyone we asked agreed with the dominant reading. A wide majority of our audience picked up on the dominant reading.

 For this photograph the dominant reading is a fight between two people. All the readings taken on this photo were dominant. Everyone we asked sore the photograph and agreed with what it is portraying. 100% of the audience picked up on the dominant reading.

For this photograph the dominant reading is being hit by a car. There was a wide range of dominant , negotiated and oppositional readings with this photograph. Some responses included "chilling by a car" and "just bought a car". When we explained the dominant reading these people were examples of oppositional readings. They understood what the photo tries to represent but they do not agree.

In conclusion the majority of the audience picked up on the dominant reading however some opposed to the idea and sore it as an oppositional or negotiated reading.

In my opinion the reception theory is useful. It suggests that individuals can have different opinions on media texts and interpret them in different ways. Some people read a piece of media text and agree with it and fully understand what they are reading, this is the dominant reading. However some people also fully understand what they are reading but strongly disagree, this is called the oppositional reading. A good example would be a headline such as "Prime Minister is the only hope for our nation" some people may completely agree and others may disagree strongly. Those who sit on the fence are part of the negotiated reading. 

The only problem i can see with this theory is that the readings vary for reasons like gender, social class, wealth, race etc. For example a headline like "UK cuts all benefits" would have different readings depending on who is asked. Wealth and social background with make the readings vary. High income tax payers in a wealthy area may be dominant readings 100% where as low income families on benefits are most likely to be oppositional readings. This means that the readings would be bias. 

When readings are taken there should be a wide range of readings in different areas of different genders of different age groups and of different ethical backgrounds. This will get the readings fair and there will be a wide variety as the reception theory suggests that people interpret media texts differently due to these reasons.