[GUEST REVIEW] CHE
I’ve not had much interest in seeing Steven Soderbergh’s Che, I have to admit. The subject matter doesn’t really interest me if I’m honest and I once dated an Argentinian and the break-up of that relationship was pretty bad so if I go the rest of my life without hearing the Spanish language spoken ever again, then that’d be fine by me.
However, saying that my interest has been increased a little by this great guest review by StalePopcorn regular, NotorietyH. This is a really intelligent, well-written piece that encompasses both what is alleged to be great about the film and the difficulties the film is facing from a distribution perspective. I strongly recommend you give it a read and spread some kudos in the “commentarium” afterwards.
Without further ado, here’s NotorietyH with his thoughts on Che, also known as two separate epics called The Argentine and The Guerilla.
I was lucky enough to catch a screening of Che in Cannes back in May. It was a slight ordeal, standing in a queue in the blazing sun for an hour and a half, to sit down for an almost 5 hour movie including the intermission, and also I’d run out of cigarettes. The film is entirely in Spanish, save for a few lines at the very start, and the subtitles were in French, with English subtitles on a separate screen below the main one, so taking in the length, the disconcerting location of the subtitles and my general tiredness, the movie was really going to have to be special to keep me enthralled. Forgive me if my memory of it is a little hazy, as it’s been months since I’ve seen it!
Che is actually two films, The Argentine and The Guerrilla, directed by Steven Soderbergh and starring Benico Del Toro as the titular Che Guevara. I’ll be honest, I didn’t really know a whole lot about Che Guevara going into the film. I’d just seen that iconic poster/t-shirt/mousepad image and had heard him described as either a monster or a hero depending on who you were talking to. Both films don’t really deal with either of those aspects of Che, instead we are shown Che as simply a man, doing what he believed was right. The film doesn’t judge Che, it just presents aspects of his life and character, and leaves it up to you to form your own opinion.
The first film, The Argentine, follows Che as he and Fidel Castro begin the Cuban revolution. We spend most of the film following Che and his guerrilla group through the woods in Cuba, and the film generally focuses on Che’s relationship with the men under his command and Fidel. Benico Del Toro gives an astounding performance as Che, understated, restrained and completely charismatic. His softly spoken demeanour belies the fact that his is a ruthless guerrilla tactician. Demian Bichir is also excellent as Fidel Castro. Again it is a restrained, understated portrayal, which I think is important in a film dealing with two figures who are so often viewed as caricatures. It’s hard to summarise the plot, because so much of the film is just a slow-burning examination of Che as a man.
There are a few violent conflicts with President Batista’s army, and all are shot with a realistic, almost documentary-like feel. Towards the end of the film we jump slightly ahead in time and see the last major conflict between the rebels and President Batista’s army in a Cuban town. This last half an hour or so is completely enthralling, shot again with a realistic, documentary style, we follow Che and the rebels as they try to take control of the town. I don’t think it’s a spoiler to say that the revolution is a success. The film ends with Che driving towards Havana with his men.
Both films are shot almost entirely handheld, with a grainy feel to it. The cinematography and editing are fantastic, and you are completely enveloped in the world of the film.
Before I talk about the second film, I just want to mention a few things about the fact that it is two separate films. Up until recently Che hadn’t picked up a distributor, which is a hell of a long time for a film that’s being touted as a potential Oscar hopeful to go without selling. The problem is that the film cost a lot to make, apparently around $65million, which would require a distributor to pay around $10 million for the rights, according to Daily Variety in Cannes (which made me feel so Hollywood sitting and reading on the Croisette!). The problem with two films, even more so with two Spanish language films, is that if the first one completely flops, and loses the distributor money, what do they do with the second film? People have been saying that the two films might be combined and cut down to one 3 hour film, but there’s a massive problem with this too. Firstly, a lot of really excellent stuff would get cut out, though some trimming during the more staid sequences would benefit the films. Secondly there is a huge jump in time between the first and second films, something like 10 years, which would be incredibly disconcerting, especially in a three hour film. Thirdly, though aesthetically the films are basically the same, they are two very different and distinct films, which is a good point to jump into talking about The Guerilla.
