It's always great to see filmmakers hopping from mainstream commercial fare to more independent, impassioned projects. It shows that they can make something that will appeal to the mainstream but also that they can divert their talent toward something that they can put more thought and personal investment into.
And Steven Soderbergh is one of those filmmakers. He can make something like Out of Sight but also Traffic, Ocean's Eleven, then Solaris, Ocean's Twelve over to The Good German, on and on. And after the presumed wrapping up of his Ocean's series he's stepped back into the more independent light with his mammoth four and half hour tale of Ernesto 'Che' Guevara's life. But although unquestioned admiration and respect goes to Soderberg for having the passion and the determination to make such a film in such an uncompromising way, it (Part One, anyway) is nonetheless a disappointing exercise.
Released in most places in two parts, Che: Part One tells the part of Che Guevara's story that begins in 1956 as he and a group of Cuban exiles (led by Fidel Castro) manage to mobilize popular support (including an army) and topple the regime of dictator Fulgencio Batista.
The feeling that immediately comes when watching Che is the fact that there's more story here to delve into than Soderbergh (or anyone, for that matter) could possibly convey in any sort of satisfying way. There's a lot to the life of this infamous figure - so many complexities and details that any attempt to recreate it on film either comes off as cluttered if too much is covered (as has been done here) or unfinished if not enough is dealt with. It's a lose-lose situation for Soderbergh on that front.
It's very clear that Soderbergh has a lot of passion for the subject matter here. He's put his all into it not just as director but also as producer and cinematographer (under the name Peter Andrews, as he always does). So the passion and determination put into the project gives it a spine of respectability and worthiness. But that in and of itself is one of its biggest failings — Soderbergh is trying too hard to include everything that happened, to cover all the bases, if you will, but in doing so he paints a frustratingly incomplete portrait of the titled man, so much so that he almost becomes a supporting character in his own story. Although no criticism goes to the performance of Benicio Del Toro who really is quite stunning in a role he was born to play - something recognised by the film world when he received the Best Actor Award at the Cannes Film Festival last year - it nevertheless is frustrating because of the way he's given so much screen time and yet so little attention.
.jpg?t=20120527181101)
Article comments