Iran Wants To Sue Hollywood Over Argo Somewhere, Some Time, & For Some Reason

from the affleck-off dept

I have to admit, I kind of like writing about Iran. They make posting about them so much fun. From their photoshopped war-machines to their plans for internet IDs all the way to their blocking useful internet services like email, it's like watching a documentary on how to be ineffective at trolling the rest of the world and your own people. But this time they've gone too far, damn it. Iran wants to take on Hollywood over Argo, specifically calling out director Ben Affleck for not including things they wanted him to include in his movie.

Ben Affleck
Side note: I consider the Iranians not protesting Gigli an act of war
Image source: CC BY 2.0


Of course, if you'd like any real details on what Tehran is planning on doing about any of this, good luck.

Iran is planning to sue Hollywood over the Oscar-winning "Argo" because of the movie's allegedly "unrealistic portrayal" of the country, Iranian media reported Tuesday. Several news outlets, including the pro-reform Shargh daily, said French lawyer Isabelle Coutant-Peyre is in Iran for talks with officials over how and where to file the lawsuit. She is also the lawyer for notorious Venezuelan-born terrorist Ilich Ramirez Sanchez, known as Carlos the Jackal.
Ah, lovely. The problem is that, while Iran is dismissing Argo and its awards as CIA propaganda, because everyone knows how pro-military Hollywood is, they aren't really disputing any specific points in the movie. They just say it shows Iranians as being too violent during the hostage-taking (er...), that Affleck failed to show why Iranians were so angry at the United States (they must have missed the movie's opener), and called Argo's awards an "attack against humanity." Other than that, no details were provided on what charges they were going to bring in what court and at what time. Why?

Well, probably because there is roughly f#@$-all they can actually do about it, outside of their own borders, where their own population has been gobbling the movie up via bootleg DVDs (are copyright pirates also pro-CIA?). Regardless, a quick message for my Iranian friends: it's a movie, get over it.



Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  1.  
    icon
    Ninja (profile), Mar 14th, 2013 @ 6:05am

    I have this image of them sentencing Ben Affleck to death by stoning and filling an extradition request to the United States. "Logic" tells us the US should shut up and grant extradition upon any accusation as they've been trying lately (O'Dowyer, Dotcom and Assange - I know the last is tangential but there's plenty of US pressure).

    Allah must be facepalming.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  2.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 14th, 2013 @ 7:59am

    'my Iranian friends'

    ha! got you Mike - you are an anti-USOFA TERRORRISTS LOVING

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  3.  
    icon
    Dark Helmet (profile), Mar 14th, 2013 @ 8:06am

    Re: 'my Iranian friends'

    Ha! I'm not Mike, so I'm the anti-American (odd, yesterday I was accused of being a Go AMERICA Rah rah guy....) terrorist loving (odd, all I do is make fun of Iran)....

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  4.  
    icon
    Anonymous Howard (profile), Mar 14th, 2013 @ 8:16am

    Re:

    I have NO idea why Iran is pissed about 'murica.
    Beside, your your government is on the way to become what you're mocking now in Iran's.

    Not that I agree with making fuss about a movie, but please look at the trend of hollywood movies, who are the main antagonists in them: mostly middle east, commies, english, germans etc. And ofc, the US save the world from terrifying terrorist again.
    It's hard not to see it as propaganda.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  5.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 14th, 2013 @ 8:19am

    Someone really need to tell Iran Ben Affleck is not real. I learned that he was fake when I was six I was devastated for a good ten to twenty minuets.

    Ben Affleck was actually derived from a German folk song dedicated to the great Major Ben Elmershaus Birckleck.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  6.  
    icon
    Dark Helmet (profile), Mar 14th, 2013 @ 8:27am

    Re: Re:

    "It's hard not to see it as propaganda."

    You really didn't see Argo, did you?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  7.  
    icon
    Zakida Paul (profile), Mar 14th, 2013 @ 8:27am

    Hollywood sues everyone else, why should they not reap what they sow?

    What's good for the gander is also good for the goose.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  8.  
    icon
    Anonymous Howard (profile), Mar 14th, 2013 @ 8:32am

    Re: Re: Re:

    I saw it. If you expect an action movie, it's not bad. Just don't expect it to be historically faithful, which it wasn't.

