Sergio Leone Web Board
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
October 22, 2017, 03:13:54 PM
Home Help Search Calendar Login Register
News:


+  Sergio Leone Web Board
|-+  Other/Miscellaneous
| |-+  Off-Topic Discussion (Moderators: cigar joe, moviesceleton, Dust Devil)
| | |-+  CHE GUEVARA del TORO
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. « previous next »
Pages: [1] Go Down Print
Author Topic: CHE GUEVARA del TORO  (Read 4870 times)
COLONNA
Bandido
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 94


I'm his son


View Profile
« on: January 17, 2004, 01:44:57 AM »

I just red that there is an Hollywood project about the life and death of CHE.
 Director; Terence Malick
Actor:Benicio Del Toro .
Not so bad . May be another "Frida" ?

In any case this film will be best than the horror made immediately after CHE death, with Omar Sharif and Jack Palance (as Castro) which was pure propaganda  IMO

Logged

Time is on my side...
shorty larsen
Bounty Killer
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 542


Agachate tonto


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: January 17, 2004, 08:57:13 AM »

Hey Colonna, in my country they made 2 or 3 movis even worst!!!!!

I think if it is Terrence Malick it can be a good movie.

Another one will be released in 2004, called "Motorcycle Diaries, The ", based on the first trip of Che in Latin America, before tuning into a revolutionnary.

Logged

Each one for himself, and God against all.
COLONNA
Bandido
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 94


I'm his son


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: January 18, 2004, 03:00:04 AM »

Sure Shorty !
And Benicio can be better than antonio Banderas (it should be easy) . Grin


May be we speak about the same film ?



Logged

Time is on my side...
shorty larsen
Bounty Killer
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 542


Agachate tonto


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: January 18, 2004, 05:25:11 AM »

Yeah!!! I forgot that.

But, hey, if Madonna played Evita, why can't Banderas play Che Guevara???

hahahaha!!!!

I think that the best movie I've ever seen about Cuban "Revolution" is Bananas by Woody Allen!!!!

Logged

Each one for himself, and God against all.
COLONNA
Bandido
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 94


I'm his son


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: January 20, 2004, 02:45:27 AM »


I think that the best movie I've ever seen about Cuban "Revolution" is Bananas by Woody Allen!!!!

I fully agree and Woody was a great guerillero!
I don't know if panties are still weared OVER the trousers in La Havana Grin

Logged

Time is on my side...
shorty larsen
Bounty Killer
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 542


Agachate tonto


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: January 20, 2004, 02:01:32 PM »

Yeah, or if swedish is the national language!!!!

Logged

Each one for himself, and God against all.
klaatu
Bandido
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 63


I'm a llama!


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: February 09, 2004, 09:07:23 PM »

Shorty What is your take on your fellow Argentinian Che? I just wonder if he got as much respect in his native country as in Europe.

Logged
shorty larsen
Bounty Killer
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 542


Agachate tonto


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: February 10, 2004, 12:34:13 PM »

Not so much. It's like in any other part in the world.

I mean that the "left pseudo intelectual crap" (hahaha, Woody allen uses this expression in "Manhattan) agrees with Guevara of course, but the left wing in Argentina is really a minority.

The right wing hates him.

And the rest, the enormous majority, doesn't care.

Che is not a national hero. Maradona is a national hero, but not Che, because he got involved in politics, and when it comes to politics, people don't agree, never.

For example, when Che participated in cuban revolution, in 1959, in Argentin the governement was democratic one, a puppet contrloed by the army.

When Che died in 1967, in Argentina the governement was a catholica and military dictatorship, who hated Che.

In Europe the "left" is by far more "powerful" than in Argnentina, both from the intellectual and political points of view. It's maybe the reason why he got respected.

But don't forget we're talking about the 60's. And the sixties means "revolution". One year after Che's dead, during that short dream in Paris that was "Mai '68", photos and posters of Che wer EVERYWHERE. Because Che means "revolution".

But Che is only a human. He shot people, he killed people himself and gave the order to kill other people. Of course, for those between us who watched "Duck you sucker", we all know the Mao quote "Mao: revolution is not  a  smart dinner.. it is a violent act by what one class overthrows an other one". Yeah, that's real, but I still agree with Juan (Rod Steiger): after the revolution, made in the name of the people who can't read, where's this people?..... They're dead.

