Che it ain’t so
February 5, 2009 at 10:00 am by Curt Holman in A&E
WAITING FOR THE MAN: Benicio Del Toro as Che (right) and Catalina Sandino Moreno as Aleida Guevara
Che, Steven Soderbergh’s epic-length consideration of Latin American revolutionary Ernesto “Che” Guevara, feels almost like the director’s bid to atone for his Ocean’s 11 movies. The star-driven caper comedies celebrate Las Vegas, superficial glitz and the joys of money for nothing. What better way to compensate than an austere cinematic portrait of an iconic figure who gave his life in opposition to materialism and poverty?
Watching Che certainly feels like an act of penance. Soderbergh and producer/leading man Benicio del Toro present what could be called an anti-biopic, studiously avoiding the kind of big gestures and historical oversimplifications that define more crowd-pleasing films about real personalities. Guevara’s background as a doctor, his formative experiences, even his wife and children barely get passing mentions in the film’s four-and-a-half hour running time.
Instead, the film splits into two parts to take a clinical look at Guevara during two of the most significant periods of his life. The first half (unofficially called “The Argentine” in reference to Guevara’s Argentinian origins) focuses on Guevara’s crucial, decidedly unglamorous work as a guerilla fighter in the Cuban revolution in late 1950s. Part one switches from the lush greens and yellows of the Cuban jungles to black-and-white recreations of Guevara’s New York visit in early 1960s, granting interviews and addressing the United Nations. The second half, “Guerilla,” follows Guevara’s doomed bid to bring the revolution to Bolivia in the mid-1960s.
Soderbergh approaches the film like a Ph.D. dissertation, as if he’s recreating entries in Guevara’s day planner from the scrupulously recorded dates in question. Guevara marches through jungles. He suffers an asthma attack. He treats a comrade’s wounds. He extols the values of literacy. He marches through the jungle some more. Del Toro won the Best Actor award for Che at last year’s Cannes Film Festival and never seems to be “playing” Guevara, but simply behaving exactly as Guevara would. The approach, however, proves not just emotionally remote from the audience, but even physically distant from the camera. So often Soderbergh places del Toro in long shot or facing away from the camera, it’s as if David Lean, instead of making Lawrence of Arabia, made a film called The Back of Lawrence of Arabia’s Head.
Che’s two parts each conclude with extended battle scenes that have the verisimilitude of war documentaries, yet build to sharply opposite outcomes. Guevara and his forces sweep block-by-block through Santa Clara in a decisive victory for the Cuban revolution, but Guevara’s compatriots end up chased like animals through the Bolivian mountains near the end of the second film. Che’s split structure invites consideration of why the Cuban revolution took root, but the Bolivian one failed to win the necessary hearts and minds.
Even more than its running time, Che’s dispassionate point of view makes great demands of its audience. Despite Soderbergh’s intellect and del Toro’s talent, the film(s) don’t quite offer an equitable return on investment. But perhaps only a capitalist would expect such a thing.
Che: The Argentine and Guerilla 2 stars Directed by Steven Soderbergh. Starring Benicio del Toro, Demián Bichir. Rated R. Opens Fri., Jan. 30. At Landmark Midtown Art Cinema.
(Photo by Daniel Daza/An IFC Films release)











February 5th, 2009 at 11:57 am
The man was a murderer who helped condemn millions to live under communism. He deserved every bit of what happened to him in Bolivia.
February 5th, 2009 at 12:11 pm
Che Guevara, the most beloved mercenary of all time.
February 5th, 2009 at 2:33 pm
Question for the gallery:
Why is that if I tell people I thought Downfall was a great movie, no one feels the need to remind me that Nazism was bad and no one accuses me of being a Nazi sympathizer?
However, if I wrote on this blog that I’m very curious to see Che because I think the man is fascinating, I might be pilloried as a Communist sympathizer.
Argentine doctor becomes international revolutionary and political celebrity icon: I don’t have to be a Commie to be fascinated by that.
I don’t mean the question sarcastically or obnoxiously. What is it about the Che phenomenon that causes people to denounce him at his mere mention?
For the record, I don’t like him and I think trustafarians in Che t-shirts are pitiable.
By the way, did anyone else see The Rutles play at Che Stadium? Great show.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F86ph2Sd0iI
February 5th, 2009 at 2:43 pm
I call you a commie because you are one, commie. I denounce your fascination with Che. Go join a collective or something.
February 7th, 2009 at 1:00 pm
Che is a worldwide hero.
Posters on this site are pathetic douches.
Hasta la Victoria Siempre !
February 10th, 2009 at 11:07 pm
CLAIM: “Che killed innocents”
REALITY: Jon Lee Anderson, author of the 800 + page ‘Che Guevara: A Revolutionary life’, who spent 5 years researching the man:
“I have yet to find a single credible source pointing to a case where Che executed an innocent. Those persons executed by Guevara or on his orders were condemned for the usual crimes punishable by death at times of war or in its aftermath: desertion, treason or crimes such as rape, torture or murder.”
February 17th, 2009 at 10:16 am
I modified the anti-drug slogan made famous by First Lady Nancy Reagan (i.e., “Just Say No!”) to create a new and increasingly-popular line of anti-Ché merchandise (i.e., “Just Ché No!”).
February 17th, 2009 at 10:38 am
mr t:
i pity u, fool!
sorry, it had to be said.
February 17th, 2009 at 12:24 pm
Andisheh – There is no need to remind anyone that Hitler was a bad guy because his acts have been stripped of mythology. I don’t see tshirts in L5P of Hitlers stylized face. Guevara is held up as a hero and Hitler is not, except by completely fringe whack jobs. Ergo, when I see a piece that promotes him, I comment.
February 17th, 2009 at 12:26 pm
Jon O – thank you for the textbook example of a “straw man” argument.