Bad Girls (1994) User Reviews

Cast off the shackles that bind women of the West

[nguldner · 5/10 · 24 April 2006]

Jonathan Kaplan's Bad Girls leaves an interesting taste in my mouth. It is an energetic and fun film, offset by its ridiculous characters and plot. The believability factor in this flick is low, which encourages its audience to view it as a swirling maelstrom of metaphor and symbol. Woman, as defined by the early 90's, can overcome any impediment and still be beautiful, no need to become manly (and lose her femininity) to assert herself. The Western genre serves as a perfect tableau for this discourse because it is one traditionally dominated by men. Likewise, the men in Bad Girls each represent an institution of American culture that is dominated by men and their mentality, conveniently dispatched by the bad girls.

Four whores raise hell by killing a Colonel and running out of town, complete with unnecessary slow motion of Drew Barrymore shouting "heeyah!" and the humiliation of every man who crosses their path. The military, traditional justice, and Christianity are trampled upon, left wondering how these motivated and hard working women could escape their clutches. The film from here takes some twists and turns, and several complete circles. In short, the whores chase a dream of establishing a home for themselves around a mill that Mary Stuart Masterson's late husbands owned, countering the murderous advances of men with their own sexual flaunting. Gunfights, smarmy dialogue, pseudo-lesbianic encounters, and female flesh fill the film to to a near bursting capacity, much like Barrymore's bosom.

It is not what I would call a smart film, however it does present itself as an interesting fable about the empowerment of women by women who remain women. I would liken Bad Girls to that of the Freudian dreams of those who struggle against "the man." I feel that it deserves to be seen at least once.

Sexy western!!

[elo-equipamentos · 6/10 · 16 January 2018]

This silly story of four sexy hookers on western take a ride in "the Quick and the Dead" which had more best reviews, Bad Girls use a sexual oriented direction, but not too seriously, surviving on this kind of sexploitation, one of best scenes when Drew Barrymore as Lilly tries seduces the Deputy to distract him to your mates have enough time to set free Eileen from the jail, best scene of the picture, the bad guy played by James Russo is a crap with all gang members, anyway the movie summarize on sexual appealliing from the four bad girls!!

Resume:

First watch: 1996 / How many: 2 / Source: TV-DVD / Rating: 6.25

Nothing special

[807 · 5/10 · 10 August 2009]

When the prostitute Cody Zamora (Madeleine Stowe) shoots a military man in self defense and is about to be hanged, she is rescued by her three companions (Masterson, Barrymore, MacDowell). They want to leave for Oregon, but are pursued by Pinkerton agents and their paths cross with Kid Jarrett, the local thug, and his mob.

The movie itself is pretty fine; the problem is that it appeared too late. After such landmarks as "Unforgiven", or even "Dances With Wolves" - not to mention the classic antiwesterns of the 1960s and 1970s - a western which is nothing more but a pure entertainment appears somewhat empty and unfocused. Also, it is somewhat underwritten: the good chicks are individualised, clean and smart, the bad guys are a mass of dirty, drunken, constanly sinisterly laughing, idiotically-behaving, stereotypical villains. In the 90s? please! The movie could have worked as a tribute to classic old westerns, but what worked fine in the case of "Silverado" is here neglected - sadly, because this would significantly improve the picture. All in all, not a bad movie - just nothing new and original. 5/10

TWO LEGS BAD!!!!!!

[nifabs · 22 June 2003]

Agreed, the acting could have been a bit less melodramatic but the actresses concerned did a good job when they weren't looking like supermodels.

The trick about it was "they had to look good" and they did look good. Madeleine Stowe's "Cool Cody", Andie McDowell's Elegant Eileen, Mary Stuart Masterson's "Arch Anita", and Drew Barrymore's tomboyish "Li'l Lilly", were fetching and gave rise to Girl Power credence.

I couldn't take my eyes off Barrymore who had come a long since E.T. and her drug/alcohol fuelled periods of teen angst/pain.

The fight at the end in the corral blew me away, those girls proved they could outshoot anything on two legs!!!

There should be a sequel!!!

4 out of 5

Gunslingerettes line up for the atrocity exhibition.

[hitchcockthelegend · 2/10 · 11 November 2010]

Bad Girls is directed by Jonathan Kaplan from a screenplay by Ken Friedman and Yolande Turner. It stars Madeleine Stowe, Mary Stuart Masterson, Andie MacDowell and Drew Barrymore. The plot sees the four girl actors playing prostitutes on the run following a justifiable homicide and a hanging escape. Suffice to say that they get into scrapes & double crosses whilst being pursued by the Pinkerton's.