And if in order to become a revolutionary leader, if in order to make a revolution, in the name of people who can't read, that is to say, in the name of justice, if I must kill some other human beeings in order to reach this justice, well, I don't agree, and I leave revolution in the hands of those who CAN kill other human beeings wihout any moral problem.

This is my opinion about Che and other "revolutionnary" people all around Latin America, Africa or Asia.

This not meens, in any case, that I don't agree with the principles of justice, freedon an fraternity involved in each and every revolution.

Logged

Each one for himself, and God against all.
klaatu
Bandido
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 63


I'm a llama!


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: February 10, 2004, 09:33:06 PM »

Thanks for insightful analysis. I particuraly agree that 'when it comes to politics, people don't agree, never' 'well, I don't agree, and I leave revolution in the hands of those who CAN kill other human beeings wihout any moral problem'


Great post Shorty! Smiley

« Last Edit: February 10, 2004, 09:37:00 PM by klaatu » Logged
shorty larsen
Bounty Killer
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 542


Agachate tonto


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: February 14, 2004, 06:25:02 AM »

Of course, I'm aware that anyone can tell me "if you don't have the courage to kill, you accept, IN FACT, the situation. You collaborate with the situation. You are the problem". Revolution is not a tea party.

But can you live your whole life knowing that you killed someone, or gave the order to kill someone? If you can, congratulations, because you will be a fine revolutionnary leader.

To kill people, or to give the order to kill people, shows that the revolutionnary leader doesn't care about life. That's the reason why he doesn't care about any human beeing at all. That's the reason why when the revolution ends, the people that can't read are DEAD. That's the reason why, after the revolution, the people that can't read books continues to starve, and to die, because the revolutionnary leader has now become the president, first citizen, or whatever you want. And life ment nothing to him, before the revolution. So life still mean nothing to him after the revolution.

Government changes. Revolutionnary people are now at the place of "dictatorial people". That's true. But what about the people that can't read? The are still starving, nothing has change for them.

Don't get me wrong. I consider myself someone from the "left wing". But also did butchers as Stalin or Mao, and they have killed people by millions.

What can we do? You don't kill or give order to kill, you don't make the change. It's as simple as that. Or not? What change? A government change? Capitalism before, "dictatorship of workers" after? Ok. But, I say it for the last time, there's no more workersafter revolution, they are all dead, or in their way to.

That form of revolution, the revolution of Che Guevara, Fidel Castro and Camilo Cienfuegos, the revolution in Zaire, the revolution of Lenin, the revolution of Mao, the revolution of Ho Chi Minh, the revolution of the Khmer Rouges in Cambodia. All these revolutions are nothing but simulacra, of course a very mortal one (for the people that can't read). These revolutions change NOTHING. All, absolutely all that matters remain the same.

Logged

Each one for himself, and God against all.
Nobody
Gunslinger
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 330


Nobody, but Nobody, knows the trouble he's in!


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: February 14, 2004, 06:37:08 AM »

I am really looking forward to this film. Malick is among my favourite directors, up there with Leone, Kurosawa, Gilliam, and David Lynch. I wouldn't be surprised if the movie isn't made though. Right after "Thin Red Line", Malick was supposed to adapt Walker Percy's excellent "The Moviegoer" with Julia Roberts and Tim Robbins on board. Then he was about to start shooting "The Catcher In The Rye", but none of the projects were realised. If he doesn't direct "Che", the film might be made by Steven Soderbergh instead, who originally planned to direct it.

Logged

"As boys, they said they would die for each other. As men, they did."
Nobody
Gunslinger
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 330


Nobody, but Nobody, knows the trouble he's in!


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: April 03, 2004, 03:28:57 AM »

Terrence Malick have quit the project, and decided to make "The New World" instead. It's the story of John Smith and Pochahontas, and the shooting starts this july with Colin Farrel as John Smith. He has said that he might start shooting "Che" when he has finished this, but now it looks as though Steven Soderbergh will direct "Che".

Logged

"As boys, they said they would die for each other. As men, they did."
Pages: [1] Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  



Visit FISTFUL-OF-LEONE.COM

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
Page created in 0.027 seconds with 19 queries.