IMDb > Dirty Girl (2010) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Dirty Girl
Quicklinks
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
Overview
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guide
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
Promotional
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
Dirty Girl More at IMDbPro »

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 4 of 4: [Prev][1] [2] [3] [4]
Index 40 reviews in total 

1 out of 3 people found the following review useful:

not funny enough

6/10
Author: SnoopyStyle
11 October 2015

It's 1987 Oklahoma. Danielle Edmondston (Juno Temple) is a dirty girl. She has sex with the boys. She gets dropped into the special class filled with misfits. She befriends outcast Clarke Walters (Jeremy Dozier) who is coming to terms with his homosexuality. Her home life with her mother Sue-Ann (Milla Jovovich) is chaotic as she is about to marry Ray (William H. Macy). Danielle and Clarke go on a road trip to search for her birth father as Clarke's parents (Dwight Yoakam, Mary Steenburgen) chase after him.

I want to root for Danielle and Clarke. The movie needs more comedy. It's not that funny. With better comedy, the buddy chemistry would take care of itself. The movie would be much improved. It also relies too much on musical interludes. The story is a bit too messy. I wish the movie and the dialog is better written.

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 5 people found the following review useful:

Don't judge a movie by its title.

10/10
Author: hemril from France
28 February 2012

This is for me of of the best written movies I have seen. It is touching, sweet and it drove me to tears at the end.

Almost all of us have difficult teenage years. But the circumstances of the two main characters are beyond what most of us had to go through. This search for identity, this need to belong, to know where we are from and what we are going to become.

Juno Temple and Jeremy Dozier play as the kids they are, but bring a genuine maturity to their characters. It makes me love them both. And it has to be noted that at such a young age they're able to carry the whole movie with so much grace.

I don't know if this movie has won any prize, but it sure deserves a huge round of applause. Well done Juno and Jeremy. You have proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that you have talent and that you deserve you place among the silver screen stars of today and tomorrow.

I'll watch for your next projects. Huggs and kisses to you both.

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 7 people found the following review useful:

The most fun film i've seen in a long time, long live Juno Temple.

9/10
Author: Jimmy Collins from United States
16 January 2012

Dirty Girl is a lot of things, it's a terrific 80's film, it's a terrific acting ensemble, it's a wonderful story of friendship, but above all it's just a really fun time, a really entertaining and fun film. Juno Temple is a great young actress, she has been consistently impressive throughout her career, from dramatic roles to small indie roles to comic gold roles such as this she always makes an impression and is always memorable. Her performance is Dirty Girl is in my opinion her finest so far, she is certainly very well suited to comedic roles and I hope she does a lot more of this kind of thing.

There's not a bad performance throughout, newcomer Jeremy Dozier gives an extremely brave performance, his character is put into some rather awkward situations and he acts his way through them all with such pizazz, you're instantly fascinated with his character, I loved him a lot, and the supporting cast are just as exceptional, Milla Jovovich is her usual awesome self and Mary Steenburgen is lovely as the supportive mother, weak at first but supportive all the way of her gay son. The soundtrack is amazing, a film such as this would be nowhere near as great as it is without the wonderful array of 80's songs, half the time I felt like busting a groove. The storyline is really such a nice story and one I haven't seen told in this way, the two leads are almost like the odd couple but have such great chemistry, the friendship that blossoms between them is very sincere and sweet.

Fabulous, times ten, with a swell cast, a truly excellent soundtrack and a lovely story, I would highly recommend seeing Dirty Girl, it's an exceptionally fun time. Loved it. Loved it.

Was the above review useful to you?

11 out of 23 people found the following review useful:

In a word: FABULOUS!

