Joe and Anthony Russo are bonafide Hollywood royalty after their run of films in the Marvel Cinematic Universe culminated with the widely celebrated Avengers: Endgame in 2019. However, their latest film is being met with a slew of criticism on multiple fronts. Cherry takes a look at the wide-ranging effects of PTSD on soldiers and the lack of support and treatment afforded to them once return, but it grapples with balancing style and substance.
I saw this as a cross between Jarhead and Requiem for a Dream (two films that I love), but I don’t know that Cherry has the same kind of impactful lasting appeal. That’s not to say it’s bad, I think it’s actually better than it’s getting credit for so far, but it kind of feels like a lose-lose situation for the Russo Brothers.
Adapted by Angela Russo-Otsto and Jessica Goldberg from Nico Walker’s semi-autobiographical novel of the same name, the story follows a college student who jumps the gun and enlists in the US Army when his sweetheart expresses some interest in changing her course. After a couple of years of service as a celebrated medic in Iraq, Cherry returns home with emotional and psychological scarring that leads them both down a path of self-destruction, drug addiction, and bank robbery.
When it comes to the cross chatter…about the opioid epidemic, PTSD riddled veterans, the military-industrial complex at the height of the post-9/11 Iraq War, capitalism, and broader American imperialism…I can see why people have been critical of the Russo Brothers. The movie is fairly long at almost two and a half hours and it seems to want to avoid getting to the point, favoring a very heavily stylized approach with numerous and repeated 4th wall breaks and graphic overlays. That said, I actually enjoyed the presentation but it did seem to muddle the messaging. While opioid addiction plays a large factor in the narrative, that’s not what the film is about. To narrow it down, I’d say it’s really about the life-altering effects of PTSD on young soldiers and the lack of structure, guidance, and assistance for those men and women when they get home, juxtaposed against the boastfulness of American military superiority.
The criticism I’ve seen regarding Tom Holland being “too young” for the role is just flat-out ridiculous. I understand he’s played a high schooler in his most prominent role to this point but, at 24-years-old, Holland is actually three years old than the average Army recruit. This isn’t the story of a grizzled war veteran who’s been in the military forever, it’s specifically about the toll of the trauma amassed by very young men in such a short period of time. Holland is fantastic in this role, even if his boyish charm disarms some of the film’s harsher realities, and it’s a deeper, darker role than what we saw in The Devil All the Time. If you find his youth somehow offensive to your viewing experience, you should probably be more critical of the military’s recruitment.
Ciara Bravo is strong opposite Holland but bears the same burden of looking too young for the role. Even though her character doesn’t get the same kind of foundational support as Holland’s, she brings a broad depth of emotion to the performance as she tackles the turmoil of their relationship and the fallout of addiction. Part of what I like about this film the most was the burden of some complex adult problems placed on the shoulders of some very young actors.
Part of the criticism surrounding this movie is the tonal mismatching going on. It’s hard to properly convey the right level of gravity to the plight of the characters when the script is intentionally comical at times. There are moments where it’s legitimately hilarious. Jack Reynor is great as the drug dealer aptly named “Pills and Coke” and Forrest Goodluck is strong as Cherry’s junkie buddy James Lightfoot. There’s almost an entirely separate heist comedy going on within the film when the three of them are together and it’s awesome in its own right, but it does detract from the emotional well of sadness of Cherry’s accelerating downward spiral. It’s exceedingly difficult to walk that line, trying to have some fun while also purportedly attempting to portray the subject matter as an important piece of social commentary.
I enjoyed Cherry on the strength of the performances and for the effort that went into the presentation. This particular narrative may have benefitted from a less-is-more approach but the Russo Bros. had been making comic book action films for six years prior to this, so it may be unrealistic to expect them to throttle down completely.
Recommendation: While some criticism is warranted, it’s better than the detractors would suggest. See it for the style and the performances.