Che (2014) User Reviews

A bold approach to one of the controversial topics of Iranian history

[maxim_K · 6/10 · 25 February 2015]

Hatamikia is a well known director in topics related to Iran-Iraq war. Although his personal believes could be found in his art, he could not be categorized as a propaganda movie director. Che is about Dr.Mostafa Chamran a prominent figure in in evens after the Islamic revolution of Iran.

The movie portrays a pacifist-spiritual figure of Chamran in the context of Paveh city siege by Kurdish separatist militia. He is reluctant to kill, he prefers to negotiate rather than fight. This approach is in contrast with the radical Asghar Vesali (Pasdaran Commander) or separatist leader or Dr.Enayati, separatist leader. This continues until the end and never changes, so we never see Chamran as a warrior type rebel similar to Che Guara as expected.

This high expectations comes from the title of the movie which is similar to Che Guara name. In addition we know that he was the person who formed and trained Pasdaran Corps in Iran. He had a long history as a militia fighter in Lebanon. Even in scenes he is involved in a fight the actor fails to show any sign of a seasoned warrior. His firing scene in hospital looks more like a video game rip off. Fariborz Arabnias' weak performance results in a character who is not a good leader nor a good fighter. His tone of voice is very soft and weak. It is a shame that they couldn't persuade Parviz Parastui to act this character, who would certainly illustrate a more lively Chamran.

Even the role of Chamran in Kordestan events is not portrayed well. We see a very subtle effect from his presence in the outcome of the struggle. I think this is a weakness because we expect to see "something" because of his presence in there. That is a problem in many Iranian movies and roots back to weak story writing. Story teller is only an observer of a troubled person trying to be nice and prevent massacre, however in the end he could not even save a single life. So what was the purpose of telling this story if he was not effective in this struggle? From the historical point of view it is not a historically accurate movie. The events are still hot and controversial topics in Iran. Unfortunately there is no independent historical research about Chamran's life that the movie could be based upon. As a result parts of movie are based on artistic inspirations of the director based on known facts. Hatamikia claims to have done his research on the topic and been thinking about this for 10 years. However, few people are satisfied with this movie. Kurds or even Army are portrayed as remote non important factors in the event. Hatamikia don't give any deep understanding of the situation.

The sound effects and music are great. Music is beautiful and thrilling. It is bold and original. The sound effects are comparable to any modern Hollywood production. Matched with artistic shots of the director you could enjoy a high quality cinema experience. However visual effects are not as good as they are described in Iranian media. You could easily locate cheap computer-made visual effects all over the movie. However, compared to similar Iranian war movies it is better and maybe that's why it won best visual effects prize from Fajr movie festival in Iran.

If you are looking for a historical movie about Dr.Chamran's life or the events in Kordistan you may be disappointed. You will find less than a Wikipedia page. However, it is a well made Iranian war action movie that could be enjoyed as is.

High ambitions but a bit hollow

[maramezani · 5/10 · 12 September 2019]

My rating is not based on the movie's historical accuracy, but its own merit as a standalone movie.

Che tries to hint at the darker sides of fascism and war. It starts out as very promising, but right up until the very underwhelming end it just seems to be starting out.

Ambitious, but heavily toned down from what horrors it aims to project at the big screen. The dialog could have been done much better. It sounds more like parts of The Matrix that pretended to be philosophical, but were really copies of tired 90's cliches. They were far and few between, and they just ended up adding to the spice of the movie. Che is all spice.

My reason for the stars I left is the impression it left on me in the beginning. I thought perhaps this is the right direction for movies to go, but I soon discovered at later watchings that it's not your morally relativistic bundle of bittersweet joy for when you can take a heavy film, it just pretends to be. Much better than the cartoonish depiction of the horrors of an uneven war, but nothing revolutionary.

Falls shorts of even Hatamikia's standards.

It was a big governmental lie....

[H-o-s-s-e-i-n · 1/10 · 24 February 2014]

I saw this movie in university. It was presented by supporters of Iranian regime and truly it harassing me a lot. The movie shows government troops and Kurd traitors as heroes in other side they show Kurdish guerrillas-who fought for freedom without wanting anything for themselves- very aggressive and heartless. For whom who is not a Kurd or don't know about Kurdish people very well it may be very interesting but for us it was really an insult.

It's a truth that history is written by victors. They have power and surely they will say whatever they want to be said. The people who are with government say everything that they want but in their opposite side we can't hear a convincing answer for them whereas even a school student in Kurdistan can give one a very reasonable and convincing answer about what's happened in there and what they're fighting for.

On other hands the movie contains very irrelevant things and wrong information about Kurdish parties and the language that people talking with. At last I think it wasn't a biography and it was nothing more than a fictional movie.

Interpret it in the right way...

[ramiar-rami8 · 1/10 · 25 February 2014]

When u watch the movie as a non-Kurd audience u may find it rather fascinating, but when u consider the social conditions of the time which the movie refers to, there would be so much controversy concerning its plot.

The fact that personal viewpoints had a significant role in its plot is rather obvious. Lies upon lies have been pictured and there is absolutely no real evidence to authorize most of the events that has been shown in this movie.

On the whole, I think having or not having a background about those times plays a decisive role in your interpretation of the movie.

Seyyid Musevi

[xseyfullah · 10/10 · 29 May 2021]

There are some people inside me who are ready to give up many things for their people, homeland and religion. Mustafa Chamran was just such a person. Despite having a beautiful life, family and career in America, he gave up everything to support the oppressed Muslims and went first to Lebanon and then to Iran. Participates in field operations against separatists and other forces here.

In the film, we see more of Mustafa Chamra's peaceful way. The film manages to take a neutral approach. The woman in the lead role in the film is a character who always tries to avoid conflicts and is always at the center of events. His brother was a rebel and his wife was a government soldier. He tries not to lose both. But in the end, only he can save his son.

The film manages to think, thank you to the Iranian directors for the wonderful work 🌹

The real hero of every man

[alirezaahmadkhanlou · 10/10 · 6 September 2021]

This martyr, this scholar, this noble man was really a perfect man It is a pity to make only a part of this man's life A man who studied infidelity and evil in the country but did not sell himself Martyr Chamran should be a role model for every young person and every person in life Happy soul, great martyr.