Like all great films, Argo accounts for various visions of which the most immediately understandable had to do with politics, derived — as it is known — from real events that occurred during the hostage crisis between Iran and the U.S. in 1979. A very accurate historical-political context, worked on down to the last detail of its reconstruction, and which can also be read and reviewed in light of current affairs nowadays, just like 1979, since there is increasing tension between Tehran and Washington today. Together with fluttering flags with the stars and stripes flags in the end, details (stated and implied) abound, especially in the first 20 minutes, of strong criticism of U.S. policy in the region — especially over the explicit support of the Reza Pahlavi regime.
Similarly, there is a fascinating, back-and-forth game established between U.S. policy and the politics of a 1970s Hollywood beaten by the crisis of the major studios, whose symbol is the famous— and then semi-destroyed — sign that the film showed from the air. One has to see how Ben Affleck handles that connection in symmetrical terms: At one point, film people — a real makeup artist and a fictitious producer — begin to become political and a group of hostages confined in the Canadian embassy in Tehran pretend to be part of team making a movie. Asserting itself in its historical time, Argo achieves the rare feat of immediately becoming a classic.
Cine
Argo hace política pensando en Hollywood
Como todas las grandes películas, Argo justifica varias visiones, de las cuales la más inmediatamente comprensible tiene que ver con la política, derivada (como se sabe) de hechos reales ocurridos durante la crisis de los rehenes que enfrentó a Irán con Estados Unidos en 1979. Un contexto histórico-político muy preciso, trabajado hasta el último detalle en su reconstrucción, y que puede leerse y revisarse también a la luz de la actualidad porque hoy, a imagen y semejanza de 1979, hay tensión creciente entre Teherán y Washington. Junto al flamear de banderas con barras y estrellas en el final abundan detalles (dichos y sugeridos) sobre todo en los primeros 20 minutos de fuerte autocrítica sobre la política estadounidense en la región (en especial al apoyo explícito al régimen de Reza Pahlevi).
Paralelamente, hay un fascinante el juego de ida y vuelta que se establece entre la política de EE.UU. y la política de un Hollywood golpeado en los 70 por la crisis de los grandes estudios, cuyo símbolo es el famoso (y entonces semidestruido) cartel que la película muestra desde el aire. Hay que ver cómo Ben Affleck maneja en términos simétricos esa conexión: en un momento, gente de cine (un maquillador real y un productor ficticio) se pone a hacer política y un grupo de rehenes confinado en la embajada canadiense simula en Teherán ser parte del equipo que prepara una película. Afirmándose en su tiempo histórico, Argo logra el raro mérito de adquirir de inmediato un destino de clásico.
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link
.
The madness lies in asserting something ... contrary to all evidence and intelligence. The method is doing it again and again, relentlessly, at full volume ... This is how Trump became president twice.
It wouldn’t have cost Trump anything to show a clear intent to deter in a strategically crucial moment; it wouldn’t even have undermined his efforts in Ukraine.
If the Green Party or No Labels candidates steal enough votes from Biden, they will go down in history as the idiot narcissists who helped Trump return to power and possibly finish off U.S. democracy.