pine_mythros This is a great movie. I read the brief synopsis and was unimpressed but as I watched it (mainly for Caroline Dhavernas) it grew on me.It's such a nice change to see a movie where girls/young women are not punished for their sexuality. The girls are given full license to explore and even the chance to make mistakes without ridiculous repercussions.Some of the scenes are absolutely hilarious - and many of them the supposedly erotic scenes - which were not over the top or distasteful. The male characters in the movie were brilliant - David Boreanaz was great as the fickle hunk - and what is great is that the movie doesn't make us hate him all that much. The other two younger male characters were good too, without being overbearing.This is one of the best movies I've seen that has girls growing up and is quite empowering to see how the they realise their mistakes but eventually come through and carry on with their lives rather than drag their mistakes along with them.

GlendaTGW Finding the premise intriguing, and reading the reviews, and being an Angel fan, I watched this movie. It's sexy and original, and quite entertaining. David Boreanaz is Keith. He's a hunky married man, stay at home Dad, and he feels a little inadequate in his marriage. He makes the mistake of penetrating a close circle of teenage girls who are fascinated with the idea of doing it with an older man. They'll do anything to get into his bed, including beg, lie, and blackmail, but they mostly try to push his buttons. The nuttiness that ensues sends Keith reeling, and pushes friendships to the edge. David Boreanaz shows a little skin in this one-- and he's looking hot. Yes-he plays a sleazy cheat - but he shows enough vulnerability and tenderness toward the goofy teens that you end up cheering for him in the end. One more thing, when someone moans "oh yeah, oh..oh..YEAH!!", it's hard to see them as a victim of rape.

Robert W. These Girls is just a completely average film in every way. The cast tries their best but the script is sub-par and sleazy and really carries no real weight. It doesn't try to play to any particular demographic, certainly not teens or shouldn't be and anyone older than thirty and you might feel a little dirty watching this film about 16 and 17 year old girls seducing and more or less raping a 30+ year old man, who is married and whose baby is quite often in the next room or with him. Even though the three actresses portraying teenagers are well into their twenties it doesn't make the film any less sexually deviant or disturbing. There is just something wrong about the whole thing. Based on a French Canadian play the film is just a mish-mash of weirdness but I suppose with some decent performance by the lead cast.David Boreanaz, I admit I'm a fan, loved him through Buffy The Vampire Slayer, and Angel and I am now an avid watcher of Bones and he is good in the lead role as sleazy serial cheater Keith Clark. I don't think this film will do a thing for his career but his role is good and he does a decent job. I don't know how he got tied up with this one though?? Relatively experienced Canadian actress Caroline Dhavernas, plays the lead girl and narrator Keira St-George. She does come across as the most intelligent and the leader of the group but their actions make them all sleazy no matter what they do outside of that. Out of the three girls she did the best job as little as that might be saying. Relative newcomer Holly Lewis plays the youngest, most inexperienced of the group. She is religiously obsessive but feels the need to experience sex once before going away to 7th Day Adventist school. I found her annoying and her portrayal as such a young school girl really disturbing and the sex scene she shares with Boreanaz was just borderline wrong and disgusting. Amanda Walsh, former Much Music VJ plays Glory Lorraine, and I think possibly gave the best performance. Her character Glory was truly infatuation with Keith and believed she loved him and gets screwed over by him and her friends. Her portrayal as being so much younger came across as kind of weird at times too but she was still better than most in the film.Certainly I would not describe These Girls as a "chick flick" because the film is completely and utterly demeaning to women. But in all fairness it's kind of completely and utterly demeaning to men too. The film can only be best described as a sleaze-fest with no real outcome although they try to make it seem like Keith Clark gets what's coming to him but he doesn't. I even saw a review that compared this to the recent film "John Tucker Must Die" and although These Girls might try to follow that formula it certainly never comes across as that. Definitely pass this one over unless you're a huge fan of one of the main characters. You'll be disappointed. Despite a slightly watchable and a graciously short time span it's really not worth seeing. 5/10

v-laxdal Tanya! What a kind and wonderful message you posted - thank you! I hope you enjoy the film - it certainly is a romp for me! Your portrayal of Caroline remains an inspiration - you gave her such a good "kick" in the Ottawa production - really focused her and brought into her own. I will always appreciate you for that.A note - her role and rationale has been modified for the film version - she's now "Keira" - but her wry humor that you really woke me to in your performance, and that I tried to capture in the subsequent draft for the Calgary production at One Yellow Rabbit, has absolutely made it all the way to big screen.Right On, Tanya! Hope all is well with you, Viv