Fidel (2002)

With an engaging first half this Made for Cable Mini-Series is of two very separate Minds. Informative and Entertaining as the Genesis of the controversial and Dynamic Leader of the "People", this is a welcome and unbiased beginning.However, after Castro rises to the top of the Cuban Political Dysfunctional mess, this becomes weak, facile and it seems to have no momentum or intelligence. The post 1959 Revolution and its aftermath is confusing and loses its ability to Entertain as a Showpiece and inform as a Biography or even a semi-inclusive analysis of the machinations of the Mind/Leadership of this enduring 20th Century Anti-Establishment icon.There is so much left unanswered or glossed over and not much of any Political Science or Philosophy. It rests on Platitudes and Sound Bites, Images and Imagination of events, unwilling to dig deep or at least present events with enough substance to be stimulating.The Production wavers from very good pasted over with some lame and less than Dramatic effects and clichéd visual cheap shots. Not a bad introduction to the Man within His Time and Place, but considering its length, leaves the Viewer with an ambiguous feeling of the Man and His Mission, the overall effect on the Cuban People and in the end is weakened by a very weak ending.

I am confused as to the role of Mr John Sacksteder from this site. My understanding was that he was supposed to summarise the film, whereas what he did was attack the film for not portraying Fidel Castro the way he feels he should be portrayed. I suggest that Mr Sacksteder sticks to summarising the piece of work before him rather than politically attacking the real life character. He may wish to be informed that Cuba is superior to the United Kingdom and the United States with regard to health, education and true democracy. All Cubans elect locally in the provinces local people from the province to represent their views at the General Council. Stick to being a film critic, Mr Sacksteder, rather than a mouthpiece for the anti Cuban lobby.

This is so sad. People who are curious and want to know about history, maybe get to see this inaccurate slander first. It's a prime example of an extremely manipulative propaganda movie. They do the trick by talking as if they were the authentic person (Fidel) and pretending things. They create a straw man. Later on (like at the very end) they blend in real arguments and quotes, but those then lose all credibility and content with the set-up movie-background that is given.So when you talk to a person who says he knows something about the Cuban revolution, he might really only have seen this movie and based everything on it. Naturally, then, there'll be a clash of opinions, because this person believes that the actions portrayed in the movie have the purposes that have been presented by the actors. In reality the person will know everything about the plot, but nothing about Cuban history or Fidel.If you see how power corrupts in the movie, I did, then it was the purpose of the film maker. And nothing else. It doesn't imply that the real life Castro is corrupted by power. That in itself is actually a strange statement, because it implies that Castro is or was the sole decision maker, which isn't true. Things are decided through voting. (Not by money or the television space it can buy).Then there is the point about counter-revolutionaries. In the movie it's just some scapegoat for consolidating power. In reality it is and was a grave threat to all kinds of revolutions. Coups, invasions, sabotage, assassinations, raids, terrorism and so on, are extremely common. Even slander movies like this one are made for that purpose. But despite this the Cuban revolution still lives on, where others have been unsuccessful.However, this movie is very interesting in one aspect, and that is that it shows more about our own society than of the Cuban one. The movie made me realize how money can spread ideas or even lies and in a way be used to "buy" votes or support. But this can only work in a society where people are ignorant (on purpose or not).Finally, I would suggest people who are interested in history to see "Che Part One" and Two. Those are better movies, which, at least to me don't seem to be made to discredit Fidel, Che or Cuba. They are accurate and were displayed on the cinemas in Cuba and people reportedly applauded. That's how movies should be made. For people, not against them. Same goes for acting (which was terrible in this movie).

Perhaps the director put Castro as a killer or cold blood assassin, it give us a good point of view about what happened in Cuba and the Castro revolution. After seeing it, one can aware of the importance of Ernesto 'Che' Guevara in the Cuban revolution and why he is now an icon for any who is in favor of this kind of ideology and government. Also, the director show Castro as a father, a husband, an ideologist, but misses very important points in the career to the revolution, when he visited Colombia in representation of the Cuban Comunist Party. Also, misses how important in the Castro's ideology has become Gabriel García Marquez.This movie could be the perfect follow up for Motorcycle Diary, the history of Che Guevara before the revolution in Cuba and his friendship with Fidel