10/10
Author: john-schaefer1 from Los Angeles, United States
8 October 2011

Singer/Songwriter Melissa Manchester was the musical guide through my lonely days as a scared, closeted preacher's kid in Porterville, CA in the late 70s and early 80s. It is thrilling to see a movie that celebrates not only her music, but the particular way she made life easier for untold numbers of gay kids like me. I went to see this movie for her music, but it's also a terrific film! The cast is fantastic and the performances are genuine. It's an engaging story with humor, wit and depth. In lesser hands, heartfelt films like this can easily be lost. Rest assured, this is a triumph at every level. THANK YOU, Abe Sylvia and all involved with this film! I left smiling and will see it again and again.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

An amazingly bad movie

1/10
Author: jm10701 from United States
9 May 2014

This is an amazingly stupid and sloppily produced movie. I'm astonished that the Weinstein brothers put their name on it.

Every character is obnoxious (especially Clark, whose weight is the very least of his defects), every actor is terrible (even ones who have been great in other movies), the story is completely unbelievable, the dialog consistently phony and contrived, the photography extremely clunky (with light coming from impossible sources), and the direction like a very bad soap opera, with not the tiniest bit of subtlety or credibility.

This movie is about as realistic as Pee-wee's Playhouse, but a whole lot less entertaining. I can't imagine what sort of people they are who've given this piece of garbage such great reviews. I hated it.

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 6 people found the following review useful:

Dirty Girl

6/10
Author: apollo_uk1965 from Swanley England
31 January 2012

This maybe titled Dirty Girl But the Actress is defiantly not, She is a Brilliant actress, and it shows in this other wise seemingly average film that is anything but.

Her almost undetectable English accent can not be heard at all as she plays a rather promiscuous young lady from Texas who is paired up with a shy young man, and the two of them run together for two different reason but end up together on the same road.

Jeremy Dozier plays well alongside Juno as well as Milla Jovovich as Danielle mother, and William H. Macy plays Danielle want to be Morman stepfather.

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 6 people found the following review useful:

Better than most "trashy, DIRTY GIRL coming-of-age" flicks

6/10
Author: twilliams76 from Kansas City, MO, USA
20 January 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I'll go against the grain and marginally recommend this one as it has a few good messages that it wishes to convey to its audience (chances are one giving this obscure title a chance and watching it won't need to learn those "messages", though, as they'll luckily already have them).

Dirty Girl is the story of Norman, Oklahoma high school student, Danielle (Juno Temple - Atonement, Cracks, The Dark Knight Rises), who has the reputation of being the town's "dirty girl" as she puts out, smarts off, doesn't care etc. She always appears to be on the hunt for the new guy who can possibly get her out of the dreary town in which she is a bona-fide misfit.

It is 1987 rural America, and so the only person in school who is a bigger misfit than herself is the chubby and unpopular Clarke (newcomer Jeremy Dozier) -- a friendless closet-case (back in the time when the word "fa--ot" was used tirelessly/acceptably to describe homosexuals). The two are paired together for a parenting project as the class's two rejects ... and they form an unlikely bond -- one that grows throughout the film as the duo go in search of Danielle's true father in Fresno, California.

Dirty Girl becomes a buddy road-pic as the pair escape his miserable home life complete with a homophobic and abusive father (Dwight Yoakam - Sling Blade, Panic Room, The Three Burials of Melquiades Estrada) and scared mother (Mary Steenburgen - Elf, Melvin & Howard, Back to the Future Part III). Danielle is fleeing both Norman-life and her single mother's (Milla Jovovich - The Fifth Element, Resident Evil, Zoolander) approaching marriage to an over-zealous Morman (William H. Macy - Fargo, Boogie Nights, Wild Hogs).

This is perhaps the first time I have seen Jovovich play put-upon parent and I think she was fine in the role for an actress who tends to play strong and fierce (I was able to buy her tender vulnerability here). The film's highest praise belongs to the Dirty Girl, herself, though -- Juno Temple. Temple is a British screen star but you'd never know it here with a perfectly captured and delivered Oklahoma dialect.

This is a buddy pic/road flick/coming-of-age tale that is slightly better than so many of the other same-genre films released every year. Perhaps the important sub-plot of tolerance and acceptance is what raises this above other fare but I also liked the bag of flour (!). The story isn't the most "well thought-out" and a lot of it couldn't possibly happen as presented; but I looked the other way as this was just a small picture about two small-town souls looking for acceptance in a bigger world and their dreams cannot really be faulted.

