‘Che’

Posted by · 10:59 am · December 3rd, 2008




→ 9 Comments Tags: | Filed in: Daily

9 responses so far

  • 1 12-03-2008 at 11:49 am

    Jamieson said...

    Can’t wait to see it next Friday.

  • 2 12-03-2008 at 2:28 pm

    Ivan said...

    Mr. Del Toro should earn an oscar nomination for his tour de force performance.
    Last year he was robbed (Things We Lost in the Fire)

    A great year for male performances/
    Michael Fassbender
    Richard Jenkins
    Robert Downey Jr.
    Mickey Rourke
    Benicio Del Toro
    Sean Penn
    Leonardo DiCaprio
    Josh Brolin
    Dev Patel
    Heath Ledger
    Michael Shannon
    Eddie Marsan
    James Franco
    Bill Irwin
    Phillip Seymour Hoffman

  • 3 12-03-2008 at 3:23 pm

    Jonathan Spuij said...

    I certainly hope it will show up at the Rotterdam Film Festival but I don’t think it will.

  • 4 12-03-2008 at 3:43 pm

    John Foote said...

    Saw it at TIFF and have been very vocal that it is brilliant with a stunning, and I mean stunning Del Toro performance. Try and see the definitive four and a half hour version, worth every minute.

  • 5 12-03-2008 at 6:39 pm

    Guy Lodge said...

    I disagree that the four-hour-plus version is “definitive,” John. It was always intended to be two films, and I think it works better that way — each one has its own distinct tonal and structural properties.

  • 6 12-03-2008 at 9:39 pm

    Scott Ward said...

    This film, or films rather, had all of the makings to be a superb classic: great director, great actor, and interesting life it’s covering. Very surprised this one didn’t amount to garnering a lot of awards attention.

    But with that said, just because a film doesn’t get Oscar attention doesn’t mean it isn’t great, so I still can’t wait to see it.

    And just curious, to anyone who has seen it, can you conjure up a guess as to why this movie isn’t receiving any attention from the Academy. I’d appreciate your thoughts.

  • 7 12-04-2008 at 1:36 am

    Guy Lodge said...

    Scott: Basically, aside from all the mixed press and confusion over the release pattern, I think it won’t play to the Academy because it employs such a rambling, unconventional structure — the second half, in particular, is more a mood piece than a narrative.

    It’s more interested in the accumulation of daily routine than in grand dramatic incidents, and I think a lot of Academy members won’t have the patience to sit through it.

    I personally found the film fascinating but flawed. And while Del Toro is superb, it’s a very quiet, low-key performance — not the kind of showy, grandstanding biopic turn the Academy frequently goes nuts for.

  • 8 12-04-2008 at 5:24 am

    John Foote said...

    Guy, obviously we disagree, but let me state further my case — the four and a half hour version allowed the audience to sucked into his life, into his story and see how his life as a revolutionary evolved — there was a definite change in texture to the films after the intermission, as the first hurtled towards a strong conclusion while the second moves mehtodically towards death — in my opinion, the only way to see it is to see it as a four and a half hour film, and in fairness I did not have the chance to see it otherwise, I likely will not. An extraordinary achievement. I agree with you about Del Toro, very low key, it’s all in the eyes.