Diarios de motocicleta

THE MOTORCYCLE DIARIES (Walter Salles - Argentina/Chile/France/Germany/UK/USA 2004).

From the director who unleashed the Oscar-nominated CENTRAL DO BRASIL (1998) on the world and is now torturing audiences around the world with Paris JE T'AIME (a joint-project with some other world-weary humanist directors), a film unlikely to increase Paris' appeal. The film seems conveniently marketed for the anti-globalist soul-searching urbanites in Europe. It will probably keep them quiet for a while, since 'having seen this film' undoubtedly cleansed many souls.

The film's first hour is spent in the extreme southern corners of the continent, in Patagonia, which plays more like a National Geographic episode with some laughably awful dramatics in between. Some time is spent in central Chile and by the 57 minute we arrive in Peru. They use a shot of exactly the same mountain in exactly the same angle (prabably very consciously done) as in AGUIRRE: DER ZORN GOTTES by Werner Herzog, near the ruins of Machu Picchu. This was one of the worst parts of the film, where our infallible heroes engage in some embarrassing chit chat, and - en passant - blame colonialism, Catholicism and modern capitalism for all misery, while talking to some local Incan descendants about how they're gonna put an end to poverty in the world.

Director Walter Salles has an indestructible believe in the goodness of mankind. I do not share this view, but such a perspective shouldn't be a barrier upfront for making a decent film. Salles, however, shows our hero as a completely one-note morally unambiguous robot. He is like a God to him. He seems to lack any questioning about his morals or world view. His view is already established at a young age and now the world has to adapt to his insights, and to this film, which does nothing but play lip-service to these, which results in even more suffering for the audience. All political views aside, the film doesn't offer the slightest assault of the senses, with two incredibly uninteresting characters. The film is largely made to tell the story of Che Guevara, or perhaps show us the diversity of South-American culture and its people, but the film's observations are alarmingly clichéd, contrived and repetitive.

Camera Obscura --- 0/10

I would not consider myself to be an ultra liberal, but I am somewhat knowledgeable about what has been going on in South America for the last 100 years, and Che Guevara is a part of it. Going into this movie all I knew about him was that he is on a lot of t-shirts, and that "che", despite what ignorant people think, is not his name, it is what Argentinians say to each other like in the US saying "dude".

I am also a big fan of the purity of movies, not this Spider-man crap that is all over the place, but the true art of films, and I am fairly serious when I go into a movie for the first time. A part of this is that I watch the movie throwing all bias I might have out the window and watch it as if I had never heard of it before. That said, I believe this movie was excellent because it had superb cinematography of the beauty of South America, had excellent acting, great chemistry between the two main actors (despite Ebert saying they did not), and an overall political theme.

This movie did not get great reviews in the US, and I haven't seen reviews from Latin American countries, but I am guessing they are better. This is because many people either shied away from the movie once they heard the word Che, and if they did see it, through the whole movie they were probably thinking "commie, commie!".

I have since read up on Che Guevara, and he is actually a fascinating person to study because he began as a rich boy who through his journeys learned how much people were suffering beyond his imagination, and part of this was how he got to be so rich, by suppressing the native people. The movie does an excellent job of showing this transition from his carefree exploring until later having an epiphany about his destiny to help the people. Yes, he got extreme after a while, but the study of him is compelling nonetheless.

It is interesting to know that coffee and bananas that say "Guatemala" are still grown today by slave laborers on farms, and that the US does not mind the slave labor because they were the ones who sponsored a coup in 1951 to install a dictatorship that in history books says it was an ousting of communism, which makes it okay. This is a much bigger and important example than the movie, but it is the same bias involved: People in the United States (I don't say America because that refers to every country from Argentina to Canada, not just the US as people in this country like to think) not only don't care about the suffering of people in other countries (unless it's mentioned on Oprah or involves economic rewards) but have the nerve to call them evil when they try to better themselves, which at the time was the communist movement in South America. This is not the communism of Castro or even of the later Che Guevara, but simply to give more to the starving and suppressed that are today suppressed to make your bananas and Starbucks coffee.

Because of the biases people have towards the people of countries they know nothing about, this movie has been extremely underrated in the wake of films that comparatively suck ("Ray", way overrated) yet have been rewarded because of their popularity and appeasement to the ignorant people that attend theaters in the United States.

