Cherry represents the social problems that have been repeatedly raised in the United States in recent years: the people at the bottom are desperate and cannot see the future, the state keeps sending young people to the meaningless battlefield, veterans are not properly placed and taken care of, and opioids. From the abuse of prescription drugs began to spread in society. Anyone who is concerned about American society can understand the message this film wants to convey.
The texture of the film is very good, and the scenes and performances are more convincing. The scenes of the battlefield are especially well shot, which makes people feel the cruelty of the war and the fear of the soldiers. Generally speaking, most of the time will not be boring. However, some problems with the director make people unable to feel too much about the protagonist's tragic life experience after watching it.
The whole film is cut into several chapters, this kind of cutting can be said to be unnecessary. Although the protagonist’s identity is constantly changing, there are sufficient causal connections between each identity transition. Why not let the transition happen naturally and smoothly? There is not much difference in the shooting rhythm and techniques used in each chapter. Forcibly inserting the big red chapter titles only makes people feel that the director has no confidence in the fun of the film.
Through the protagonist's narration and some absurd details (Dr. Whoever, Shitty Bank, etc.), the whole film maintains a fast-paced joking and ironic atmosphere most of the time. If handled properly, this atmosphere can well reflect the tragedies experienced by the protagonist, but the too single rhythm makes the audience have no chance to experience these experiences. From the time the protagonist joined the army, a series of incidents he experienced were explained in a straightforward manner. He joined the army, his comrade-in-arms died, he had PTSD, his wife collapsed, the two took drugs, and he robbed the bank. What was originally a dramatic experience was poured out, interspersed with narration without emotional changes, which makes people feel like watching a PPT. Everything is so logical, there is no other possibility, the protagonist just accepts what happened to him, and has no idea.
If the film can have a short and powerful ending, the problems caused by the single tuning may not be so obvious. But the director did not let the absurdity and banter go through to the end and complete the irony. Towards the end, the protagonist was arrested and imprisoned. The director played a sequence of several minutes without dialogue, accompanied by hopeful music, showing that the protagonist had lived a stable life in prison for several years, and finally regained it. Normal life. The previous problems were solved in such a simple way-I know that life in prison is not easy, but the few minutes of footage really make it seem simple. Before the audience watched the PPT with dizziness and failed to establish an emotional connection with the character, when they finally saw these problems disappearing lightly, they became more unable to sympathize with the protagonist's experience. It is not difficult to co-author all these social problems, and just throw the problematic veterans into jail for a few years. Is this really what this film meant to express?
I watched this movie because of the star-chasing Spider-Man and YT's self-produced drama Wayne, but after watching it, I didn't have any mood to comment on the acting skills of the male and female protagonists. They did perform some clips very well, but the monotonous choreography left them with little room for character creation, and their acting skills did not add depth to the film.
It's good to look at as a spiderman meal replacement.
View more about Cherry reviews
