I watched this film today, and I think it's underrated. A 4.8 on IMDB? Come on! It deserves at least a 6.0 or so.
shareI agree. I had started watching it a second time and would have loved to seen it to the end if I could have.
We can't shoot a dog. People? Okay, but not dogs.share
[deleted]
This film has only one reason to exist, and that's to make money by exploiting the beauty of the young actresses who "star" in it. By every legitimate measure of a film's quality this movie is a steaming pile of poo. Realism- non existant. Dramatic tension- nil. Predictability- constant. Acting- marginal, at best. Without the "Boobs and Booty" factor, NOBODY would have bothered to watch this load of dung. Were women in the West a bunch of young hotties? NO, in spite of what you see here. Instead of wasting two hours watching this tub of offal, do your laundry, and read a book while doing it. That would be time not wasted, unlike watching this reeking satchel of fecal matter.
shareI agree to some extent on all points, although it might have been difficult to find four famous actresses in Hollywood who are both unattractive and who would still attract an audience. Plus, how many famous male actors in cowboy films were that ugly? John Wayne? Gary Cooper? Clint Eastwood? Kevin Costner? I don't recall a critical outcry about their improbable good looks surrounding any of their westerns. Let's face it, the majority of leading actors become successful largely on their looks as much as their acting skills; it's the nature of the game.
shareI gave 7. Quite good western and some way fresh too as havent seen much women in leading roles. But sure this movie would had been worse without Drew Barrymore, she brought some real "bad" girl aspect into movie. Some point a bit boring but thanks to Drew there was still something to hang on ;)
The best multiplayer internet football (soccer) game: [ulr]
http://soccer.kiekko.tk/
[/url]
It wasn't all that bad. It didn't pretend to be high art, just escapist entertainment. Such snobbery from some folks! I'd watch Madeline Stowe in just about anything.
shareWell it's a genre traditionally dominated by male stereotypes and watched by men, so of course a version with women was going to be tank-rated.
"Reviewers" will say the bad guys are one-dimensional and the characters are a little thin but really how is it any worse than Cowboys and Aliens?
For every lie I unlearn I learn something new - Ani Difranco
So i guess women back then werent that attractive? lmao. It's a good movie. I think Drew, and Andie are wonderful actresses. Madeline is good too! Stakeout and Last Of The Mohicans are 2 other films of her's that are good. But for Bad Girls if you think all this is....is eye candy! What do you expect from a western about whores? :) But honestly i just look past that. It'sa different type of western that doesn't always have to deal with men in the main lead. The soundtrack to the film is pretty good too!
shareA 4.8 is a pretty ridiculous rating. The movie was neither great nor horrendous, it was an entertaining western that flipped the script by showcasing females as the leads who flashed some skills with the horse and firearms. Maybe that aliened those who expect westerns to be of a certain nature but I for one always love to see a story told from a different point of view. It gets a solid 7 from me.
shareAgreed mosaff. I just voted it a 7 myself.
I agree. I liked it. It wasn't a great movie and the plot was pretty bad, but it was fun.
Very good. But brick not hit back!share
It's up to 5 now. :p But definitely deserves at least a 7!
share