(Reposted from earlier edition due to the movie now being on DVD)
Steven Soderbergh’s “Che” has created an interesting reaction; in fact both a negative and cynical reaction from a number of US/Canada movie reviewers. For a movie that does not seem too interested in defining Che systematically, it sure feels that other prejudices are at play.
Let us be honest shall we? Most of the negative reviews are ultimately an ideological prejudice, or at the very least a politically correct, North American style of playing it safe. Very rarely have I read any reviews of this movie without reading that A: Che was a failed/misguided revolutionary or B: After the Cuban revolution quite a few of Batista’s thugs were shot (apparently US reviewers forget just how much bloodier their own revolution was). This apparently gives said reviewers a convenient way to dismiss the film. This is likely not the best perspective on any film, considering they should be reviewing the actual movie and not their own bias. My own cynicism tells me that many of them are afraid that their latte/cappuccinos will get cold from explaining to their friends why they might like a movie that humanizes a “commie”.
It is probably because of this, among a number of other reasons, that I find the whole concept of the movie revolutionary and very courageous. This is not only because it does not rely on the close up to make its point. Benicio del Toro not only went to show it in Cuba where, unsurprisingly, it received an incredibly positive reaction, but also in Miami, where the heart of the anti-Castro movement lives, and where he endured rather unfriendly protests from people who had not actually seen the movie.
To be clear, “Che” is not a complete biography. Most of the film is devoted to the grueling experience of day to day guerrilla fighting. There are bits where you get to see Che with Fidel, a very young Raul, a funny Camilo Cienfuegos, but these characters are not the actual focus of the film. There is a number of small voice-over sections that explain the roots of Che’s revolutionary commitment, but again, we never see this truly separate from the guerrilla aspect of it all, with the marked exception of Che’s historic visit to New York City in 1964 to speak at the United Nations.
Sean Penn was not off the mark when he wished Benicio Del Toro was the actual nominee for the Oscar for best actor. Not far into the movie, you forget that you are watching Benicio and you get the feeling that you are actually experiencing more of a documentary than a Hollywood production. This achieved without bombast of any kind, is one the hidden jewels in the film. It is really a quiet tour de force for both actor and director. However, we live in times of immediate gratification, Facebook, and “reality” TV and many have complained about the length of the movie. I take some issue with this, mostly because I suspect that you could not do Che genuine justice with a 90-minute movie. That might be fine for those that want to escape at the movies, but that length would be unsatisfying for those who want to get a sense of a real man.
Che is a movie that demands it be properly digested, the way books used to be a long time ago. Courageous filmmaking pays respect by its very format to its subject. Watching this film does not evoke the same emotional response as watching the very beautiful “Motorcycle Diaries” but it is complementary. One shows the beginning of an ideal and “Che” shows the price you may pay to achieve it.
At the end of the day, I did feel that the man in this film, the untouchable icon seen on so many posters/rallies/t-shirts, became a human being who wanted to change the world. I felt that I was walking with a friend, a passionate man irrespective of your read on his ideology. Ultimately, he was that rare kind of person who spoke what he thought and did what he said. Che tells his captors shortly before being executed in cold blood, (another bit the negative reviewers never seem terribly bothered with) that “maybe our failure will wake them up”.
Looking at the progress in Bolivia now, with the election of a president of indigenous blood who claims Che Guevara as an inspiration, as well as the incredible changes all over Latin America, makes me think that Che’s “failure” might have been a premature assumption by his political enemies.
Beautiful review, Mikhail