Reptileenbu Did you people see the same film I saw?

Dirtylogy It's funny, it's tense, it features two great performances from two actors and the director expertly creates a web of odd tension where you actually don't know what is happening for the majority of the run time.

Ogosmith Each character in this movie — down to the smallest one — is an individual rather than a type, prone to spontaneous changes of mood and sometimes amusing outbursts of pettiness or ill humor.

Guillelmina The film's masterful storytelling did its job. The message was clear. No need to overdo.

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.

BA_Harrison A recent article in The Telegraph predicted that, by the year 2050, human-on-robot sex would have overtaken human-on-human sex; I reckon they could be right if the robots look anything like this film's titular model, the Cherry 2000, created to fulfil its owner's every desire. Blonde, beautiful and obedient, Cherry (Pamela Gidley) seems like the perfect match for Sam Treadwell (David Andrews), which is why he goes to such great lengths to find a replacement body for her memory chip when a frolic on the kitchen floor results in some serious blown circuits. With the only Cherries still in existence to be found in the robot graveyard of Zone 7, a desert wasteland inhabited by dangerous psychopaths, Sam hires the help of pretty 'tracker' E. Johnson (Melanie Griffith), and comes to realise that his ideal woman might not be battery powered after all.Director Steve De Jarnatt's other film, Miracle Mile, is an almost flawless example of '80s apocalyptic cinema—an extremely tense, darkly humorous, and touching example of low-budget film-making revolving around a compelling dilemma—what would you do if you discovered that WWIII was imminent?Cherry 2000, a post-apocalyptic adventure that takes place in the near future of 2017 (next year, as I type), also poses an interesting question—will sex with a machine ever be as satisfying as the real thing?—but despite a much bigger budget than Miracle Mile, the film proves far less successful, thanks to an awkward blend of genres, its clumsy, episodic nature, and questionable performances. Writer Michael Almereyda and rookie director De Jarnatt must shoulder much of the blame, the slapdash story and chaotic direction leading to some really disjointed sequences, including one spectacularly ill-conceived action set-piece in which our heroes cross an obstacle via electromagnet. Griffith is the film's other obvious weakness—she looks lovely (even with her bad hairdo and dubious wardrobe of tasselled post-apocalyptic attire), but fails to convince as a tough cookie who can handle almost any situation.Cult actors Robert Z'dar (Maniac Cop), Tim Thomerson (Trancers, Dollman), and Brion James (Bladerunner, Enemy Mine) join in the 'fun', but can do very little with the messy material (which might explain why Thomerson doesn't even seem to try). Also keep an eye out for an early appearance from The Matrix star Laurence Fishburne in a role that he'd most likely rather forget about.

axlrhodes Filmed in 1985, but shelved and not released on VHS until 1987, perhaps the most telling thing about Cherry 2000, is that it's producer, Edward R. Pressman, reportedly confessed that the films distributors, Orion Pictures, were "stumped" by the films confusion of genres, which led to the long delay in it's initial release.Seeing it for the first time, it's easy to see why it was such a marketing headache. For starters, it isn't really any good, however, in being a crazy mish-mash of bits of everything, and having the good sense to never take itself too seriously, it's hard to feel annoyed with it.The film is set in the year 2020. Mankind has progressed to the extent that it's now possible to own a fully functional, supermodel, stay at home girlfriend (Cherry) who knows exactly how to treat her man – we never see male model counterparts. In the first scene, our lead character, Sam Tredwell, ( David Andrews) has a soapy, after dinner mishap with his own Cherry 2000 doll, which kick-starts the plot of him having to travel the wastelands of 'Zone 7′, to find another one. Yes folks, it's as ridiculous as it sounds. Co-starring with Andrews is a jaunty looking Melanie Griffith, who seems to be playing a female 'Rambo', running and gunning her way through her scenes. Surprisingly, some of the stunt work, locations and set pieces are genuinely quite stunning, which makes it all the more a shame that the end result is such an elaborate mess.Cherry 2000 is like Mad Max, but madder. It doesn't really seem to know what it wants to be, and ends up being not much of anything. That said, there is fun to be salvaged amongst it's bonkers sense of humour, and the people in it seem to be having a good time. A guilty pleasure for some, perhaps.

arthursranch What's not to like about this film? Mindless action, great characters, dime-novel romance, wonderful scenes and scenery, ridiculous premise, even more ridiculous action sequences, gender confusion (from the DVD cover, "She's your man").And more, no message (OK, a really weak and fun one, capped by my favorite quote having to do with a cola-based soft drink), creditable acting, Ben Johnson AND Harry Carey Jr. Most of all, this film is visually highly original/creative. I wonder sometimes how such a movie gets produced (like, how did Michael Nesmith get Repo Man out of the Hollywood grinder?).My DVD front cover lists Melanie Griffith and Ben Johnson but not David Andrews, who was excellent. A more well-known male lead would not have worked (in my opinion). Tim Thomerson's part is memorable. I enjoy the sci-fi back-references such as the cameo by the original GORT, a sci-fi tradition.I rate it a 7.5/10, I put it on the same shelf as Legally Blond, and I play it when I just want G-rated entertainment (and no CGI). I liked Melanie Griffith's portrayal/character a lot.