Fidel

I must say this movie was quite well presented. It surprised me to see a self centered movie about Fidel Castro even it was produced by an american company.

I don't want to talk about what Fidel has done or what he hasn't done as Cuba's president.

I liked the movie because it presents a certain episode in Cuba's history. I disagree on the comments presented before about Fidel's actions against his political opponents because it's the director's and the producer's decision what episodes to present in a movie. As far as I know, they're free to talk only about certain moment in Cuba's history. It's ok to disagree on that, but there's no way to criticize it because it will be doing the same people criticizes on Fidel: his lack of acceptance to different points of view and his tolerance to people who don't agree with him.

I don't know who posted the comment before, but they obviously have no idea what the hell they're talking about. I am Cuban-American born and raised in the United States. I have been to Cuba and seen the utter poverty that the people live in. And even though Batista's government wasn't the best the people did not live in poverty like they do now. My grandfather died in the Bay of Pigs after being asked by Castro to join his regime. Just because he was a revolutionary doesn't mean his revolution was right. He killed many innocent people along the way to his political success and lied to all the people. How can someone be so ignorant to say long live Fidel when they obviously have no idea what they are talking about. The same goes for Che Guevara. I don't want to paint him as evil because in all reality he didn't know Castro was going to do what he did, but he did kill many innocent people in the name of "The Revolution." He was not the freedom fighter many "IGNORANT" people portray him to be, but a radical fanatic.

It is certainly very difficult for someone to prepare well a film about Fidel Castro and Cuban Revolution. One lengthy film is not enough, may be some sequels are the best way to show something consistent. The director and producers should be obviously people neutral trying to show good and bad of this process. The film from historical point of view has a lot of incoherences, persons like Fidel and Raúl Castro as well as Che Guevara are badly played. Fidel Castro is not so sweet talking as you can see him in this film, while Guevara was a man with culture and deep in his arguments, Gael García Bernal played a role far to be Che Guevara. There are also some doubtful scenes and assertions, e.g. young Fidel Castro arguing with the American Ambassador after the American marines raped the monument of José Martí. Historically there is no evidence that Castro had such a discussion with the ambassador. Raúl Castro was never sympathetic to the leader of Orthodox party, Eduardo Chivas. Raúl was a member of the youth of the so-called Partido Socialista Popular (Communist), and this party had no good relationship with Orthodox party, so the scene of Raúl running together with Fidel at the time Chivas shot himself is not real. Celia Sánchez died several years after the revolutionary offensive, which happened in 1967. Che Guevara resigned as Minister and went first to Congo, then came back to Cuba in order to prepare the guerrilla for Bolivia. Thus the film was wrong showing that Guevara resigned and went directly to Bolivia. Any film about Cuban Revolution should give some space to Camilo Cienfuegos' life, a real hero of the Cuban Revolution, who was badly shown in the film. The figure of Dr. Osvaldo Dorticos, the second president during the Revolution, who killed himself, is absent in the film. Hubert Matos' problem was touched superficially, the same is applicable to the case of General Ochoa, just mentioned slightly at the end of the film and mixed with Mariel exodus, the latter happened in 1980 while Ochoa was arrested and processed in 1989. The relationship between Cuba and USSR was historically very complicated, and shifting from time to time. I can make a longer list of historical shortcomings of this film, but it also has the Mexican accent of the actors talking in Spanish plus some extras that do not look at all as Cubans. To prepare a good material about Cuba you must have more mulatos and black people (no less than 40% of Cuban population) participating in the film.

Some TV productions of late have been fantastic, and many are duds. `¡Fidel!' is interesting for content but disappointing in production. Huggo Martin has good moments in the title role, but mostly he walks through the lines without imparting believability to them. Other cast members do the same. Of course, Fidel Castro is a fascinating character. Viewing this film does flesh out a Yankee's knowledge of his life. Yet, so much remains unanswered. The first segment portrays him as an idealistic leader of the justified overthrow of General Batista. His failures seem somehow related to lack of realistic planning, but he triumphs in the end at least in part by his reliance on subordinates. Then, the second segment takes us to the Castro government in power. Here, we see a megalomaniac who makes his own decisions regardless of reality or the opinions of others. He sells out his revolution out to the Soviets for no apparent reason other than his hate for the U. S. The regime becomes a disaster for the Cuban people. The film makes no effort to explain the abrupt change. Is it just the taste of power, or is there an illness within Castro's mind? Were we deceived at first? Castro and the Che Guevara character often throw allegations toward the CIA, but all of that is also left vague. A viewer interested in the subject here can only come away terribly unsatisfied.

Just for the note, I'm not Diego Luna, that's just my nickname =P

Showtime's Fidel has a good start. Terrible ending. Pretty bad for us lefties. Very yankee-made, which doesn't make the film objective at all. Lefties... be warned. Right wingers... enjoy.