A few years back I was actually dabbling in writing, or adapting, a Che screenplay for a small production company in LA. Back then, though, it was exactly the wrong political climate to make such a film. Now, it’s all the rage. With Soderbergh set to release his Che duo pics at Cannes, all eyes are suddenly on the sexy Commie revolutionary. Cinematical has a review of a new Che doc called Chevolution, which screened at the Tribeca Film Fest:
Social tagging: Che > TribecaWhat struck me about the movie was its completeness; it not only took a careful look at the lives of Guevara and Korda, but it also examined the genesis of the famous photograph, taken at a memorial for the victims of the 1960 terrorist attack on the ship Le Cubre. The photo, one of two frames of Che amongst rolls taken by many photographers at the event, wasn’t even published in the local papers the next day, but showed up internationally seven years later. Che’s revolutionary message, which dovetailed nicely with the student protests that had started around the world by that time, combined with a lack of copyright laws in Cuba, allowed the image to spread like wildfire around the globe.
I think it will be great if a better understanding of Che is accomplished through any or all of these films. Clearly, the public is divided in labeling him a martyr or a murderer. I’ll sit back and examine the new evidence.
People are entitled to their own opinions of the man, but I think it’s funny that young kids or students go around with t-shirts with his symbol on them without even knowing a thing about Che – they just do it because it looks “cool”, when if they knew anything about him they might be horrified by the things he has done. I’m no expert, but I know he was behind building concentration camp-equivalents in Cuba, so it’s at least worth looking into before people start hero-worshiping him out of the blue.
why does this picture of Che remind me of a current movie star? I don’t mean Benecio or Gael Garcia Bernal, either. If you shortened the hair, gave him a shave, removed the beret, you’d get…?
Haroldsmaude, Sean Connery?
As for this whole topic…I’m interested in seeing Soderbergh’s CHE pictures, but if he gets off on the idea of making either picture be a hero-masturbation piece, I’ll be greatly disapointed.
Che Guevara is a martyr for his cause, but did the ends justify his noted executions, camps, and shitty* industrilization management? In his so-called pursuit for “justice,” he practiced the very actions that marked him as equal as the injustified military dictatorship he sought to overthrow.
Yet, “Che” and Che Guevara are now two different things, for that name has become a symbol, whatever it stands for, outside of the person.
Such contradictions in historical figures can be great fodder for material to work a good picture out of, and get Oscar support….look at PATTON, a movie about a great military leader who is only defeated by the only enemy that could undermine him: Himself.
*=Apparently, his CEO skills were on par with George Dubya Bush. Ouch…
HaroldsMaude,
ok, one more time…
What’s the first rule of Fight Club?
As far as I know, aren’t the two films looking at the two opposite public opinions of Che – one that he was a hero, and one that he was a villain (that’s a rubbish word to describe it but I can’t think of another one at the moment. Rebel didn’t sound “bad” enough).
No the two films are just looking at two different points in his life. Argentine is set during the Cuban Revolution and Guerilla is set in the post Cuba years and his revolutionary efforts in the rest of South America.
Ryan, Rule #1….Never support Michael Bay.
Well, thats my first rule for MOVIE CLUB.