There's some obvious contextual information that we can divulge on when discussing the film Che. It's most notable for being released in two separate parts or volumes if you like, albeit having its world premiere at Cannes in 2008 as well as screening during the Toronto International Film Festival in its unbroken, 4 hour entirety. But now, you can only view the film only in two volumes of equal length now, and this review is concentrated on Part One otherwise subtitled as The Argentine. Next, contrary to possible popular belief or assumption, Che is not your typical biopic film. It doesn't even fall under the realms of being conventional, no. It is directed by American filmmaker Steven Soderbergh who recently made a name for himself with the Ocean's Eleven series; but this recent project of his is a far departure from such follies.
With the aforementioned and hugely popular trilogy of films, Mr. Soderbergh showcased his variety and diversity as a filmmaker by delving into the world of mainstream cinema, leaving a decade long era of experimental, art-house and niche works: from his breakthrough film which won the Palm d'Or Sex, Lies and Videotapes to even less accessible works like Schizopolis and Gray's Anatomy, Soderbergh cemented himself as a truly innovative auteur of contemporary film. Now, he returns to those roots with recent projects The Good German, Bubble, The Girlfriend Experience and now Che. With these, he also maintains this title as an auteur. Che is directed with both fiery passion and earnest rumination at the same time. It is helmed by a director who does not only have a clear mindset and a clear vision of what he's doing, but with a sprawling scope and vision which is so impressive and certainly evoked in this film.
The Argentine focuses the birth of the Cuban revolution, from the landing of figurehead Fidel Castro, our title character Ernesto 'Che' Guevara and other revolutionaries on Cuba and their attempts to topple the dictatorial regime of Fulgencio Batista: a junta riddled with corruption and starving their own nation in a wave of oligarchy. The movie starts immediately right off the bat with barely a hint of conventional contextual setup and introduction of characters. Instead, Che (the film) and Soderbergh expects the audience to know who the people are and which side they're on; perhaps not the events of the film as he tells them to the audience on his own behalf, but it certainly indicates the type of audience which he is recommending this film be seen by.
That audience is one not just willing and interested to learn more about this iconic and influential revolutionary and historical leader but also one who can appreciate the angle which Soderbergh is going for. We've commented upon Che's highly unorthodox approach to the genre of biopic, and through this the movie demands a crowd who can respect such cinematic technique and the intricate technical aspects which make Che such a diverse and dynamic film. This can be seen as a leading innovator in the biopic genre and an example of brilliant combination of mainstream and art-house film techniques, with much more focus on the latter, naturally. But the point is, Che is a movie which is dazzlingly unique, so impressive from how it operates and the way it chooses to do so and just such a fine, fine film.
What's more, the movie is so beautifully, brilliantly and breathtakingly shot that we sit gob-smacked at the aesthetic of The Argentine more than the enthrallment of the story on quite a few occasions. Soderbergh's and cinematographer Peter Andrews' sustained use of hand-held cameras immerses us in a cinéma vérité style environment which is both beneficial and most apt during intimate scenes, dialogue driven scenes and immersive, frenetic battle scenes. The latter, most especially, are filmed with a continued sense of closeness to the characters which continues to thrive on the titles of a biopic more than a war or action film. Interspersed with this early military campaign are scenes of Che's addressing of the United Nations in another timeline they are shot in beautiful black-and-white and reinvigorate the film.
Now don't get me wrong but there is inference as to why Che: Part One has not attained a much higher score. Despite all this praise which we can easily direct to all parts of the film, the impact which we would desire from painting the portrait of such an influential figure is, for the most part, missing. Perhaps it's due to Soderbergh and screenwriter Peter Buchman's decision not to show any of our title characters' negative traits whatsoever and only paint him as an heroic figure fighting for the good of the people like a Robin Hood figure, so to speak, even though that this is something of a distortion. So in terms of historical accuracy Che falters and ultimately that leads to the dearth and want of something a little more cerebral and provocative rather than an exercise in cinematic and narrative technique, however laudable that is.
But it is clear that the positives far outweigh the negatives and are unable to fully incapacitate the film. The technical merit which does manage to mould a story cohesive, structured and absorbing is more than enough to get The Argentine across the line. And of course we cannot forget about Benicio Del Toro, who plays Che Guevara with a subdued and dormant zeal which should set a benchmark for any performance in film which does not and need not rely on bombast or bravado. This is a very fine movie here. It is not one of Soderbergh's most successful efforts and it might not reach the echelons of the best films of the year, but the movie's good enough to enamour us and at least compel us to award it an honourable mention.
7.5/10