Argo

A good suspense flick, well-acted (especially by Alan Arkin and John Goodman, who stole every scene they were in) and competently directed by Ben Affleck.

Many (many) facts are in error (this also includes the opening narration), and ALL the dialog and many situations are just made up! Typical Follywood. The film is Produced by two ardent Dems (Affect & Looney) and is a thinly veiled add for the Dems & Carter; the latter holding the arguable distinction of being the worst President in U.S. history, until the President that was in office when this film came out. (Sorry Carter. You don't even have that distinction anymore.) If you want to see a film about an American escape from Iran, watch "On Wings of Eagles" (1986 TV-mini series; Burt Lancaster & Richard Crenna).
[Note: The Hostages were released immediately at the finish of Reagan's inaugural speech, as per the "negotiations", during which time Reagan was President-elect. Interesting how that works. e.g. During the Administration prior to Trump, armed Iranian fast boats continually harassed U.S. ships in the Persian Gulf. After Trump took office, they stopped. The media reports that "officials are baffled as to why". LOL!]

A good movie about a heroic mission. Those who complain about the details of historical inaccuracy are most likely defendants of the Carter Administration's cowardice during this period. The rest is dead on accurate.

I was entertained by Argo! Thought it was a good flick.

Historically flawed. The acting and the directing were excellent which makes this overall an entertaining film but the inaccuracies are irritating and, frankly, unnecessary. Affleck turned this into a patriotic, "Yay USA" film when former President Jimmy Carter said himself that 90% of the operation was conceived and acted upon by the Canadians. It is even known as "the Canadian Caper". Affleck apparently also ticked off the British and New Zealand governments by portraying them in the film as refusing to help the US diplomats when, in reality, they were part of the effort to help them. These inaccuracies are pointless. I can tolerate Hollywood making the danger seem more intense and imminent but why cut out and/or diminish the real heroes' role? (I guess the answer is that it makes the US look better and that is what the target market wants to see...)
Good film.

A disappointment - the movie's documentary style techniques suggest historical authenticity and there are many lies throughout the movie. Just more American propaganda to instill Patriotism and paint Iranians as the bad guys. There were no Iranian characters - other than the sterotypical 'bad guys'. Iranians were made to look like mobs of crazed people.
The lies: there was no dramatic chase by police before the plane took off, they were never 'drilled' by airport security to the point of almost missing the flight - their plane ride home was uneventful in real life. The ending line about Canada taking credit to just to save face was the biggest lie. Jimmy Carter did point this out after seeing this movie.
The ommission: The movie's opening with the overthrow of Iranian Prime Minister Mossadegh failed to mention why he was overthrown, and the sinister USA military assassinations and aiding of rebels in yet another USA coup.
Mossadegh was not the bad guy. Just like Gadaffi, Assad, Saddam et al. are portrayed by Western media. They are not saints - name a leader anywhere who is. All these leaders are guilty off, was trying to nationalize their countries natural resources and remove American control. I should include Hugo Chevez, who was the victim of an unsuccessful American backed coup, himself. Americans want to control everybody elses oil.
If they had not tried to pass Argo off as a factual documentary, I'd say it's an okay movie. As a documentary, it is too full of inaccuracies to rate above 2 stars. And those two stars are only because I am an Alan Arkin fan.

Super Intense. Maybe too intense. I knew largely how the film was going to end, and yet my heart was racing. While I recognize that for many this is a sign of a good movie, personally I didn't like it. It made what was an interesting story into a fast-paced spy film. Hey, you like Tom Cruise, you'll love this. Like fact and drama? Well it has plenty of that too, but not enough to completely satisfy me.

I don't know all the details of the true Argo story, but if it had truly been this tense, had every thing that could go wrong went wrong, and every "baddie" been just one millisecond behind the rah-rah team, I'm sorry to say that Mark or Bob would've had a heart attack. No doubt about that.

Was Argo fast-paced and breathtaking? Yes. Will I remember it for as long as other contemporary films that didn't try so hard to impress me with thrills (eg Life of Pi)? Absolutely not.

Enough about the pacing, I thought Argo had a wonderful cast. The filmmakers did an excellent job picking the right people and getting the look of the times, places, and people right. These are the aspects that make this story phenomenal.

Argo wouldn't have been my selection for Best Picture, but it certainly was good.

Wow!!! Quite surprised with this movie. Definitely worth my time.

Terrific movie despite the skewed version of who helped who in this event. Extremely well acted and great building of suspense (even though I know it was never quite that close) but terrifying to think that in today's climate, those hostages would probably not have survived. Recommended.

Watch the bonus for a closer glimpse at how it may have really gone down. We really enjoyed it and got a lot out of it: history/ good story telling/ good character acting/ suspense/ learning more about a well known Canadian story .