Being asked to suspend disbelief is one thing, being force fed drivel masquerading as pro-feminism is entirely another. Bad Girls is a mess of a movie, an insult to the Western genre, the fans of the lady actors, to the lady actors themselves; who simply deserve much much better and arguably worst of all; to women in general. The script is laughable, serving only as an excuse for the gals to sling those guns and hips when possible, and be abused and saved by "men", while the plotting is by the numbers as everything falls into place readily. There's even slow-mo shots where they serve no purpose of enhancement. Throw into the mix that three of ladies look nothing like on the run outlaws, all shine and span and make up with nice hair (Masterson the exception as she has a modicum of believability about her), well it's rather a depressing experience all told. Sure, as a red blooded guy I'm not going to be turned off by Barrymore's shapely thighs adorned in white stockings, or Stowe's truly gorgeous face, but when the highlights of a "girl" Western is something that's only aesthetically sexy for men, then they clearly have got it wrong.

So what's the justification for it being so bad? Well the back story offers up the answer. Film was meant to be directed by a woman, Tamra Davis (erm-Billy Madison & Crossroads), but she was jettisoned a couple of weeks into production. The plan with Davis at the helm was for it to be a Western told from a female point of view. However, Kaplan (The Accused/Unlawful Entry) was brought in quickly and the screenplay rewritten in a hurry. And boy does it show. Technically it's a duffer too, Jerry Goldsmith's score is cheap in texture and Jane Kurson's editing is choppy to say the least. There's no eye catching cinematography (Ralf D. Bode), while the acting away from the script hindered girls (ie: the men), is either a waste of time them being in it (Nick Chinlund) or badly directed (James Russo). While Dermot Mulroney seems only to exist as being a link to Young Guns; the "boy" version that this is clearly trying to ride the coat tails in on. If you want a good Western about the girls fighting the good fight then seek out George Marshall's 1957 film The Guns Of Fort Petticoat. It's a fun movie that at least has believable women fighting back under duress. Bad Girls, tho, is just bad in every department. 2/10

Not so much Wild West as rather genteel

[neil-476 · 7/10 · 12 April 2010]

This is actually a fairly handsomely mounted and rather traditional western, if it wasn't for the unrelenting glamorousness of the protagonists. Even when they are dirty, you get the impression that it's designer dirt.

But that's OK, because the glam factor is one of the things which sells this western.

It sure isn't the story, because there are few surprises (although, to be fair, there are a couple of moments which aren't entirely expected).

The confusing thing is that the movie is resolutely feminist, yet trades on the very un-feminist element of hot chicks. I suppose this enables it to appeal to two apparently contradictory demographics.

The movie is a romp, which makes it a touch puzzling that Madelyn Stowe plays it very straight and serious.

But, taking everything into consideration, it is entertaining, undemanding, and easy on the eyes.

You have already seen it.

[rmax304823 · 4/10 · 31 January 2009]

Madeleine Stowe, as Cody Zamora, is a hooker who shoots a man in self defense. Being what she is, that is to say, not being Mother Teresa, she doesn't generate much sympathy in this rough-riding town and the good citizens decide to hang her. "Get on with it," she tells them with Promethean contempt. They're about to do just that when three other young women of dubious repute rescue her at the last minute and ride off. In pursuit are a variety of justice seekers, including Pinkertons and other law types, one or two of them, such as Dermot Mulroney and James LeGros aren't too bad. On the trail they run into the Jarrett Gang. Some of the bad girls, and some of the pursuers as well, carry baggage with them related to the Jarrett Gang. There is a violent shoot out.

Now, we must note here that the writers weren't reaching too far for original character names. The leader of the girls is Cody Zamora, whereas the leader of the Gang is Kid Jarrett. I'd be surprised if the writers hadn't seen James Cagney in "White Heat" as a gang leader named Cody Jarrett. At least there were no Wades or Coles or Lukes or Matts, although there was a bad guy named Yuma, which is pretty bad.

In fact, though, all four of the bad girls could as easily have been men, or more easily. They WOULD have been men back in the 1950s or 1960s. But then I suppose the Jarrett Gang wouldn't have had an opportunity to treat Drew Barrymore to a lesson in Tough Love. At that, though, this is a BIG improvement over "Westward the Women," with Robert Taylor as a sadistic wagonmaster hired to cart a caravan of would-be wives out to a female-starved Western outpost. Taylor consistently treats his wards like dirt and actually whips some of them when they don't work hard enough.

There's nothing original here except the gender of the four leads. There is some suggested nudity but no simulated sex or anything else to pique one's interest. They just seem to have rounded up four popular actresses and thrown them into a well-worn dusty rut. The climactic gunplay is lifted straight out of "The Wild Bunch", as are a couple of slow-motion gunshots. No reason for it, except that it had been done before.