    I was speaking of american action movies in general (especially in the last ~10 years), like the ironman series, the other marvell movies etc etc.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  9.  
    icon
    Anonymous Howard (profile), Mar 14th, 2013 @ 8:34am

    Re:

    Both Hollywood and Iran should fuck themselves instead of others. My 2c

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  10.  
    icon
    Zakida Paul (profile), Mar 14th, 2013 @ 8:34am

    Re: Re:

    Americans cast the Brit as the baddie because they mistrust intelligence. Arabs are the bogeyman of the current times. Commies are a throw back to the Cold War. And no one likes the Germans.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  11.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 14th, 2013 @ 8:37am

    can't they sue ben for his bad acting.

    Le stink

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  12.  
    icon
    Dark Helmet (profile), Mar 14th, 2013 @ 8:38am

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    Fair enough. As I said in the article, it is just a movie, after all.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  13.  
    icon
    Trails (profile), Mar 14th, 2013 @ 9:04am

    Re: Re: 'my Iranian friends'

    Um, I don't think that was real.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  14.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 14th, 2013 @ 9:06am

    You've got to wonder about those Iranians. I mean, all those vague complaints about Argo and not even a hint of a complaint about Mr Affleck's acting... I mean, the guy has two Oscars now and neither even remotely connected to this actor's "acting". Doesn't that say something?

    (Disclaimer: This post is intended to be humorous, and if Mr. Affleck is in any way offended I would like to say "You're a public figure Ben, this is the price of fame, get over it..." :-)

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  15.  
    icon
    Coogan (profile), Mar 14th, 2013 @ 9:07am

    Good luck with that. After all, this is at the end of every movie Hollywood makes:

    All characters appearing in this work are fictitious. Any resemblance to real persons, living or dead, is purely coincidental.

    See? Coincidence!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  16.  
    icon
    Ben (profile), Mar 14th, 2013 @ 9:10am

    Re:

    when I was six I was devastated for a good ten to twenty minuets

    I, too, find dance helpful :-), although I was never fond of minuets (a good waltz or polka, however...)

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  17.  
    icon
    Trails (profile), Mar 14th, 2013 @ 9:12am

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    I don't think I'd describe it as an action movie. It's a suspense/drama, I guess?

    The historical inaccuracies are not small: downplaying the role of the Canadians, portraying the Kiwis and Brits as unhelpful when they stuck their necks out too, portraying the whole thing as more tense/skin of the teeth than it was (care chase at airport), portraying the administration as against the operation causing Ben Affleck to go all mavericky, when none of that happened. Certainly this lends the film a propagandistic whiff, in terms of playing up the contributions of the CIA and Hollywood.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  18.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 14th, 2013 @ 9:12am

    You've got to wonder about those Iranians. I mean, all those vague complaints about Argo and not even a hint of a complaint about Mr Affleck's acting... I mean, the guy has two Oscars now and neither even remotely connected to this actor's "acting". Doesn't that say something?

    (Disclaimer: This post is intended to be humorous, and if Mr. Affleck is in any way offended I would like to say "You're a public figure Ben, this is the price of fame, get over it..." :-)

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  19.  
    icon
    Trails (profile), Mar 14th, 2013 @ 9:14am

    Attacks against humanity

    Argo's awards an "attack against humanity."

    If that's an attack against humanity, then how do we describe the depravity that is Reindeer Games?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  20.  
    icon
    ChrisB (profile), Mar 14th, 2013 @ 9:14am

    The question really is, will American's tolerate the inevitable road to war with Iran? If they are pissed at the bailing out of banks, how can they tolerate the trillions spent in wars again goat farmers and former allies?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  21.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 14th, 2013 @ 9:15am

    Only USA propaganda wins the best MAFIAA Movie of The Year.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  22.  
    icon
    Ninja (profile), Mar 14th, 2013 @ 9:19am

    Re: Re: Re:

    And no one likes the Germans

    I lol'd at that.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  23.  
    icon
    Ninja (profile), Mar 14th, 2013 @ 9:20am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    Hmm what if it wasn't the intention to be historically faithful? Was it presented as so?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  24.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 14th, 2013 @ 9:22am

    The problem is that, while Iran is dismissing Argo and its awards as CIA propaganda, because everyone knows how pro-military Hollywood is

    Sorry for the nitpicking, but the CIA isn't supposed to be military. The CIA don't take oaths to defend the Constitution and IMO it really shows. It would be nice if we could keep the entire fucking CIA the hell away from the military, because they don't deserve to leach from and taint the young men and women who are truly there making an honorable sacrifice, and yes there are many 18-25 years olds (and some beynd) who are doing exactly that. Moreover, each of our armed forces have their own intelligence agencies which, in my experience, completely punk those self-serving pussies at the job of intelligence.. every time. The CIA doesn't deserve to dig shitholes for the military.

