Esta resenha pode conter spoilers
I wonder if my interpretations are right
I think this is the continuation of Bittersweet Chocolate. In Bittersweet Chocolate, James was given drugs by Playboy since he was still so young. Maybe he was still in kindergarten or first grade in elementary school when Playboy started giving him drugs. The actor looked so young. James grew up as a drug user (and maybe a drug dealer), but he managed to hide it from her mom. We can see the absence of his mom in this movie. She was rarely at home and didn't talk to him that much. He was preparing for college if I recall it right. But at some point, it looked like he ran out of money. He used the drugs he wasn't supposed to use without paying (I mean. he stole it). Playboy became mad and started hitting him (that's the ending of Bittersweet Chocolate). The director wanted to tell us the importance of family time and proper communication, I think. That way, such things can be seen as soon as possible.
And then Playboy and The Gang of Cherry. In this movie, we can see that James has become a part of the gang completely. He doesn't stay with his mom anymore. In this movie, a lot of time was used to portray the problems caused by James. He stole the drugs, Playboy somehow hides that fact and made Cherry mad. It looks like Playboy cares about the chained boy, so in order to annoy Playboy, Cherry keeps on torturing him. And then in the middle, we see Max and Playboy talk, which was played by the same person (Fuhrer Steven). I don't remember that much about this part, but I think Max (I think he is Playboy's alter ego or whatever, I don't know much about psychological terms) asked why Playboy stay in that place. Playboy started wondering about it. In the end, he decided to go and also take the chained boy with him. At the same time, James became irritated by his new environment and Cherry so he killed Cherry and go. This isn't your usual happy ending but it is... I guess. I think the director wants to tell us that villains (or at least some of them) aren't 100% evil. Sometimes they still show their "good" side. And that they can change. Just maybe. I'm not a native speaker, so I'm not sure my words are understandable but I tried at least.
And then Playboy and The Gang of Cherry. In this movie, we can see that James has become a part of the gang completely. He doesn't stay with his mom anymore. In this movie, a lot of time was used to portray the problems caused by James. He stole the drugs, Playboy somehow hides that fact and made Cherry mad. It looks like Playboy cares about the chained boy, so in order to annoy Playboy, Cherry keeps on torturing him. And then in the middle, we see Max and Playboy talk, which was played by the same person (Fuhrer Steven). I don't remember that much about this part, but I think Max (I think he is Playboy's alter ego or whatever, I don't know much about psychological terms) asked why Playboy stay in that place. Playboy started wondering about it. In the end, he decided to go and also take the chained boy with him. At the same time, James became irritated by his new environment and Cherry so he killed Cherry and go. This isn't your usual happy ending but it is... I guess. I think the director wants to tell us that villains (or at least some of them) aren't 100% evil. Sometimes they still show their "good" side. And that they can change. Just maybe. I'm not a native speaker, so I'm not sure my words are understandable but I tried at least.
Esta resenha foi útil para você?