If The Argentine was showing the birth of Che the revolutionary, on his path towards becoming an icon, The Guerrilla is the portrayal of an icon being torn down, and more by himself than by any outside force. The Guerrilla is a slower burn, and more subdued than The Argentine, there are much fewer action scenes, in fact I’m struggling to remember one. This film centres on Che last actions aiding the revolution in Bolivia. Che’s belief in the cause is still there, but he seems more jaded, and out of his depth. Time has passed him by, and the revolution in Bolivia is not the same as the one in Cuba. Basically the entire film is set in the woods of Bolivia as Che leads a small group of rebels. You get a sense that they are already fighting a losing battle, they seem to lack the numbers, the urgency or the will that the Cuban revolutionaries had. Every action they seem to take ends in disaster, and you begin to see cracks in Che’s belief in the cause and his passion, but it is clear in the end, that Che has never lost the belief in his ideals, and in the end I suppose that’s what the two films are about: A portrayal of a man who stands strong in his ideals, refuses to compromise them whether he is on the winning or losing side.
Whether you agree with his politics or his actions is secondary to the respect you have for the man, and that’s how he is portrayed, not as an icon, a monster, or a hero, but as a complicated man, full of ideals and self-belief, and faith in the notion that a small number people can make a difference in the world if their self-belief and cause is strong enough.
Overall the two films combined are outstanding. I was left with a similar feeling as I had after watching The Assassination of Jesse James By The Coward Robert Ford, and the comparison is apt enough really. Both films deal with these larger than life figures in an understated almost mundane way. Someone asked me after the film “Was it awesome?” Which I scoffed at, partly because I didn’t particularly like the person who asked me the question, but mainly because this isn’t an ‘awesome’ film, you’re never in awe of the film. It’s restrained, understated, a film with an epic scope but a narrow focus. This is a character study the same way The Assassination of Jesse James By The Coward Robert Ford was. It’s not about the spectacle of war, it’s not a history of the Cuban revolution.
It’s a low key character film that completely absorbs you from the first frame to the last and is an outstanding achievement, which I hope you’ll all get to see in it’s full form and not some jumbled up monstrosity!
I told you it was a crackin’ review didn’t I? Throw some praise NotorietyH’s way in the talkbacks below why don’t ya? And remember, you too can get your work up on the site just as easily as he did… drop me your review by e-mailing me at undiscovered_genius@hotmail.com with the subject header of ‘Guest Review Submission’ and, well, it’s as easy as that! 
6 Responses to “[GUEST REVIEW] CHE”
Give this guy a job at this site NOW!!!!!
That was such a well-written review! KUDOS, man, really!
Oh yeah, jump all over his prose why don’t you?
I leave you alone for one second woman and you’re sniffing around someone elses sentence structure like a dog on heat!
Man! You jezebal!
But yeah, in all seriousness, it was ace wasn’t it? Let’s see where the future pans out for NotorietyH
ahh man i know nothing about che…i feel so ignorant NOT knowing about him sinse hes really known and alot of my friends rant about him (and wear his shirt)unfortunatelly i really dont know much about him. but great review, 5 popcorns? well i cant see it because its not in my local theatre…(shit is it even out yet!? see told you i knew nothing about this…)
that review was awsome but i doubt it was better then my matrix reloaded review…which ran thus:
“this movie ****ing sucked”
Thanks all! Was fun to write and had been meaning to for a while. Wasn’t the highlight of Cannes for me though, walking into a hotel a few feet behind Natalie Portman and making direct eye contact was! Next year I’ll work up the courage to talk to her and the year after that ye’re all invited to the wedding!
Funilly enough Hazmat my review for the Matrix Reloaded was almost verbatim, except it ha dmore swearing.
We could have a double one – you and Natalie, me and Nora-Jane.
And then wife-swap every 6 months to keep things “fresh”
TraLaLa – I Love FantastyWorld! It Is Great!
Trackbacks
What's Your Opinion?