I thank the whole tenor of the pitcher is captured when there is a scene of them four hoorah gals a-settin' around the camp fire and a-havin' a peaceful chat. All four of them is exquisitely dressed and unimpeachably groomed with modern hair styles and make up in full panoply. Not a hair out of place, y'know? But the make up department has very carefully brushed a comely taupe area on one cheek or a smear of raw sienna across some otherwise impeccable forehead. That's dust and dirt from the road. They been on the trail fer quite a spell. And they talk like they just graduated from Wellesley. (That's this here classy college back East, kids.) Not a single "g" is dropped at the end of a word like "nothing," or -- as we rawboned cowboys like to call it -- "NUTHIN." How can writers and directors be so careless, so contemptuous of viewers? Or maybe I'm mistaken. Maybe they have a different audience in mind. But if so, what is it?

Both fruitless and fruitful in equal measure western romp through an annoyingly Hollywoodised wild west, Bad Girls hits and misses but it ultimately enjoyable.

[johnnyboyz · 6/10 · 27 February 2011]

Are the four titular lead women really all that bad in Jonathan Kaplan's 1994 Western thriller Bad Girls? Perhaps it's the nature of what they do lined up against what's expected of them that makes them so "bad", that is to say, putting their necks on the line and obliterating whatever male dominated spectrum exists within the world they occupy as they strive for independence and individualism. Perhaps that's what makes them bad, the fact that they refuse to roll over for the majority of the men in the film and act like good little whores suitable to be looked at but nary heard. The titular girls do kill people, but most certainly in self-defence; they fight and they battle away, but do so against fair degrees of sexism; they're on the run, but their running is purely a result of pent-up rage and sustained marginalisation. As it happens, Bad Girls is a guilty romp through a west you couldn't really entitle "wild" about four gals just wanting a 'straight' American dream infused life but having to fight both misogyny and false charges brought against them along the way.

The film covers the misadventures of a handful of women in pre-20th Century America, the ringleader and toughest of the lot of whom is Madeline Stowe's Cody Zamora; a woman nary afraid to stand up to men nor those lecherous and out to harm either herself or one of her kind, evident when we observe her react with violence to a patron's over exuberance at sampling the services of Drew Barrymore's Lilly Laronette. Stowe's reaction lands her in some seriously hot water, the death sentence carrying with it an air of disenchanted inevitability about it in that Zamora stands before the gallows on account of preventing the elderly man from having his way rather than defending a girl from rape. After a straight faced Zamora demands the execution party "gets on with it", her three accomplices, with whom she has been working most of her life and will spend the majority of this film with, bound out of the wilderness and save both the day and Stowe's neck before charging off with her in tow. Fugatives to the law, Zamora; Laronette; Andie MacDowell's Eileen Spenser and Mary Stuart Masterson's Anita Crown hole up out of town after a verbal demonisation from those back at the party point out they are both the enemies of the people, religion and all things righteous.

What transpires from this is effectively a weak rendition of 1992's Unforgiven, only minus Eastwood's character and Freeman's character; a tale about strong natured prostitutes maltreated but then themselves consequently being the ones whom go on the run as it's they whom are additionally stalked by a pair seeking their own brand of justice. Those men are two Pinkerton Marshals named O'Brady (Chinlund) and Graves (Beaver), men hired to track them down in this sprawling road movie of sorts and bring them to justice as the girls themselves attempt to get on with a more honourable way of living: the allure of opening a saw mill in far off anywhere appearing particularly appealing. The film has fun with placing women at the forefront of its plot, allowing its lead characters to charm; trick and seduce their way out of tight spots and usually into tighter ones when they require some money rather than to throw around weight they do not have as might have been the case had male characters driven the film.

The film isn't without flaw; its goofiness encapsulated by the fact each of these girls maintains a relatively photogenic look throughout, not once the years of abuse nor the results of their previous line of work really worming its way into either of their expressions nor overall demeanour and thus holding the film back from being the grittier tale it might have been. As time had passed and the four of them worked at that seedy tavern, each of them appeared to master the fine art of gunslinging and sharpshooting; Zamora managing to make best-friends/worst-enemies with a certain Kid Jarrett (Russo), a bandanna sporting low life thief with a small army of bandits whom waltzes around with a belt of bullets around his ribs, along the way. The chase element is surprisingly effective, a love plot to do with a young man named Josh McCoy (Mulroney) whom becomes mixed up in things, or more specifically Laronette, daft as it is good natured; a later sequence featuring this additionally consistent, in an unrealistic manner, photogenic young cowboy arriving to save his dame on horseback out of a dynamite caused cloud of smoke, suit of armour all that is missing, rather ridiculous but then spun around when it is he whom needs the collective power of the four women to save his own life.

