Girl (1998) Reviews

• Even though everyone says the book is better...

  LickMyNipples2002-07-17

  I read the book after I saw the movie, and the book to me was less real. I thought that Andrea and her overthought, psuedo-angsty voice-overs were what made her real. She was a little rich girl who essentially knew that she wanted for nothing, yet she's searching to fill a hole that she knows isn't really there. Complete with bad poetry-like flowery language and long sighs and large gestures, I thought that Andrea in the movie was real, and Andrea in the book was flat, uninspired. I didn't even hate Todd Sparrow, as has been mentioned by other viewers. I thought that the whole movie was about stupid little people doing stupid little things and learning from them, like how it really happens. I didn't think girl was oscar material, by any means, but I think that there will be a character that everyone will see a bit of themselves in.

  More

• Threeway

  tedg2005-07-10

  The setup is all too familiar: we have a girl who wonders about life. She has sex, is disappointed in love (always mildly by our measures) and thus "grows up." Its a persistent fiction that is glued into filmdom and god knows how many lives it has bent. But as these go, this one isn't as tendentious as the others. I think that's because of the triple narrative structure. The main narrative is the girl (here Dominique Swain fresh from "Lolita"), who tells us what is going on in her mind. Thhings like "I wish I could grow up." Sometimes her narration is her thoughts in the story rather than over it, such as when she says something polite but is thinking something rude. The second narrative is the story we see of course. Naturally, all the sex is akin to dreamy cuddling. The third narrative is embedded in the story, the narrative of incisive rock songs. Indeed, they are rock songs about the very stuff of the story and inspired by the story itself. The three are woven together, each commenting on the other. Few young viewers will notice, but this is pretty sophisticated storytelling. Even though every thing in it is empty and borrowed, the whole seems much fresher. Ted's Evaluation -- 2 of 3: Has some interesting elements.

  More

• A poor excuse for a film adaptation....

  laura-3392005-03-26

  Do yourself a favor and read the book before you try to watch this movie. After watching it I felt like they tried to turn this incredible and moving work of fiction into an episode of My So-Called Life. The book this screenplay is loosely based on is so much more powerful than this bland film version. The main character was heinously miscast, she brings no depth to the role whatsoever. You end up being annoyed by her, instead of identifying with her in any meaningful way. And you never find out enough about the supporting cast to understand what's going on with them. In my opinion the entire point of the novel was completely missed. I was terribly disappointed.

  More

• Dominique Swain stands way out above all others in this one!

  pgardner2000-04-14

  What an extremely well-acted, realistic, coming-of-age-grunge movie! Dominique Swain has definitely shown herself to be quite a unique talent. First LOLITA, and now GIRL. This is a definite MUST-SEE by males and females alike.

• Comic but stereotyped teen-movie.

  melbow1999-04-30

  Based on Blake Nelson's popular novel - Girl offers a traditional cut-and-dried teen-story. Far from excellent, witty Clueless or TV-Series Dawson's Creek. Andrea Marr (Dominique Swain) lays eyes on Todd (Sean Patrick Flanery) a local rock guru and begins to rebel by going to clubs and becoming a groupie. Irrespective of the inspiring original, the plot feels jerky and Andrea's character lacks in substance. Girl slips in authenticity but somehow captures some of the disillusionment and confusion of being a teenager in today's society. After all, both Dominique Swain and Sean Patrick Flanery (Young Indiana Jones!!) are talented and captivating actors and make Girl worth seeing.

  More