Quite an epic seeing it is split in two parts, totaling 269 minutes of footage. For me the downfall came with the screenplay where action was intermittently replaced with quotes from Che almost like clockwork. Finding a balance between the ideologies of Che the man and his actions in bringing them to surface is a hard achievement. Perhaps they had the right idea in shooting 2 separate films but missed the chance for ultimate execution. If this is true, Che's biopic is ironically accurate.

Del Toro is great as Che, though I don't know much about the real revolutionist. Soderbergh did his best trying to make a non-Hollywood movie. His overuse of flesh backs and flash forwards was a real a bittersweet for the first half of the film. The second part was more structural and digestible to open Che as historical character.

The way this film is presented demands some knowledge of the historical context. Gradually, over the 2 hours Del Toro builds a picture of Che as a leader but the narrative doesn't leave you with a sense of what he was fighting against. I couldn't connect with the character.

Earnest (pun intended) presentation of the lead-up to victory in Havana that at least attempts to give a sense of the political discussions and strategies that animated the movement. This episode is very well photographed and looks beautiful. The somewhat detached feel is clearly the result of a directorial decision grounded in the politics of the subject, and is entirely defensible: the alternatives were basically hagiography or judgment, both of which would have been inferior choices.

Sodobergh takes the only measure possible to take the cuban revolution seriously and makes the film as anti-hollywoodic as possible. Which is great. The camera walks between the troops indifferently depicting scenes from the revolution without the excessive glamour that is typical of a Hollywood biopic, giving the film an authentic feel of the gritty, improvised guerrilla war. Benicio del Toro fits perfectly in Che's shoes, too; can't wait to see part 2.

Beautiful.

It's a little bit slow but has good spirit

clocking in at over two hours (the second does as well) it manages to keep the entire duration packed with little boring time. the problem with this movie is that it doesn't have a very cohesive script and tends to jump around way too much, not enough action. though it was plenty interesting.

Slow-paced revolution with eyecandy landscapes as its stage. Glorifies the revolutionaries but also subtly shows how they laid the foundations for new repression.

Soderbergh didn't seem to know what direction to take this. An interesting feature that is lacking in some areas but Che is a Gonzo like figure where making a bad movie about him is difficult. Del Toro is great and I'll now seek out part two.

not much telling about che. it's an average movie except for the documentary-style shots.

I found it quite beautiful and, well, nicely ... proportioned. Like, the tempo in what ends as a purely cronological story, was quite calming. Yes, passages are boring, and at times it lacks nerve, but it is a great portrait, made in an unpretentious style which suits it. Much too hated, for sure, in comparison to most american blockbuster biographies.

"Too emotionally dry to embrace but too ingenious to dismiss, Che is a fascinating, problematic film." - Fernando F. Croce

Magnificent cinematic representation of a highly controversial figure in political history. The first part deals more with the personal values and morals of Guevara as a fighter and a politican. Both parallels are very well illustrated on screen. The Guerilla deals more with the humanist side of Guevara and the wider struggle for freedom, the heroic sacrifices made for it, and the high price paid to achieve it Benicio Del Toro does not depict Guevara; he personifies him. He IS Guevara.

I think in the end the purpose of trying to seriously portray Che is lost on a generation where they sell shirts with his face at Hot Topic and teens quote him against their "fascist" parents. While being technically competent trying so hard not to be a Hollywood biopic, it doesn't come off as genuine, especially in the script where it's Che-ism after Che-ism. Let an Argentinian direct a film about the Argentine.

Out-perversing Gus Van Sant's Milk, Soderbergh makes a four-hour-plus biopic about a historical figure without providing a glimmer of charm or narrative coherence.

68.000

An inspiring story, in some ways. Cinematography/directing could be better.

I really like the atmosphere of this movie. Instead of opting to go with the more uplifting or "movie-ized" feel of a historical story, this movie goes out its way to make it feel like you're a part of the events that occur in the movie and is more of a display of the situation in question. The action has much more tension as a result. However, the movie is too disjointed and incoherent for it to be as thoroughly enjoyable that it should be. Still worth a watch given the direction, though.

Che has very interesting moments. In fact, in sections the film is superb and Del Toro's performance as Che Guevara is excellent. However the film never seems to come together, instead it seems to just wander with general intent than definite intention. Even so it's still very well made making it worth a watch.

With all the praise del Toro deserves, the guy who played Castro in what was essentially a bit part should get a shout out - he got his mannerisms down pat. The film feels episodic but the only real weakness is when it gets bogged down in the Santa Clara battle scenes, it seemed somewhat without context and had too much time devoted to it. Treads a fine line with the potential for both slavering hero-worship and iconoclastic revisionism but generally succeeds without pandering to the audience.