Have you ever seen a movie from a director you liked and thought “Maybe I was wrong... Maybe they aren’t that good.”? MCU films are nothing if not a hot button issue that divides opinion, but I appreciated the Russo’s work and felt they excelled at the jobs they were given in those sometimes bloated big budget affairs. But here, with Cherry, I had to question all my previous assumptions about their artistry and taste level.
Every bit of this film seems to be trying way too hard; trying to use all of these “flashy” techniques in cinematography and storytelling, but missing the heart of those moments and relegating them to signifying nothing. In fact, for the most part, all of their showy elements just distract. There is so much “telling instead of or alongside showing” with over the top empty handed bombast elements. The faceless banker or stupid names on the uniforms, the constant slow mos, the color saturations, overdone lighting, zippy editing, overdone angles, intense lenses, and the ridiculous title card inserts; its all too much. Everything in the film is big expressive hullabaloo, but it's artifice. There is nothing in this film that FEELS genuine or lived in; it’s all external and cut off, from page, to narrator, to screen.
Maybe the worst bit is the actual good moments. There are fleeting moments of engagement, strong acting, and even well designed shots. They speak to possibilities of what could be, but end up just being fleeting hand grips as the film claws at the bad movie tunnel that it is stuck in.
I think this might be a good book, but it didn’t need to become THIS movie. It didn’t work as a coming of age love story, its anti-military & toxic masculinity felt misplaced and neutered, and the sad rascals debased in drugs came off as empty and flat. Partially it’s the casting and the over abundance, but it just feels like kids putting on a show. Like a high school musical version of Born on the Fourth of July, Deer Hunter and Requiem for a Dream for 2 and a half hours.