Far from a conventional biopic, Steven Soderberghs film about Che Guevara is a fascinating exploration of the revolutionary as icon. Daring in its refusal to make the socialist leader into an easy martyr or hero, Che paints a vivid, naturalistic portrait of the man himself (with a stunning, Cannes-award-winning performance by Benicio del Toro), from his overthrow of the Batista dictatorship, to his 1964 United Nations trip, to the end of his short life. Originally released in two parts, the first a kaleido-scopic view of the Cuban revolution and the second an all-action dramatization of Che’s failed campaign in Bolivia, Che is presented here in its complete form.
Stills from Che (Click for larger image)
 |
 |
 |
Lauded for its documentary approach yet also experimental in nature, Steven Soderbergh’s Che spends over four hours chronicling different phases in the revolutionary career of Che Guevara (Benicio Del Toro). In Che: Part One, the successful Cuban campaign is covered, interspersed with glimpses of Guevara’s camera-ready visit to New York in the Castro Revolution’s aftermath. This section can’t help but approximate the outline of a battle epic, despite Soderbergh’s anti-romantic approach, and ends up being a stirring account of guerrilla action (it also has the bonus of Demian Bechir’s uncanny impersonation of Fidel Castro). Che: Part Two jumps ahead to Che’s grueling later experiences in Bolivia, where he traveled to aid the homegrown insurgents but found much less fertile ground than in Cuba. Here Guevara is–figuratively and visually–lost in the jungle, as Soderbergh reduces the characters and story to a series of factual sequences laid end-to-end. It’s not Dr. Zhivago, that’s for sure, although it does last longer. By spotlighting two specific sections of Che’s life, Soderbergh sidesteps the less heroic aspects of his struggle, including the executions that followed the Cuban Revolution (omissions that brought criticism from anti-Castro Cubans). But the film’s approach is so intentionally flat that such criticisms are almost not worth the trouble. And while Benicio Del Toro sinks into the role of the asthmatic jungle fighter with total commitment, his Guevara is an elusive protagonist, seen from a distance except for the scenes in which he’s being turned into a celebrity during his NYC interlude. In short, Che is a very intriguing idea for a movie, and not a terribly engaging film. –Robert Horton
March 20, 2006
#1
What kind of sick mind could produce such a piece of hagiography? Why does this sociopath continue to exert such a hold on the maiden-aunt sensibilities of North American liberals? Nothing short of a perverse taste for vicarious violence or a closeted taste for rough trade can explain it.
March 20, 2006
#2
More progression trash in an attempt to glorify people and regimes associated with murders misusing the masses and political system. All copies of this should be burned or sent to Cuba.
March 20, 2006
#3
I just can’t understand how any American can look up to this murderous scumbag for inspiration and hope! It’s like saying “hey I think Adolf Hitler is cool and I’m going to wear a t-shirt with his face depicted on it,” give me a break! Che was a cold blooded murderer who along side Castro butchered thousands of people, and any American who thinks this guy had something to share with the world is a moron. This movie depicts Che as being some kind of sympathetic character–now how can a cold-blooded murderer be a sympathetic character? I normally like Soderbergh’s films, but this atrocity isn’t good. He could have given the viewer an accurate rendering of this sociopath but instead were given this liberal garbage–truly disappointing. Che was truly a disgusting human being–if you can even call him a human being!
March 20, 2006
#4
I was really excited to watch the Che movies. Knowing that Benicio Del Toro was playing the Title character and that it was a two part movie, I felt really excited. Then I watched it… and I had to keep hitting myself to keep myself awake. It is that slow. Granted, Del Toro does a great job at playing Guevara, and this movie misses some of the most important stuff in Guevara’s life. The movie is very poorly shot- shot on a Red camera with very little visual thought. 5 minute shots are abundant and drag the movie down greatly. Not even that gorgeous final shot of Part Two could save this movie! I heard that Soderbergh regrets making the movie now, which I am not surprised. THe documentary feel was terrible and wrecked the movie- the movie was ruined by the constant switching to black and white and the interview segments. Even the dialogue sucked too (“Vanilla piss”?????). And worst of all, the movie is so SLOW!!!!! A movie about an extraordinary man like Che Guevara should be exciting and adventurous, not slow and boring. If you want to know a movie about Guevara that’s exciting and does a great job of chronicling his achievements, I suggest watching The Motorcycle Diaries, which was about Guevara’s motorcycle journey across Latin America before he started the revolution. But steer clear of this dreck at all cost. My Spanish Class was falling asleep while watching this, I was not surprised.
TOTAL:
Violence: Snore/10
Bore factor: 10/10
Snooze: 10000000000/10
Soderbergh: Should hang it up!!!
***Approach with caution***
March 20, 2006
#5
For $30+ and you don’t even get a theatrical trailer!? Seriously, there is absolutely NOTHING on this disc except the movie(which is awesome)! What a freakin’ jip!