BlazeLime Strong and Moving!

Softwing Most undeservingly overhyped movie of all time??

Tacticalin An absolute waste of money

Solidrariol Am I Missing Something?

savanah_17 This is a great movie. one of the best of Angelina Jolie. I love her. She does an excellent job of portraying the bad girl, and even better of making the movie what it is. She helps to push it to its full potential. Angelina has amazing talent. This movie is recommended for any girl who has never been the wild child. any girl who has never had the guts to do anything too drastic. excellent movie. I like Maddy. She is unique in that she is not your average teenage girl, but she is not drastic like legs. And who has a name like legs. It's like, once these girls have stood up for themselves, they can never go back. Like they are changed some how. I love this move and give it a excellent rating.

mybluehooloovoo Firstly to correct an earlier reviewer this film is not based on a novel from the fifties, it's (very) loosely based on a Joyce Carol Oates novel that is set in the fifties but was first published in the nineties.The film isn't perfect, but no film is. The plot surrounds a group of teenage girls who are brought together by the arrival of a rebellious stranger named Legs. Like other girl gang films before it, such as Foxes (1980), the film employs certain character types regularly seen in movies of this sort, although this can hardly be considered an attempt to copy other movies. The film belongs to a specific sub-genre and as such it employs the conventions of that sub-genre.While some may simply pass this film off as clichéd others will look a little deeper and appreciate the film for what it is. Foxfire puts across a message rarely seen in American cinema - one that emphasizes the importance of teenage girls forming close friendships in order to assist their development into well-adjusted adults. And while the film may employ certain clichés in order to get that message across (such as the somewhat one-dimensional secondary characters) the message itself is not a cliché and is an important one for girls of all ages.

Alexandra Johnson I have loved this movie ever since I first saw it. It forces you to think for yourself. What would happen if you acted on the impulses in your heart, instead of what you were told was right? Jolie gives a stunning performance as the free-spirited Legs, and Hedy Buress (Maddie) portrays the coming-out-of-her-shell part of us all extraordinarily well. The other characters are well thought out, but don't overwhelm the script. This movie speaks to the rebel in all of us, and it will make you laugh, cry, yearn, and hope. I believe that every generation of girls should see this movie, and realize that they have the ability to think for themselves as well. There is nudity on the part of 3 out of the five actresses, and partial nudity in the very beginning, but it is not distasteful or even sexual at all. It's more about being comfortable. Bless you, FoxFire.

christie-smythe OK, I get the point. This is supposed to be about girl bonding in a patriarchal society that values stories only about boy bonding. As nice as the idea sounds, I don't think it was executed all that well. The set-up is flimsy. I'm not convinced by the abusive teacher's performance that he's all that scary. The characters are barely sketched out, so it's hard to feel attached to them, or like their bond is terribly genuine. Angelina Jolie's Legs might be interesting, but she hardly gets to talk. The other characters' lines are so simplistic and cookie-cutter,they sound almost like a teenager WROTE them -- rather than a mature writer who understands teenagers. What they say, in fact, sounds almost interchangeable in places, which heightens the sensation that the characters are extremely two-dimensional. There are also distinct lesbian undertones in the film, which is fine, but the movie feels incomplete by not coming out and actually acknowledging the lesbian theme. It's almost like a bad editor hacked out the love scenes. I wish I was able to compare this to the written work by Joyce Carole Oats and know whether the flaws are the fault of the screenwriter or inherent in the source material. I don't know. I haven't read it. But I do think that the reason why this movie didn't get much publicity is not because it was incredibly avant-garde. Critics and the press LOVE avant-garde and risky themes. Hello -- Brokeback Mountain?!! It just wasn't a well-made movie.