The revolutionary guy. You know, the one who’s on all the T-shirts and bags. He’s meant to represent freedom and power to the people? Everyone has a basic idea of who Ernesto ‘Che’ Guevara is, or at least what he represents if you’re not into modern history, and the life of the Argentinean guerrilla fighter has been put on film before. Just not on this scale. With a four-hour-plus edit causing a sensation at Cannes last year, Che walked away with a Best Actor win to Benicio Del Toro along with knowing moviegoers can still appreciate epic film.

Epic seems the only way to describe it and audiences at the BAFF were lucky enough to catch the same Cannes edit, screening both parts one and two in full. Pending on distribution decisions, Che may be released as separate films – but this won’t hurt the story as they’re presented totally different and connecting characters are minimal.

Che: Part One

Rating: 4/5

While set up as an introduction of sorts, Part One is the meatier of the two parts. It picks up in 1956 at the start of the Cuban Revolution war as the July 26 Movement sail back into Cuba from their exile in Mexico to try again to overthrow dictator Fulgencio Batista. Over the course of the two years of guerrilla fighting, Che helps to recruit soldiers, fight on the front lines and act as the medico even when he himself was wounded. The Argentinean appears to us as a very philosophical person, with narration giving us insight into his thoughts as well as giving us a bit of background on the situation.

Director Steven Soderbergh uses flashbacks that slightly confuse in the first third of Part One but it soon settles into a smoother ride. Relations with the US are shown through integrated real footage and simulated interviews, and these English-speaking parts break up the Spanish (included perhaps to prevent it from being classed as a foreign film). Most characters take a backseat (although there is unexpected comedy from two overconfident teens desperate to become soldiers), even Fidel Castro – and what’s irritating is the lack of background. It seems strange that we aren’t given much about how Che met Castro, or why he wanted to fight for Cuba. We only find out mid-film that he has a wife and child; there’s very little past to him.

Visually, Soderbergh uses blue tones and vivid greens to give a lush portrait of the Sierra Maestra outside of Havana. He changes it up, with battle scenes well placed in between the trekking that are orchestrated very well. Action is mixed in with mild comedy as well as the dramatic final shootout before moving into Havana. There are good supporting performances from Julia Ormond as the American interviewer and Catalina Sandrino Moreno as companion/love interest Aleida, but the length impacts the most in the middle, which does drag a bit. Thankfully, the build-up to the final battle is a good one and holding on to the end is worth the wait.

Che: Part Two

Rating: 3.5/5

Six years after the successful coup and we see Che is a happy family man, having made a life with Aleida in Cuba – but when Fidel Castro reads out a letter from him on American television, we understand that his work isn’t done. His disappearance is almost the stuff of legend, Bolivia the next candidate for his Latin American revolution. Part Two is more of a slog as we see his journeys with new guerrillas and increased pressure from the US and Bolivian governments (including a good Joaquim de Almeida as Bolivian President Rene Barrientos), as well as hostility from the Bolivian people.

As with Part One, Che tries to help the people through education, moving between villages to teach as well as lend support. He believed that an uneducated country is a vulnerable one, and education was a key focus. This time around though, there is no Castro by his side, he’s constantly incognito and his age is starting to show. Don’t forget, Che was in his 50’s by this point and his ongoing asthma increased. Part Two is the fall of the revolutionary, and the sad end to his life sees a man who fights to the end.

Soderbergh doesn’t play with colour this time around, but as with Part One, hand-held cameras give us an intimate feel, and point-of-view shots from Che in his final moments are perfectly used. There isn’t as much to tell in Part Two though, and this is where it fails in complimenting Part One well. It seems stretched out, and while we do learn about Che’s character it feels hollow in parts. Again, the end is where the film picks up, with his demise drawing the viewer in to see his final days with more interest.

Verdict:

For both parts, the obvious standout is Benicio Del Toro. His portrayal of Che as a human that wanted to help is nothing short of awesome. Che in both parts is perhaps more than can be chewed for most – it is a gruelling watch, but worth it for both final sequences particularly. Watching them separate could prove to be more successful for viewers as well as box office takings, so don’t get deterred if seeing them back to back isn’t a possibility. Che is a well-made film about the revolutionary, but more about his reasons for fighting and less slugging through the forests could’ve improved what we see. Although not perfect, a standout performance from Del Toro and enough interest in the man of topic will keep you hooked.

Overall:

Follow the author Katina Vangopoulos on Twitter.