'Cherry' - Too Young To Die Old


'Cherry' is the new film by the Russo brothers, those responsible for directing 'Captain America: The Winter Soldier, 'Captain America: Civil War, 'Avengers: Infinity War' and 'Avengers: Endgame'. For this the Russo is popularly known, although before leaping the MCU they had previously directed - with more pain than glory - two films, 'Welcome to Collinwood' and 'You, me and now ... Dupree', as well as several episodes of television series such as 'Arrested Development', 'Community' or 'Happy endings'.

Until Marvel Studios arrived, few had bothered to know who Anthony and Joe Russo were. But in one of those decisions that have been seen from the outside is hard to believe, Kevin Feige entrusted to you the jewel in the crown of his franchise and also the highest-grossing film in the history of the world. That is something that in the last 20 years no one but James Cameron had been able to say. James Cameron, responsible for films such as 'Terminator' (and its sequel), 'Aliens', 'Abyss', 'Risky lies' or 'Titanic'. Almost nothing.

Anyway, compare the curriculum of one and the other, and their reaction after becoming the theoretical kings of the world: While one devoted himself to his work with complete tranquility, the others have rushed to do this 'Cherry', in a clear attempt to claim. Or justified. Marvel's shadow is as elongated as Feige's. And 'Cherry' is a clear attempt by the Russos to demonstrate, or try to prove that they are not a wimp, neither Marvel nor Feige. That they are not the Pavones that Florentino Pérez said at the time.

An appreciable but unsuccessful attempt that delivers an uneven and bittersweet result. 'Cherry' continually oscillates between two or more films, as if its director were fighting with the film itself to be noticed. The Russos do not skimp on narrative flourishes, although their apparent heterogeneity collides head-on with the strength of storytellers such as Martin Scorsese, Steven Spielberg, or Quentin Tarantino before those who position themselves as groupies, giving priority to self-centered whim over a genuine narrative instinct.

The length of the film does not help either, that it is divided into clearly delimited chapters or that it does not take much milli to at least suspect what is going to happen. The Russos try to imbue this 'Cherry' with style and charm, forced to be and above all to appear to be something much bigger, deeper, and more relevant than it is. What flowed with simplicity and naturalness in 'The Old Man & the Gun', what could well be its mature reverse, in 'Cherry' seems imposing. But mostly premeditated.

The Russo's never convinced us that the sum of its parts adds up to an organic whole, but rather that 'Cherry' works regularly and intermittently. Almost like an anthology movie. It's easy to see the seams in the Russos' ambition and with it the movie itself, a collection of postcards that come and go without being anything particularly novel. As easy as it is tempting to point out that this time they have not been able to hide their shortcomings after an avalanche of special effects or the fatherly figure of a producer like Kevin Feige.

The Russos try and make him want to. And to tell the truth 'Cherry' is not a bad movie at all. But it is a "bloated" film with an excessive desire to be "cool" that instead of resting, with humility, on Tom Holland's shoulders depends too much on some gimmicky outbursts of pride that feed its insecure and random narrative postulate. As a politician who is more concerned with promoting himself than his politics. And the result is a scattered and exhausting film that also always reminds me of others.

0/Post a Comment/Comments

Previous Post Next Post