In 1952 Ernesto "Che" Guevara was a shy, middle class medical student in Argentina. Within a few years, he had become the world's most iconic revolutionary, a personal journey that begun with a physical one, a trip undertaken with a friend around South America. This was an age before budget airlines and backpackers hostels, so the expedition was a hard one, even if it could only have been contemplated by a child of (relative) privilege; and in Walter Salles' film, 'The Motorcycle Diaries', these travels are sympathetically and understatedly recreated, with the story of Guervara's political development the underlying (but subtly handled) theme. The movie showcases the beautiful scenery of Chile and Peru, and convincingly portrays a perhaps more austere age than our own, in which Guevera and his companion might be honoured and humbled by the people they met. The two are presented as appealing characters, in no way heroic but open-minded, human and compassionate; based of Che's own writings, it may not be neutral but although the pair start no revolutions (except for a minor revolt against the nuns in a leper colony), it's still an inspiring story. A world of immense inequality and suffering would be a better place today if more of those fortunate enough to be able to travel were to do so in the spirit of Che.

This movie is based on the true story that took Ernesto Guevara (Gael Garcia Bernal) and Alberto Granado (Rodrigo de la Serna) on a road trip all across and along South America in the 1950's. The script/direction elegantly avoids any politics or similar. Its focus is on the human transformation of two young Argentine professionals, a turning point in their lives, who decide to see their continent with their own eyes. This movie only covers Che Guevara's life BEFORE he became the famous Che Guevara. Most of us would agree with Che's goals but less, I guess, would agree with his means. However, the movie concentrates on how the world changed Ernesto which in turn led him to try to change the world. The movie ends at the end of their road trip. I understand that there is another movie in the making (with Benicio del Toro) which will show the rest of Che' s life, with politics and flying bullets included. The acting of the movie is first class: Gael Garcia Bernal performs at his best; however it is Rodrigo de la Serna's performance the one that is simply outstanding; not only he represents Granado's as a funny, outgoing character, but he also highlights Gael's characterization of Guevara. Great photography, humor, action, and drama are all ingredients of this movie. If you want to watch a movie that deals with reality and that contrasts with Hollywood's fantasies, this is your movie. You'll laugh, may be cry, but for sure you'll leave the theater thinking about a few things. Finally, this movie ironically represents Che's ultimate goal, a unified continent: the director is Brazilian, the main actor Mexican, the main actress and supporting actor Argentinean, the script writer is from Puerto Rico and the producer, Robert Redford is American. And, the movie was filmed in Argentina, Chile and Peru. Length: 2hs 04 min.

The Motorcycle Diaries does a great job of sketching out the character of Ernesto Guevara de la Serna, without any pandering to our knowledge of who he will become. There are no cheap shots and only one 'Che' joke-to explain the origin of the nickname, which is a play on the Argentinian accent. It's a deeply felt examination of the events that inspired the development of a political consciousness, with only a few touches of the hagiography that has developed around 'el Che' and those not until late in the film. Gael Garcia Bernal is completely believable and very human in the role, and there's real chemistry between him and Rodrigo de la Serna (any relation?) who plays his friend Granado, leading to a lot of funny moments-important, as ther are many stretches of the movie where it is just them and the scenery. The cinematography is truly gorgeous, and reminded me how little of the South American landscape we ever see on film in the U.S. The cinematographer has pulled off a major feat in shooting a period film in slightly grainy, sometimes shaky hand-held. No crane shots or sepia tinting here-the film quality immerses you in Guevara and Granado's experiences and makes them feel very immediate, without sacrificing any sense of history. A film like this is long overdue, and it deserves wide distribution. While the plot revolves around Che's awakening to the social struggles of South America (which are ongoing) there is a rich sense of place, and people, and beauty here. It seems to me that this is the first South American film in a few years that is not a world-weary documentary about social or political problems (and U.S. involvement in them), to open in the U.S. market. It's about the life of Che, yes, but it doesn't forget the people and problems that lead him into political activity, and will hopefully inspire viewers to pay more attention to what is going on around them, not only in Buenos Aires, Cuzco, Havana or Chiapas, but right next door.