neatly skip over everything from the coup in cuba to his undercover entry into bolivia and part two of soderbergh portrayal of che guevara be that of the tragic hero . a with che part one and this rather ramble guerrilla warfare escapade through the colourful mountain of bolivia be probably destine to disappoint more people than it will satisfy and so why be the film ( and particularly benicio del toro performance ) so loudly praise at cannes . james rocchi and for instance and call it and a work of art that and not just the story of a revolutionary and but and a revolution in and of itself . the guardian peter bradshaw call it a flawed masterpiece . i return to my original contention for part one that the value lie particularly in depiction of a hero figure . and in an age when there be a surfeit of poor hero role model and could it not be salutary to see a strongly honourable one and even if strip of some of the less endearing episode of his life . this be the psychological hero enshrine by the great scottish essayist and thomas carlyle and in his seminal book and hero and hero worship . hero can be real or imaginary ( or somewhere in between ) . but should genuinely inspire u to high goal and a high purpose . compare this with the unrealistic hero of standard western storytelling represent where a person undergoes trial and tribulation before obtain a barely believable reward usually everlasting love or material wealth a if by divine studio intervention . real hero have an excess of moral courage not lose ark dare devilishness or james bond super toy . they rise and and empower others to rise and to be the best that they can be . in part one and che succeed . in part two and he fail . it be not for want of moral courage but since a ) not all good plan can succeed and b ) be human and mistake be inevitable . guevara intellectual clarity be flaw when he equate condition that justify arm struggle with condition that make that arm struggle able to succeed . it be a serious miscalculation . high in the mountain from la paz and the colour be breathtaking . there be an air of mise en scene authenticity that be occasionally lack in che part one ( the u. s. would not allow soderbergh to film in cuba . ) visual treat be heighten by maximise natural light and the extreme flexibility and realism offer with groundbreaking red camera . this be a high performance digital cine camera with the quality of 35mm film and the convenience of pure digital . design for flexibility and functionality and the package weigh a mere 9 lb . shoot with red be like hear the beatles for the first time and say soderbergh . red see the way i see . . . so organic and so beautifully attune to that most natural of phenomenon light . if che have stop with the successful cuban revolution it would have enshroud him with an almost mystical invincibility . that he fail in bolivia show not only that he have human limitation but that it be his moral virtue that be remember and not the political triumph . critic will say and with some justification that his arm struggle inspire much less noble character to achieve tin pot dictatorship . his development of guerrilla fight tactic be not good or bad in themselves ( and have since be use for both ) . but for all it praiseworthiness and the film often seem to lack dramatic and narrative tension . we stumble from one escapade to another and knowing that he will eventually meet his death . i find myself glance at my watch and think it could have be short . but the work that have go into this interview with people from all side and even get one of guevara ex comrade to coach actor on the minutia of the bolivian operation make the film a commendable achievement . it might not be top flight entertainment and but it demonstrate integrity in document a significant slice of history . there be also another very important point in the che hero figure here . it about failure . that if you try your utmost and even if you fail and your effort will not have be in vain because it may give others hope and moral courage . one could cynically call it a amartyr complex and and it be find and of course and in many religious figure a well . but che do not acrifice himself . he do what he do best and to the best of his not inconsiderate ability and and so provide an example . success or failure in any particular instance become mere detail . with the u. s. longstanding and illegal blockade of cuba ( all in the name of freedom ) and i be tempt to write that che part 1 and 2 be too good to be waste on the u. s. but that would be to invite a contention that the film have seek so earnestly to avoid . one must hope that many viewer will have the skill to view che without politics and the bias that inevitably engenders . whatever it fault and it rehabilitate soderbergh from the populist nonsense of ocean 11. but if you haven not hear of che guevara or see part one and or if you can not get past the phrase amurderous marxist without froth at the mouth and i might struggle to imagine what you would get from this film . the same can be say for many who have and and can .