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 8 people found the following review useful:

The winner takes it all.. here its Juno Temple!

3/10
Author: hakan_lovdahl2 from Sweden
14 June 2013

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

A late review but i just saw this and wanted to share my thoughts.

Sigh.. what a mess. In 1987 i was at my peak and lived life to my full. Im older now.. I saw the glasses Juno wears and was like.. HM they look really retro, 1970 retro. And those hot pants. HM.. The shoes.. again the 70's.. It became obvious to me that they simply bought the entire wardrobe from Charlies Angels.. the original 1970's TV show. They missed this ???? bad bad bad bad is an understatement of the 1987 clothing and hair styles.

The music is at least from the 80's.(they can get sewed for getting that stuff wrong) But the songs has no real role to play here. I saw an old Pat Benetar album on the floor in 1 scene i use to own back then. And BTW.. did all gay men during the late 80's listen to girl pop artists? Every poster on his wall is good looking girls except the gay men that hangs above his bed.

In short.. Girl hates life and her mother. She knows she has a father out there somewhere. Boy is fat, gay and gets beaten by his father. They meet, help each other flee. He gets to have sex for the first time, and she gets to see her dad. They meet back home, sing a song and film ends.... To make a film and not even care to try and make it realistic for its time-frame is for me an insult to all the movie lovers. Shame on you .. The characters are forced and all predictable. No new touch or feel to anything really.. remake, redo, copy and paste. But the film has 1 little thing that caught my attention..

Juno Temple.. She is so pretty i can't really take my eyes off her for 1 second. The only reason i kept watching after the ultra bad intro of the film. She has nothing to work with here as far as script or role.. And still she pulls it off. She can make it all the way if she just gets the right roles. A tip if you wanna see Juno in a really really good movie. See Mr Nobody.

I gave it a 3 and those are for Juno Temple. She is the only reason to ever waist time on this. (concider downloading screens from movie instead and save some time.)

Håkan Lövdahl

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 5 people found the following review useful:

Just don't waste your time

1/10
Author: Eric Murphy from Coventry, England
11 December 2013

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Long story short, It's a story about a fat gay guy and a slutty with no tits and no ass (actually the fat gay guy's are bigger).They are having trouble with their own families. Both of them carrying around a bag of flour which have facial expressions from time to time (It's supposed to be funny but NO). As family's problem built up, the slutty girl is then trying to find her own biological father and runaway from the house. The fat gay guy came out of closet and his father does not like that so he is running away with her. The road trip begins and there are some troubles along the way (It's supposed to be funny but NO). In the end, it's supposed to be sentimental or something but I did not feel into it at all. I don't know what genre this movie supposed to be in. It's not funny (I had no single laugh). It's not drama. It's not romance. It's not a family flick as well. Most of actings are lousy even if there are some familiar faces. The roles somehow don't suit with some of the actors and actresses. The atmosphere is also weird. Story line is boring. Directing is bad. I just tried to watch it until the end to see if there was any interesting thing came up but it wasn't. I don't know why it has rather good reviews on IMDb despite the fact that, this is one of the worst movies I have watched lately. For your own sake,don't waste your time, go watch something else.

Was the above review useful to you?

5 out of 20 people found the following review useful:

can't believe it only got positive reviews!

1/10
Author: mrnitepoet from Italy
28 May 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I've never written a review on here before because usually I find some other reviewer that articulates more or less what I feel, so there's usually no need to add anything. But this movie only has good reviews! And I've just watched it and happen to think it's absolutely dire...

Let me qualify first of all that my dislike for this movie is not due to the gay-friendly themes etc. I love gay culture and have seen plenty of gay movies. I go to the Turin Gay Film Festival every year. So it's not that. Indeed I watched it after seeing the trailer from Mary Steenburgen's IMDb page and thinking it might be an OK, fun little road movie, and interestingly different, what with the kid being gay and all. So there was no prejudice, in fact quite the opposite. I was looking forward to a gay kid being the 'hero' for once.

