In case you don’t know the plot of the highly-acclaimed “Argo,” it’s based on the true story of the daring rescue attempt by the CIA to get six Americans out of Iran in 1980. Operative Tony Mendez — whose spy name is Kevin Hawkins — (director/actor Ben Affleck) pretends they are a Canadian film crew looking for an exotic location to film “Argo,” a non-existent sci-fi flick. In the movie, Iranians are not demonized. Their cause was presented as just because the U.S. deposed their rightful shah and set up a puppet-tyrant. “Argo” frequently changes tone and doesn’t seem to know exactly what kind of a movie it wants to be. It starts off to be an exciting, tense, exacting historical reenactment, but stalls and turns to mush in its Hollywood scenes. Why is “Argo” winning so many awards, and perhaps Oscars? It has been conjectured it’s because Hollywood loves films about filmmaking (most recently, see “Hugo,” “The Artist”). “Argo” also makes the U.S. government look bad — telling the United States’ dirty little history lesson in Iran in the opening scenes — that much of the world likes to see. Canada, however, shines — and rightly so. But then, the U.S. takes back the glory and has the last triumphant word. The acting is superb, but Affleck is mostly strutting and mugging, walking around silently, looking worried, with the camera in tow. Affleck’s acting strained believability. He is self-consciously unselfconscious, deadpan and emotionless. He never looked scared, he never looked anything, actually. Is his character simply a super cool cucumber? There also seem to be too many heavyhanded Hollywood insider jokes mostly poking great fun at “the industry.” What’s the takeaway? Well, there is one fantastic line and concept (especially when dealing with governments, espionage, the military): “Someone is responsible when things happen. I’m responsible.” If this is the heart of the film, if all the action is framed in this, then there’s some meat to the film other than the nailbiting display of immense courage and bravery. However, like “Hurt Locker,” the plot is really about breaking the chain of command in order to be successful. One could also read such storylines as boiling things down to conscience. How does conscience survive, react, play out in the smallest and largest of dilemmas? To whom or what is blind obedience really owed, if at all? Worthy food for thought.