Cherry Crush (2007)

People are voting emotionally.

The film makes a home in your brain and the only cure is to see it again.

This movie tries so hard to be funny, yet it falls flat every time. Just another example of recycled ideas repackaged with women in an attempt to appeal to a certain audience.

There is, somehow, an interesting story here, as well as some good acting. There are also some good scenes

Most people will look at this and see a film noir rip off of epic proportions. It is easy enough to make such an argument, no doubt about that. Indeed, Cherry Crush is a collection of all the film noir clichés, but there are two reasons why the film is acceptable despite all this. First of all, It is a b-movie, not a Hollywood production. It should also be noted, that you end up caring for the people in this story. Noir is not usually a sympathetic genre, but Cherry Crush makes it much more mundane and down to Earth. Of course, it's not like they have the money to take the story to New York or Chicago or bring in any names to the cast. This film has a softer touch. It is pacifistic and seductive and for a low budget production, it is well photographed.If I am gonna make a complaint about what bothered me personally (the clichés don't count, I was just pointing that out), I would say that the introduction was a bit uncomfortable. The film's opening twenty minutes are far too rushed, and place greater value on fast cuts and editing tricks than on exposition. Perhaps the makers were afraid that, audience would notice how derivative the story is if it was played out too slowly. It certainly would explain the decision to run the plot at 200 mph for a while, hoping to get the viewer involved as soon as possible before they walk out. Cherry Crush may be amateurish, but it works enough that it entertains if treated as pulp. It pays homage to the art of photography, it presents Nikki Reed in the nude, and it is proof I guess that money is not always needed to make an entertaining feature. In the end, that is enough for me.

Here's the deal: the movie starts with a high school student and hobby photographer (Jonathan Tucker) coming from a wealthy home getting busted for putting up nude girl pictures on the web. Thanks to his father's contacts, the only consequences are him having to change school and getting involved in some charity work. At the new school though he meets some girl (Nikki Reed) who is supposed to be mysterious. The mystery in the first instance is that she's involved with an adult (Frank Whaley), allegedly because he promised her a scholarship. She wants Tucker to make photos from meetings with Whaley though, which somehow suggests there might be a blackmailing scheme involved either, and as it turns out we there unfortunately already reached the bottom of her mysteriousness. It's at one of these occasions that something not exactly legal is taking place. We're forty minutes into the film now until something happens.From this point on, Tucker and Reed avoid meetings to not arouse suspicions, and we are invited to again see him struggle complying with his charity duties. Then, after about another thirty minutes again something happens. More precisely, a detective (Michael O'Keefe) with knowledge about recent events approaches Tucker to blackmail him, and it's now that Tucker finally understands that it was all about money. He has some difficulties contacting Reed again, but finally succeeds and a kind of final showdown follows, after which the money - 1 million dollars - stays with either the detective, Turner or Reed.Boring read? Sorry guys, but I can only be as involving as the story is, and in this case it's not more involving than any Veronica Mars episode stretched to ninety minutes. The cast and performances are disappointing either. Tucker's character exhibits close to none personality and is utterly meaningless, and Reed's performance way too shallow to project the mysteriousness expected from her. Both failures are likely due to poor direction either. What personally annoyed me the most though is Tucker also giving the narrator, the story being told from his perspective, so that an almost constant and totally uninspired voice-over ruined those few moments in which I might have settled for simply enjoying some imagery. I finally just ignored it, which gave me some relief.Final verdict: best be avoided wherever possible. Four stars for the camera though and the Audi Tucker's driving around.

This is not a movie that is so good. It is only average. The only things I liked are the beautiful, Nikki Reed (Shay) and some good cinematography in some places. The use of colors in those places is great.Unfortunately, this is a film that you demand more as from the beginning. The beginning scenes are shot very well. But it is as I said average unfortunately.The very beautiful girl. A young boy and older lover. Guess what. If what you guess does not come around so what again. Philosophy, Psychology, Great Scenes, Unbeliavabe Moments, Some great action none of them are in this film.Hope you enjoy it.

We saw the movie at the premier weekend showing in Rochester, N.Y. Theatre was sold out the night we went. Audience was captivated and slow exiting after credits. Film was very entertaining with a couple surprising twists that we were still talking about the next day. Very thought provoking.Michael OKeefe and Julie Gonzalo had memorable performances. Jonathan Tucker gave a strong performance in his role. Nicki Reed transitions skillfully into the sexy and seductive Shay Bettencourt.Heard it was being held over and we are considering taking it in again. Very nice job from Post Central on their first at bat!