But let's get to the first problem with this turkey. The movie is supposed to be set in 1987. I was already puzzled in the trailer by the fact that the hairstyles, clothes, etc, were more like 1979. And the whole film confirmed this. It just made no sense. I thought, maybe it was originally supposed to be set in '79 but then they realized they'd used a song from 1987, or a car (I'm no expert), or whatever, so they decided to change the caption at the beginning at the last minute? But then there was a photo of Reagan in the headmaster's office... So it WAS supposed to be the 80's. Well, maybe 1981 at a stretch, but not 1987, no way. Even the photos on the walls in the kids' bedrooms... OK I suppose the gay kid was supposed to be 'uncool', but still. No, it was just all wrong - never have I seen a worst reconstruction/representation of a year in a movie. And I was around at the time, I was just a little younger than the characters were supposed to be... OK maybe I wasn't living in Normal, Oklahoma, where the movie is mostly set, but you'd just need to watch the music videos from that year to see that the fashions and stuff were totally different... I mean, even accounting for it presumably being a backward place, in what parallel universe would ALL women (of all ages) have had Farrah Fawcett flicks in 1987?? The boys at the school, too, had 70's-ish hair. There were no mullets, no frizzy 80's hairstyles, etc, to be seen... It didn't feel like 1987 AT ALL. I mean, '87 was the Beastie Boys, house music, Whitney Houston, mullet-haired power ballads and stuff. Couldn't Dwight Yoakam (who plays the kid's scary father) tell 'em what it was like??

Wait a sec, I've just remembered they talk about the Shuttle tragedy happening the year before at some point! So it was really meant to be 1987!!

But that really wasn't the main problem. I could overlook this if the film was any good, but it wasn't. Not funny, not poignant, the usual unbelievable character development arc, really it was practically as bad as "I Love You Beth Cooper". So if you loved that movie, by all means check this one out. In that movie I'd sat through it all because Hayden Panettiere is nice to look at, this one I sat through because Juno Temple is nice to look at (I'm an old man... but she is hot). Only reason. But even her little outfits with the shorts - even those were completely anachronistic... who the hell wore hot pants like that in 1987?? NOBODY. Certainly not the school hottie.

The good cast had also fooled me. I don't know why William H Macy or Mary Steenburgen would attach their reputation to a film like this... I just don't get it. Maybe they wanted to be politically correct or something.

The movie is very short, thankfully. But that meant that any character development was too fast and unrealistic and totally non-moving (again, pretty much like "I Love You Beth Cooper"... which was even worse than this, though). I was so expecting the kid to turn up and sing at the end, that erased any chance of me getting moved - and I love being moved, I love cheesiness, so it wasn't that either. It was just a flat, annoying movie. The fact that it was competently shot and acted only makes it worse, in my opinion, because then you wonder why they got it all so wrong. I mean, going back to the time setting... I'm all for stratification in movies, those movies where it's all from the year they're set in are silly too, as if everything from previous years disappeared... But this was too much in the other sense. Really absurd. The tone was just all wrong, incongruously going from gross-out humour-like moments, to soppy tear-jerking ones that didn't elicit any emotion from me, and I cry at any old schmaltz. As a comparison, I'd loved Napoleon Dynamite, I think they got that just right, the tone and everything, and I was moved at that!

I gave it 1/10 because of Juno Temple. And I guess I must've chuckled maybe twice. Otherwise it'd be a zero... despite the professional cinematography and the acting. The soundtrack was also meh. If they were that backward in Normal, they'd have had more mainstream tastes in 80's pop music. But I guess rights to Madonna songs are more expensive.

Oh if you're a foot fetishist, you'll like a completely gratuitous scene where Juno sticks her feet up to the camera and paints her nails, a really long, pointless shot. Worse than Tarantino!

Milla Jovovich was pretty good, too, but it's depressing to me that now she plays the mother. I feel old. Note to self: stop watching teenage movies...

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 4 of 4: [Prev][1] [2] [3] [4]

Add another review


Related Links

Plot summary Ratings External reviews
Parents Guide Official site Plot keywords
Main details Your user reviews Your vote history