linconjames
This is a weird off-beat film worth a watch. Don Johnson and Melanie Grifith are great opposite each other as a human- robot couple. Grifith shines as the role asks for her innocent cat like sensitivity to shine. This along with Steve De Jarnett's Miracle Mile are two of the most underrated 80s films. The reason these kinds of films have become cult are the same reason retro-futuristic cars have become so popular- nostalgia tinged with a yearning for a better future which was the vision..
atomicgirl-34996
I've watched plenty of bad movies in my day, but I never, ever felt they were a waste of time. I might've rolled my eyes at how poorly executed they were, laughed derisively at the ineptitude or even fallen asleep. But I never felt, "Wow. I wasted two hours of my life watching this."Well, as they say, there's a first time for everything, and Cherry 2000 is officially the first film that made me feel as if I completely wasted my time. I should've immediately bailed; the only reason why I stuck with it is that whenever I see a movie that's obviously going to be a stinking pile, I try to see it through to the end because you never know. Sometimes a movie that starts out really bad lands a surprising payoff that makes sitting through it worthwhile. Sometimes a movie that seems like it's going nowhere actually shows that it has a point. But Cherry 2000 is pure garbage from beginning to end. It has no point. It has no payoff. And the worst part of it is that it's predictable as hell got out. As soon as the two main characters meet, you know exactly what will happen. You might as well just shut off the movie at that point; that's how predictable it is. The only unpredictable thing about the rest of the movie is how surprisingly predictable it is; even the worst movies try to change things up a little. Cherry 2000 is as paint by numbers as you can get.What a shame, too, because the movie had potential. In case you don't know, it's about a Yuppie who has a sex robot as a girlfriend named "Cherry". She breaks down. Problem is, they don't make her model anymore. His only option is to go out to some extremely dangerous area to a robot graveyard to get another one. Because the area is so dangerous, he has to hire a "tracker" to get him one. So far, so good, right? Melanie Griffith, who plays the Tracker, is an interesting character and very likable. Too bad Sam Treadwell (played by David Andrews) is as wooden as two by four and everyone and everything in this movie boring and pointless. Too bad nothing in the movie makes sense. For example, the reason why Cherry malfunctions is that Sam decides to have sex with her as a nearby laundry machine overflows and floods the floor with soap and water. You'd think someone who's been around electronics and bought something as expensive and rare as Cherry would've been smart enough to realize that water and electronics don't mix. Other things don't make sense. Why would a robot graveyard that has so many priceless models be out in the middle of a no man's land wasteland full of bandits? Or not have been looted if they were so valuable? Why has a handsome, young Yuppie turned to a sex robot when he's not only successful in life and seems socially well adjusted but has had normal relationships with real women in the past?Everything else is bad in this movie, too. The editing is atrocious, lots of weird jump cuts and shots. The action scenes are terrible; the first major action scene when E and Sam leave town looks like a staged pyrotechnics show, so fake. Other action scenes are pointless and drawn out. The villain in the movie has no point other than to add some fake tension to an otherwise threadbare script with no real plot. The soundtrack is lame and forgettable. And there's no real chemistry between the two leads or any real buildup to when the inevitable happens. I've seen more chemistry between cubes of ice.The only positive thing I can say for the movie is that the cinematography and costume is great, very Miami Vice. Too bad it didn't fit the post-apocalyptic theme of the movie whatsoever.All in all, a terrible film from start to finish. Don't waste your time like I did or listen to the reviewers "gushing" about it. It's bad. I'd rate it even lower than Battlefield Earth.
bowmanblue
I watch a lot of 'so-bad-they're-good' films, but 'Cherry 2000' was actually quite different. It was a 'so-bad-I-don't-know-if-it's-real' kind of film. I literally sat there unable to believe my eyes at what I was witnessing. It's set in some sort of weird future where men can buy robots shaped like beautiful women who will wait on their every needs. However, what one such man obviously never read in his 'wife's' instruction manual was that you should probably never get them wet.I won't go into the hows and whys of how he gets his 'Cherry 2000' model wet (there's a treat in store for you), but it totally blows a fuse and the local dealer seems to be out of stock in that particular make. Therefore, the only thing he can do is set out into a forbidden wasteland where there's – apparently – a robot graveyard full of perfectly-kept Cherrys waiting to be taken back to some lucky man's kitchen.So he does. Only he doesn't do it alone. He enlists the help of a 'tracker' – someone who's familiar with the dangerous world they're about to explore. This particular tracker is played by Melanie Griffith. And this is where the 'fun' starts. That is if you call 'fun' really bad acting. Melanie Griffith can't act. Or, to be fair, she can't act back in this particular film. I read online that she had just given birth weeks before filming, so perhaps I should cut her a bit of slack. But she really is bad. Every line is delivered like she's reading if from a children's comic (and not a very well-written comic either).You could almost say that she ruins the movie, but that would be a little unfair. The guy who's hired her tries to 'out-ruin' the movie, too. He's possibly the least charismatic leading man ever. Plus he doesn't seem able to close his mouth – ever. Therefore, with two such awful leads, you could imagine many people would have turned it off as soon as possible. But that's where its appeal lies – you have to watch it to see just how bad it gets.Plus there's the script itself. Robert DeNiro and Al Pacino would struggle to act well delivering these lines. It's like the writers were students who had a good idea for a film, but none of the talent to bring it to the big screen. The action scenes don't make sense. The dialogue doesn't make sense. The progression of the story from scene to scene doesn't make sense and, finally, the character motivation doesn't make sense either.Cherry 2000 is a disaster, but one of those car crash type disasters that you just have to watch. You need to know you are in for a bad experience when you sit down to watch this. It is bad, but it is so bad you really do have to see it to believe it.
