Steven Soderbergh’s two-part film “Che” is quite an accomplishment in terms of cinematic virtuosity. I admire these films who adopt “cinéma vérité” techniques to really bring you into the action. The second pillar of this film’s success is the acting performance by Benecio Del Toro. His presence is captivating and he gives real substance to the character of Che. He also looks remarkably alike.

The first part of the film entitled “The Argentine” deals with the Cuban revolution. From jungle guerilla warfare to the battle of Santa Clara, it is a gripping, captivating recreation of the conflict through the portrayal of the definitive intellectual leader.

The second part of the film entitled “Guerilla” deals with actions in Bolivia leading to the capture and execution of the “Che”. As intense as the first part, these sequences enhance the character of the dedicated revolutionary.

This vision presents an heroic character as we mostly see Che Guevara on the battlefield. Many aspects of his life, for example his leading of the purges of the Batista regime are just hastily mentioned.

I strongly recommend the film for its intense directing and a tour-de-force by Benicio Del Toro. A Criterion Blu-Ray edition of the films will be out in 2010.

A word about the politics of the film. I believe a lot of propaganda was fed to us regarding Che Guevara and the legitimacy of the Cuban revolution. As a libertarian, I can only respect the desire to uproot the fascist regime of Batista. The question is the use of violence. How legitimate is guerilla warfare in this case? Well, the Batista regime was the result of a couple of military coups supported by foreign powers. (The United States were extremely prompt at recognizing it.) As Havana became a haven for the mafia (see the life and times of Meyer Lansky), one could say that American interests were mainly organized crime. The high level of corruption and graft of the Batista regime was enough to fill the population with a strong feeling of injustice.

Justice is what we yearn for. Justice, the Law, is at the core of any political system. A system without justice is doomed. The reign of the arbitrary can only survive with the use of violence. Therefore, one can legitimately use violence against violence. It is a form of self-defense. Castro and Guevara were on the side of justice. Unfortunately, foreign political analysis was biased. The principles of justice were not put forth. Policy was made in the name of national interests. In taking sides with the mobsters, the United States lost its moral ground. In my opinion, the Eisenhower regime (himself a general) was catastrophic in spreading the Cold War. (Had he been successful in his bid for the presidency, the non-interventionist Robert Taft would have saved a lot of innocent lives. Naturally, he was not supported by the US military and it is another case against the militaro-industrial-complex already out of control.) Yet, the triumph of Castro and Guevara was logical. Victorious, Guevara addressed five points to the United States that boiled down to “Leave us alone!” This could not happen with such a presidency. It is the illogical blockade of Cuba that threw the cubans into the arms of Moscow. But the big plan was really to invade Cuba. The surprise election of Kennedy muddled these actions. JFK purposefully sabotaged the “Bay of Pigs” mission. (At odds with the interests of the military, the CIA, the mafia and the exiled Cubans in one stroke, he would “pay” for it in 1963.) On the defensive, now in the hands of Moscow, Cuba could never choose the path of normality and democracy, justifying even more containment.

An open policy towards Cuba from the United States, non-intervention, fair and free trade, respectful diplomacy, could have changed a bitter conflict into uninterrupted peace and prosperity.