    My apologies.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  25.  
    identicon
    Joe, Mar 14th, 2013 @ 9:24am

    i used to work with an Iranian girl whom I would often tease that the movie 300 was extremely accurate. Therefore most people in Iran must be either obese with axes where there hands used to be or super sexy on one side of their face but horribly deformed on the other. She didn't find that funny for some reason.

    We did chat about Iranian movies though. I was curious as most American movies cast the villain as basically anyone with an accent. I asked if Americans were the villains in Iranian movies. She told me the actually prefer British as the bad guys. Fair play, as the Brits do make awesome villains.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  26.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 14th, 2013 @ 9:47am

    so, someone please tell me what Hollywood is gonna do to threaten Iran, then? who thinks any notice will be taken? at least they have the bottle to tell Hollywood and the USA government to fuck off!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  27.  
    identicon
    Colin, Mar 14th, 2013 @ 11:12am

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    I was speaking of american action movies in general (especially in the last ~10 years), like the ironman series, the other marvell movies etc etc.

    I hate that Captain America had the Nazis as the bad guys.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  28.  
    icon
    drewdad (profile), Mar 14th, 2013 @ 11:55am

    I think the best response is already in the movie

    "Argo F*ck Yourself"

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  29.  
    icon
    ltlw0lf (profile), Mar 14th, 2013 @ 12:02pm

    Re:

    The CIA don't take oaths to defend the Constitution and IMO it really shows.

    Uhm...I'll just leave this here for you.

    5 USC 3331 - Civilian Oath of Office.

    All US Government Civilians take an oath of office when they are hired, and are bound to that oath.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  30.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 14th, 2013 @ 2:25pm

    Re: Re:

    It doesn't matter though. Oaths don't mean anything. Congressmen and Senators all take oaths, but what good does it do? They don't follow them. It's just silly words and publicly going through the motions.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  31.  
    icon
    ltlw0lf (profile), Mar 14th, 2013 @ 2:46pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    Oaths don't mean anything.

    That is not what AC said, was it. He said the CIA didn't have to take the oath, in which I was saying that they did. 5 USC 3331 covers civilians for all three branches of government and the military. It comes from Article IV of the Constitution.

    As for congresscritters, politicians aren't particularly known for their honesty. The old adage goes, "How do you tell if a politician is lying? Their lips are moving." They have also been known to take bribes and kickbacks. I find it hard to believe that most bureaucrats would not take their oath seriously, but then again, I am sure there are some (particularly those lobbied by the entertainment industry.)

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  32.  
    identicon
    The dude, Mar 14th, 2013 @ 3:33pm

    Re: Re: 'my Iranian friends'

    Yep, this article destroys my theory about you completely.
    And i present my apologies to you and your Iranian friends.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  33.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 14th, 2013 @ 6:18pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    I know. I wasn't defending his argument. I was merely pointing out that arguing over whether they take an oath or not is pointless because even if they do, it doesn't really mean jack shit. They are still going to be self serving, lying, corrupt bastards with no regard for the public well being.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  34.  
    icon
    techflaws (profile), Mar 15th, 2013 @ 12:55am

    So it's "300" all over again? Geez.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  35.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 15th, 2013 @ 6:40pm

    Okay, so...

    It's Iran vs. Hollywood. Whose side are you on?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  36.  
    identicon
    Mason Wheeler, Mar 15th, 2013 @ 7:19pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    I was actually rather offended by their historical liberties, but for a point that no one else ever seems to pick up on: the way they maliciously and ridiculously slandered the Shah and made him out to be some sort of monster who deserved everything that happened to him and worse still.

    I doubt anyone here was there during that time. And I wasn't either... but my mother was. She lived there as a teenager for a few years. Her father was an engineer working on a contract there. (Telecom; not anything oil-related.) And here's the amazing thing: she could do that. She and her sisters were able to live openly in Iran, as foreign Christian women. They were able to go to school and work on their education. They did not have to live in fear. They had rights, and they had friends. And to this day they have fond memories of their time living there.

    The movie explains how the Shah was overthrown for the horrible, offensive crime of trying to "secularize" Iran. But let's call a spade a spade here. It was the high point of the country's history for literacy, education, tolerance and women's rights, none of which have been equaled since he was deposed. Whatever his personal flaws may have been, he was trying to civilize Iran, and he. Was. Succeeding.

    Right up until the barbarians took over and plunged the country into a dark age from which it has yet to emerge, that is. And the filmmakers did a great disservice to the truth with their portrayal of him.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  37.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 16th, 2013 @ 12:11pm

    Weird thing is that "Argo" is still showing in some theaters despite being out on DVD.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This