Argo: A Review

Fifteen years ago Ben Affleck burst onto the Hollywood scene with the 1997 film Good Will Hunting, which he co-wrote with childhood friend Matt Damon. Affleck and Damon went on to win an Academy Award for Best Original Screenplay. It seemed however that Affleck's acting career was quickly overshadowed by Damon as Hollywood played it's all time favourite game of comparison. In 2003 as Damon was riding the high of the successful The Bourne Identity (Dir. Doug Liman), Affleck was trying to get away from the negative publicity that swarmed his critically panned film Gigli (Dir. Martin Brest).

Affleck directs on the set of Argo

Affleck had a skill however that Hollywood had yet to see. In 2003 he directed a film he had written called Gone Baby Gone, an emotionally charged drama centered around the kidnapping of a little girl in Boston. He followed this with The Town in 2010, a critically acclaimed drama, set near Boston, in which he directed and starred. It seemed that Affleck had successfully stepped out of the shadow and into his very own spotlight. With two dramas under his direction, it wasn't a surprise to learn that his third film would also be a drama. It was a surprise however that he chose to take on a highly political subject like the 1979 American Embassy hostage crisis in Iran. 

Affleck's Mendez goes through the plan with the American fugitives 

Argo begins in the thick of it, the protests outside the American Embassy in Tehran. Flags are being burned, anti-American slogans are shouted passionately. Affleck doesn't just fly the camera through quickly and rush to the American point of view. His camera stays with the protestors, hearing their anger, letting them have their say. By the time you do get inside the embassy and meet the six fugitives to be you have an understanding that this is not a film about who is right and who is wrong. Politics, although always in the background, are never focussed on. 

Mendez and O'Donnell (Bryan Cranston) pitch the best bad idea they've got 

Just before the embassy is overrun six employees escape and are taken in by the Canadian Ambassador, Ken Taylor and his wife. There is a line in the film which states that the British and the Kiwis refused them help. This is factually incorrect. The British and the Kiwis helped get the fugitives to the Canadians, and Taylor and his wife played a much larger part in the rescue. This is a story where only one true hero can emerge however, and not surprisingly that hero has to be American.

John Chambers (John Goodman), Leister Siegal (Alan Arkin) and Mendez (Affleck) have one last toast before showtime

The film is emotionally powerful to say the least. It has you on the edge of your seat all the way through, allowing enough humour to break the tension, but never too much to distract from the gravity of the situation. The idea of sending Tony Mendez (Affleck) into Iran as a would-be filmmaker for the fictional film "Argo", and walking out with the six hostages posing as a film crew is ludicrous, yet as the film quotes "it's the best bad idea we've got". The first half of the film sets up the fake film. It needs to be real, so real that Hollywood buys it. Enter our producer Leister Siegal (Alan Arkin) and makeup artist John Chambers (John Goodman), the only two Hollywood players that know the truth of what the CIA is attempting to do. Arkin and Goodman supply much of the comic relief in the film and do it so brilliantly you eagerly anticipate their appearances on screen. Affleck's Mendez is sober, solemn and serious, the key player in showing the tension. As our protagonist his point of view becomes ours, where he goes we go, and where he goes is where no American would want to have gone in 1980. We have no reason to believe that he will be successful except for a short acknowledgement that he is the best and he's never left a man behind. However, we find ourselves daring to believe he'll be successful because the alternative is too tragic to consider.

The stakes are high as Mendez and the fugitives are questioned by security 

What follows is a suspense-ridden, high stakes game of cat and mouse where the only way to win is if the mice keep a step ahead of the cat at all times. The cinematography creates the illusion of it being shot in the early 1980s, lending a nostalgic, somewhat documentary feel, creating a sense of realism. Although Mendez is clearly the hero of the film there is still a sense of ensemble work from the supporting cast, including a great performance by Bryan Cranston as Mendez's CIA supervisor Jack O'Donnell. 

Affleck may never be able to fully shed the horror that was Gigli, but if that old Hollywood adage that you're only as good as your last film holds true then Affleck is going to be ok. 

There Should Have Only Been One

I'll never forget when I was 17 years old and was at the movies with my father. I can't recall the film we were watching but a trailer came on and my dad, who rarely gets excited about films, couldn't hold back his excitement. The trailer was for The Bourne Identity. My father had read the book and he spoke of it's intrigue and mystery so naturally I had to read it too. I ended up being the only one in the family to read the trilogy. I fell in love with the chaotic world of Bourne. I eagerly anticipated The Bourne Supremacy and was a little stunned to find that they had completely parted ways with the novels, however The Bourne Ultimatum was so much fun I didn't mind at all. The latter two films were directed by Paul Greengrass, a director who is able to keep a handle on the story whilst creating thrilling action scenes. All three Bourne films were written by Tony Gilroy, a very talented screenwriter. 

