EzoterikDark
First, to address a few good things with Cherry Crush. It's not all that long. It's not all that boring (on a scale from 1-100 about a 20). And well, the camera work shows a little promise. But Cherry Crush is an experience in grotesque and stupid mind of an obviously deranged teenage wannabe director, that used this movie to launder some money or just has rich relatives or a LOT of connections.Cherry Crush doesn't even try to hide the blatant idiocy that envelopes the very essence. It's almost a parody of noirish clichés and trippy haunting atmosphere. The plot is almost non existent (boy takes pictures of teenage girls, boy gets transfered to another school by his rich daddy, boy meets schizo girl, boy fcks schizo girl, schizo girl involves him in a giant scam involving murder, lots of money and other stuff, the end). Oops I'm sorry I meant to say ORIGINAL plot is almost non existent, there's a lot of recycling and flamboyant flashing of semi famous main leads.I'll just address one thing more, because the movie really doesn't deserve anymore. The photography and directing was crappy. Really crappy. It actually looked like a five year old, who just watched Night of the Hunter shot the entire movie with his dad's camcorder getting some help with the screenplay from the neighborly six year old, that wrote that GREAT short story about that dog with spots.Idiotic and appalling all in one. Why the 3 then? Dunno really. It wasn't that boring. And I actually laughed a few times when the intellectual babble started.
coreguy
Sex, money, desire, crime…all these “necessary” elements combine using an old plot: story of a freaky photographer and a sexy girl. He takes her as his model and sex companion while she takes him as her tool for getting money.The process is also plain and stereotype: They get acquainted. The girl tells a lie. The man trusts her and don’t know he is already trapped. Then the climax: They mistakenly kill someone,who is just the girl wanna murder in her plan. Her scheme makes the man really involve in the affair because of the photos he takes on the spot of case, and the tracks he leaves. Under the investigation, his character of indecisive and maybe some love for that girl keep him from telling all clues out. So, he bogs deeper and deeper…at last, his life is ruined. um.hum,nothing particular, isn’t it? Many crime flicks about “Photograph” act like this.Bad side is over, now turn to the good side. Firstly, The leading cast is a highlight. Nikki Reed and Julie Gonzalo especially. Shay Bettencourt’s wildness and sexiness, and Desiree Thomas’s lawyer-like appearance are impressive. Worthy to mention, Some dialogs are interesting, like the discussion between Wade Chandling and Jordan Wells about the lawyer.Secondly, I probably realize that the director may wanna show something under the plain story: a topic about scripted life designed by the family and an own life made by oneself. At the end of the flick, the main role loses his scripted life and have to escape but maybe it’s actually a good ending for him since he is not suitable for a lawyer career? Deep thought may survives this movie.
rochviewer
This movie is beautiful to look at. Rochester has been transformed into a real live movie venue but that's where the professionalism ends. The story line and characters are under developed and poorly written. Despite the voice over you never learn what dastardly deed the lead character did to turn him into a bad boy and get expelled from private school. The photos he shoots of his love interest are slick, professional and commercially beautiful but don't reveal anything more than a glam shot from a slick magazine does. I kept wanting to see some gritty, 18 year old's idea of honesty, something cutting-edge, and I never got it. I never believe that his family is pressuring him into a life he doesn't want and the women around him look an awful lot like they're from Greece, NY not some fantasy Film Noir landscape. The entire film noir aspect of the film is only defined by the great music track. The script and visuals are in constant conflict with the premise of the murder mystery. The writing never gives the viewer enough details to provide a great ahh-ha moment at the films end. The amused audience seemed more interested in catching their own faces and spotting Java Joe's product placement than on the quality of the story. The film looks great but just doesn't deliver.
rw212605
Like many films starring teens or pitched to a teen audience, Cherry Crush falls short on intrigue and plays long on wrought dialog and narration. What Cherry Crush has that say, Cruel Intentions, doesn't have is a languid and saturated visual feel that distracts from the film's occasionally empty writing. The film has a similar feel to The Virgin Suicides, which also focuses its artistic energies on creating rich landscapes and detailed portraits of its characters (rather than character development). Director Nick DiBella's choice to prioritize style is a good one given his strength with the camera. It's no wonder that the protagonist in his co-writing debut is a photographer.Because of its sophisticated cinematography and laudable go at film noir in color, Cherry Crush deserves to be offered to an art house audience. The story of a rich kid bewitched by a mysterious pauper isn't a terribly sympathetic, but putting the failures of the plot concept aside, DiBella captures his subject well.
AD
