Motorcycle Diaries

Do you think that the impact would be less if it was not about 'Che' and Granado and only about two young men on a journey?

Is is just me, or does that movie soud very dull...?

It is far from it, simply watch it brimstone.


@JoeFX; The initial impact through trailers on the internet, and tv would be less. But the films cinematic impact wouldn't diminish in the slightest.

I'll have to catch it then

I have high standards for it.

I didn't get to see it unfortunately. so I bought the book (in spanish) to make up for it and will hopefully get it on when it's out on video.

Has come out here but big fan of Gael Garcia Bernal so definatley cath it when it arives in South Africa.

Has not come out here but big fan of Gael Garcia Bernal so definatley cath it when it arives in South Africa.

I saw the film last week-end.
I think it's quite good, even if not great.

It's a good portrait of the 50s in Latin America.
A good psychological portrait of Guevara and his friend Granado.
Even if Gael García Bernal is a good actor, De la Serna (as Granado) steals the movie. Just about everyone agrees on that.
I agree that it's more of a road movie than a political film. It's also entertaining, specially the first half.

It made me understand Che a little better. A great character.
It made me think about his virtues, and about how reason nurtures monsters when virtues become compulsory.
It made me think about the Christian roots in Che, and in many Latin American left-wingers (the idea of visiting a leprosary, so biblical!). Guevara seems more inspired in St. Francis of Assisi and the Spartan morals than in Karl Marx. I do believe he was (or rather that he re-interpreted the bible with a tinge of Marxism).
It made me think about the place he chose to die (after leaving Cuba, at a time where his difference with Castro were open): Bolivia, the center of the Andean social nightmare.
Of course it made think about how little have things changed at their root. A similar voyage would have today better roads, a little more riches, but the very same social injustice.
Finally, it made me think about my father. I practically saw him, as a young man, in Granado. Just the kind of macho, socially concient, easy tongued, very corny, adventurous, romantic, lyrical Latin American of that generation.

nice post fb

This is on my must see list and I appreciate both Locke's and fbaezer's reviews.

I now have seen it, I liked it though not as much as I excpected, what I most enjoyed were the poetic quotes of what I assume are Guevara's memories.

I agree also agree it's more of a road film, and that's why I think the birthday speech is a little out of place even if it's Che we're talking about.

I knew practically nothing about Guevara before this film and that made me think the character portrayed in the movie is out of reality.

On the contrary, Joe, I think the Che Guevara portrayed in the film is very believable. At least, it checks quite well with descriptions of his contemporaries.

Guevara's asthma is a key to understand him. He had a love-hate relationship with pain . In many senses, he craved for pain (there are several anecdotes in his life about it). He identified himself with those who suffer (social injustice), wanted to suffer with them and was ready to sacrifice himself for them. He did sacrifice himself. That's why he's seen as a Christ-like figure by some.

A shallow anti-Communist critique of this film warns viewers: "they present Ché as a good person; but he was a fanatic and killed many people".
Well, IMHO, that's precisely the point: a seemingly good, and good-willing individual, can become a historical monster, without ever leaving his good feelings towards mankind. You see a little of that inhuman monster in the film.

Ché was damn self-righteous. He wanted a world without exploitation and was willing to destroy the world in his deed (no kidding, he said that if he, and not the Russians, were in charge of the red button during the October missile crisis of 1962, he would have pressed it).
Unlike Castro and his cronies, Guevara always lived with very little. Unlike Castro and his cronies, Guevara knew that Communism was to be an economical failure. He said so. That's why he wanted to create a "New Man": generations of people ready to give, not to take; people without greed or selfishness. Near saints. Communism would work beautifully if we all were near saints.
If people resisted (by being "selfish"), it was not because humans are like that, but a result of the remnants of the old ideology, that had to be fought.

That's why Ché Guevara split with Fidel Castro. Guevara was near the Chinese Cultural Revolution's ideas and ideals. Castro was more of a pragmatist, and knew that the Cuban Revolution needed massive Soviet subsidies in order to survive.

Yes, Ché and his "eyes loaded with future". The money-hater becomes the father of the rationing card. The liberator becomes the yolk: "¡Seremos como el Ché!" is the motto of the Cuban Pioneros (compulsory Communist boy scouts). "We shall be like Ché": and kids are taught, from the earliest age, to ask for nothing and to give everything to the Revolution (to the totalitarian State).

Finally, a telling moment in the film. Guevara is in Peru, reading Carlos María Mariátegui's best known book: "7 Interpretative Essays of Peruvian Reality". For a person like myself, that scene sends shivers. He's avidly reading Shining Path's (the infamous Peruvian Maoist terrorist group) main inspiring source.

I'm watching for this to be shown near me. I was quite taken by the previews. Thanks for the comments and reviews.

Thanks for the info, fbaezer, made me learn a little more about Che and changed my views on the film.

I showed this film as part of my library film program last weekend. We have a modestly big screen (10 x 12 feet) so there is a feeling of being in a real theater. Many people had heard of the film but few had seen it because it received so little play in the local theaters. I think that was partly because it is slow and partly because in this country we are fanatical anti-communists and don't want to be seen as glorifying anybody associated with that.

It is a road film, for sure. It is also a little slow. That, to me, is typical of most films made outside the U.S. -- Hollywood never gives us real life --- films from this country seem to always be larger than life in one way or another and so we become, I think, jaded to reality.

The M.Diaries was spiced up with a lot of swearing and a few amusements because truly not much happens. Not much happens, that is, except for the changes going on in the minds of the young men. We see that they are already idealists because their goal is to volunteer at a leper hospital. We also see that they are human -- something that is lost in the reputation of such a colorful figure as Che Guevara.

The film itself is an easy road to begin to understand Che and his mystique. I totally agree with fb that the Argentinian actor nearly steals the show. He also becomes an important figure in Cuba -- their friendship continues throughout their lives. What a cool character; I'll bet he receives a big boost to his career.

There is a hard-headed right vs. wrong that is evident in Che's character which, I guess, shows how he reached his chosen path. The inequities for the native people of S. America are touched on but without slamming it into our heads. (Hollywood would have shown blood, screaming, raping, mayhem and a lot of deaths -- but, of course, they would never actually show any of that because it is too radical a story to tell.) The horrors of the disappearances, the poverty & the stealing of land is touched on but without the details, except in the eyes of the people. Those photographic images are awesome.

My favorite line: The Incas and the Incapables.

To me, the film is worth watching just to see the magnificence of S.America, but the importance of showing us this window into a life and a time we willfully ignore in this country makes the film a standout.