A four hour movie? Okay, so they're going to break it up into two movies for release, but they were originally intended to be a whole and will have some screenings as a whole (which is how it ran in L.A. during its qualifying run.) Still Che is a massive work, even if it's taken in two doses. Che Guevara is such a mythic figure that it would be hard to do his story justice in the usual two hour film. Even after over four hours of this film, there is much more I'd like to know.

The first half, originally subtitled The Argentine, is the account of Guevara's involvement in the Cuban revolution that brought Fidel Castro to power. We see small bits (out of chronological order) of Guevara with Castro in Mexico and of Guevara in New York to address the United Nations and meet various American politicians and socialites. Most of this part of the film, however, is the story of the two year campaign to take control of Cuba. Guevara served as comandante of one of the columns of the revolutionary army. He trained new recruits, taught the illiterates among them to read, and showed a great skill at military tactics. There were ups and downs along the way, but in time they forced President Batista out of the country and the war was won. As Guevara says at the end of Part 1, this isn't the end of the revolution; it is the beginning of the revolution.

Part 2, originally subtitled Guerilla, takes place in Bolivia where, years after the Cuban revolution, Guevara tried to recreate the Cuban revolution to bring his idea of freedom to the rest of Latin America. Bolivia turned out to be nothing like Cuba. In Cuba, the rural population supported the revolutionaries. The Communist Party in the cities may have preferred a non-violent coup, but cooperated with Castro and his forces. There was coordination between the various forces under Castro. But in Bolivia, there was little support. The peasants never rallied. Many saw Guevara only as a foreigner who was stirring up trouble. The Communist Party offered no support. In time Guevara's forces were decimated and Guevara captured and executed.

Among the differences between Parts One and Two is that in Part One we are often given specific dates, but in Part Two we get a date at November 3, 1966 and a notation that this is Day 1. From time to time instead of dates we are told it is Day 141 or 219. This adds to a distinct difference in tone between the two parts as well. Part One has a sense of progress -- of history being made. Part Two is much more about failure, hardship, and endurance.

In some ways, Part One could be a stand alone film. It has a distinct beginning and its ending could serve as a finishing comment on the nature of revolution. The second part really wouldn't work by itself. You can't appreciate Guevara's mission in Bolivia without seeing how different it is from Cuba.

What is it that makes Guevara such an icon for revolution? Is it because he seems to have been the quintessential revolutionary who saw this (rightly or wrongly) as a way of changing the world for the better? Is because of the familiar photograph Guerrillero Heroico that seems to be a man with a vision? Is it because, from the perspective of revolutionaries throughout the world, he was martyred in the cause?

Actually, this film doesn't really answer (or even ask) these questions. It shows us Guevara's determination in support of revolution, but really tells us little about what he hoped to bring about through that revolution.

Continue: 1 2