After hearing that Matt Damon didn't want to do another Bourne film I resigned myself to the fact that the films had come to an end. Hollywood however will never let a cash cow die. I was both excited and a little apprehensive when I found out that a new film entitled The Bourne Legacy was being made. When I saw that it was being written by Gilroy I realised that there was nothing to worry about, until I saw that Greengrass was not on board. Rather than replacing Greengrass with an equally skilled director producers handed the reigns to Gilroy, whose directing credits had only two films (Duplicity, Michael Clayton). But what is quantity when there is quality? Peter Jackson was relatively unknown when he took on Lord of the Rings, and look at him today. So I swallowed my doubt and went to watch the fourth Bourne film.

Although the film is called The Bourne Legacy this is not a film about Bourne. He is merely the tip of the iceberg as the film quotes. This installment follows Aaron Cross (Jeremy Renner), a soldier who is part of a program designed to create super soldiers. After the CIA failed to capture Bourne they go into disaster mode and decide to shut the program down, which basically consists of killing everyone involved. On that list is Cross and Dr. Marta Shearing (Rachel Weisz) a scientist who administers the medication to the soldiers. Cross and Shearing go on the run from the relentless Col. Eric Byer (Edward Norton) and his team who sit in the comfort of their office whilst tracking the two down. In the previous Bourne films Jason fought to catch up with the CIA, to find out the truth he desperately searched for. In this latest film it is the CIA who are trying to catch up, and they really aren't very good at it, Cross and Shearing are always two steps ahead.

Cross is not Bourne and the film takes great pains to remind us of that. The source of his super strength is from the medications he's been taking, whereas Bourne's skill set was purely from training. If this was Batman Cross would be Robin. Cross also has his memory, he knows his past, he figures out quickly what's going on and he is able to make decisions based on those facts. Shearing has a much more important part in the film than women in previous Bourne films. Cross would not have been able to survive without her. Both Renner and Weisz have great chemistry on screen. Although their characters are never shown to be physically involved there are more than enough glances and hand touching to get the point across.

Renner is a great upcoming actor who I believe has a long successful career ahead of him. With films like The Town, The Hurt Locker, Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol and The Avengers behind him he already has made a name for himself in tinseltown. He brings vulnerability and integrity to Cross and you really can't help but root for the guy. Perhaps if this was it's own film, without the Bourne name being attached to it then there would have been more opportunity to explore this character more. As it is however Cross seems as though he's always two steps ahead of the CIA but three feet deep in Bourne's shadow. Anything he can do Bourne can do better.

The main issue with this film is the directing. The marriage of Greengrass' direction and Gilroy's script in the previous two films meant that both story and visual were at their best. With Gilroy wearing both screenwriter and directing hats there was a loss in quality of both. The greatest flaw is the ending, or lack thereof.  There is a spectacular motorbike chase scene and then two minutes after that ends we hear that famous Moby song signaling the end of the film. It came on so abruptly that I felt there must have been a mistake. And there was. Gilroy forgot to write an ending. The hollywood demon must have sat on his shoulder all along because the film sets itself up for sequels. The problem however is that the film can't stand alone, whereas all three previous Bourne films could. So many questions are asked, very few answered. I have a feeling we may never get them answered.

My recommendation is that you go see this film knowing that you'll get great action scenes, talented actors playing underwritten roles, and an incomplete story. This is not a Bourne film, Jason Bourne jumped off that roof and perhaps we will never see him again...but remember, this is Hollywood and cash cows never die.

We Bought a Zoo

This week my husband and I went to see We Bought a Zoo. I have had a celebrity crush on Matt Damon since Good Will Hunting, and it's no secret that my husband has a crush on Scarlett Johansson. So really it was a win win situation.

The film follows Benjamin Mee, a recently widowed father of two. While looking for a new house he finds the perfect place to start a new life with his children. The only problem? The house comes with a Zoo. Benjamin, a writer, has no knowledge of animal care taking. Enter his new colleagues. Scarlett plays Kelly Foster, the head zookeeper. Along with her motley crew of employees they have barely kept the struggling zoo afloat. Benjamin decides that they can save the zoo and so begins their adventure to get it ready for a grand opening in Summer.

The film is really wonderful. Damon's performance as the grieving Benjamin draws you in but it never gets too heavy or takes away from the enchanting storyline. I really enjoyed watching him play a father, it's a role I haven't seen him in before. His chiseled good looks from the Bourne days are softened out a bit making it a much more realistic transformation.

Scarlett does well as hardworking animal lover Foster. She and Damon have a good chemistry throughout the film but it is never laid on too thick, which I appreciated. Some films tend to force romance into a storyline that doesn't need it. This is not a romance genre film, rather it's the story of a man and his children and their journey through healing.

The animals also have their part to play in the film. There is a spectacular scene with a bear who escapes and goes on a little adventure. And then there's the beautiful tiger who is at the end of his life. Tigers are my favourite animal so any screen time dedicated to them is enjoyable to watch. And when you get a shot with Matt Damon and a tiger, well it doesn't get any better than that.

We bought a Zoo is adapted from the book of the same title, which is a memoir written by the real life Benjamin Mee. The true story obviously has a few differences from the film adaptation, eg. the real zoo is in England, not America. The film is really wonderful and I highly recommend it. Children will love it as much as adults. It's an uplifting story that reminds us that it's never too late to start an adventure.