TIFF (partial) MOVIE REVIEW: Soderbergh’s Che (Both Parts)

NOTE:  I will do my best to avoid commenting directly on any plot points (despite the historical content of the film) as to not spoil a film that has yet to reach wide release.  As a result, I will try to focus on less tenable qualities of the film than plot and historical accuracy.

I had been trying to get tickets for the September 12, 9:00 am 262 minute (plus 20 minute intermission) Toronto International Film Festival screening all week and was delighted to stumble upon a freshly released ticket online approximately 30 hours before the screening.  With the exception of a delicious eggs, bacon, pancakes and orange juice breakfast at Sammy’s One & Only pre-Che, it was all downhill from the ticket purchase onwards.

The 262 minute runtime promised to me a thorough recounting of the man’s life, and the casting of Benicio Del Toro gave me confidence that any eccentrities of the man would be captured.  I assumed incorrectly.  The brunt of the 240 minutes that I managed to stay awake for provided an outline of the battles and notable events of Che’s life as taken from a 400 word History textbook sidebar (the Sandman caught me for a few minutes in Part II.  I am not proud that I couldn’t stay awake for a movie I planned to review however I was trying to abide by the no food or drink rule.  My good friends Red Bull or Tab Energy would be necessary film companions for a movie with this pacing.  So please read this review with that in mind).  Rarely does the film (that I saw) entertain with Ernesto ‘Che’ Guevara’s intensity or tactical brilliance, even during the film’s half a dozen fight sequences.  Che’s contribution to the revolution seems to be found in his popstar hero myth, attempt at ideological purity (in comparison to Fidel Castro), and his abilities as a supervisor of his small teams of brainless fellow revolutionaries, if this film is to be believed.

If the objective of this film was to confuse college kids with Che t-shirts, it was a resounding success. If all I had to base my conception of the man on was this movie, I really wouldn’t know what the big deal was.  Soderbergh’s Guevara lacks the passion, vitality, and (in all but one instance) the oratory flourish commensurate with the honour of being made into a t-shirt logo.

The moment that deserved and received the most enthusiastic applause was the announcement that there would be a 20 minute break in between the two parts, at the moment entitled The Argentine (Part I) and Guerrilla (Part II).  The final moments I saw of the film (I did not stick around for the credits) was made up of a black screen and appropriately somber and inappropriately heartless mood music.  I suppose the gutless musical exit is only inappropriate to the subject matter; it is perfectly in tune with the film.  As the audience took that as their cue for Freedom, the majority rose and perhaps 20% of the audience clapped.  As others who attend TIFF will confirm, almost any film that shows any sort of ambition receives thunderous applause at the end, as a courtesy and validation for $20+ spent on a single ticket if nothing else.  Che, due most likely to the taxing length and slow grind it represents to a viewer’s endurance when seen in one morning (and early afternoon), received something between a smattering and a courteous applause as most rose to flee the theater and defile nearby washrooms.  At my only other TIFF experience, a screening of the horribly thoughtless and disappointing anime Steamboy, the ending was greeted with a baffling cacophony of applause.  So certainly the quality of a TIFF movie, in my opinion, can hardly be gauged by the audience’s reaction.

My reaction, beyond groggy boredom, was that of disappointment.  The subject matter deserves a better film and a better approach, regardless of political leanings.  In fact, I believe the subject of Ernesto Guevara is best served focusing on the character’s passion and dedication, and perhaps the telescopic vision that allowed him to overlook and play a part in acts arguably heinous to achieve heroic at least in intent.  No matter where a viewer may lean politically, if a film is to focus on the character of Che, the man can be explored as a character study in obsession and vigour.  I would just as strongly propose such an approach to a film on Milton Friedman.  Soderbergh’s Che is a Che sanitized and left an empty husk:  Soderbergh’s Che hardly explores character or human relationships; it inspires no passion, and provides no call to activism, or even call to condemnation.  It attains a near-neutrality on strength of banality and a lack of connection to the character, events, or ideals.  As the first five minutes of either part suggests (an introduction to Che’s area of operations for each half of the film, highlighting countries, provinces, cities, and prominent regions by colouring in a map in a deliberate instructional manner while accompanied by soft music), this film is a simplified lecture on the adult life of a polarizing figure, trying to capitalize on a surfeit of invested emotion already prevalent in the subject matter as it ponderously recounts the travails of Ernesto ‘Che’ Guevara.

… and the cow goes moo