There's a glum and rather seedy sub-plot to do with Jarrett and his past-involvement, romantically, with Zamora which doesn't quite sync up with the rest of the film's boisterous tone of romp and circumstance; while Laronette's own swiping from the rest of the crew feels a little preordained, or more obligatory than is desired, since it is she who is the youngest of the four titular bad girls and it is she whom must then where the little dress her captors have lined up for her. You additionally feel their treatment of her might have been a little more sordid than it actually is, but a ruthless sticking to the overall tone of the film demands a watered down version of whatever might have happened in the real wild west; the taking of Laronette the result of Barrymore's sexuality when compared to the other three than that of any realistic plot driven reasons or mechanics. Flaws and frustrations aside, and there are a glowing number, Bad Girls is a daft but enjoyable frolic through hazy female empowerment and both action and western genre demands but done in a relatively fetching manner.

Bad ___

[SnoopyStyle · 4/10 · 11 May 2014]

Cody Zamora (Madeleine Stowe), Anita Crown (Mary Stuart Masterson), Eileen Spenser (Andie MacDowell), and Lilly Laronette (Drew Barrymore) are prostitutes in the small Colorado town of Echo City. Cody kills a particularly rough client beating on Anita who refuses to kill anybody after the death of her true love. She is about to be hung when the girls rescues her. They are pursued by Pinkerton detectives Graves and O'Brady hired by the widow. Anita has a homestead claim in Oregon that she wants to start a saw mill with. Cody has over $12k to make the start. When the Pinkertons catches up at the Texas bank, Cody's old partner Kid Jarrett (James Russo) shows up to rob the bank and he takes her money to lure Cody to him. Eileen is captured by the town and Cody gets beaten by Kid Jarrett rescued by Josh McCoy (Dermot Mulroney).

This was a great opportunity for women to lead a western. It should be a lot more than what this movie actually turned out to be. The sets look cheap and the style looks weak. This needs a great director to push a gritty tough style. Director Jonathan Kaplan has fallen into TV show directing after some early big screen success and there is a good reason for that. His style isn't cinematic or grand enough for a big adventure movie. The visual style is lacking. The ladies are all terrific actresses. The story rambles on and on. The tone is all over the place. This is a mess. There is a bit of good action at the end, but it's too little too late.

Seen worse by far.

[Stoli_Raz_N_7 · 6/10 · 30 January 2005]

Bad Girls was a Young Guns wannabe with women. The actresses gave fair performances with the roles they were given, though those roles were clichéd and one-dimensional. The film was meant to show the struggles and hardships of women in the old west, yet the film failed on many levels. Rather than turning the women into gunslingers, they should've played more on the Thelma-and-Louise-of-the-old-west routine. What was worse was the whole "we don't need you men, but we love you" attitude. Overall, it could have been better, but then again, it could've been worse. It could've been "Catwoman in the Old West". As crappy as it was, they should've had some T&A in the film, just for redeeming value. It would've made the show more watchable, at least. Feminists probably loved the film. At least it has a niche audience.

fun entertainment...beautiful ladies

[wyatte-1 · 4/10 · 8 October 2005]

I think I could have enjoyed Bad Girls a little better if I felt that ladies, particularly in the west were pathetic, helpless victims of the boorish, stupid, chauvinistic men.

Oh well, I really enjoyed the fairly realistic town scenes and particularly the talent of the ladies....

Drew Barrymore was quite fetching if not (like the rest of the movie).. even remotely....believable.

I'd watch these ladies do just about anything....but riding horses, shooting guns, in bawdy western wear, corsets.... was pure entertainment "on the hoof".

The gritty lines were as good as I've ever heard...even the old widow of the dead officer whore monger...."bag of manure"...good stuff.

Beautiful scenery....human AND location.

Top Notch

[Buddy-52 · 9/10 · 5 April 2005]

Best expression of women in westerns I have seen so far. This eclipses the Sharon Stone film The Quick and the Dead. The latter film softens the lead character by making her survival depend wholly on the Russel Crowe character. In Bad Girls Madeline Stowe eats up the dust on the west and shows a no nonsense gunslinger that has been rare since the Man With No Name hit his stride with a trilogy of spaghetti westerns that made Clint Eastwood a universal star. I can hardly ignore the great cinema style and the substance of this movie that transcends the gender of it's hero. Make no mistake about it this is Stowe's movie to win or lose and she comes away having broke the bank at Monte Carlo. See it with open eyes if you like westerns. If you don't see something else as this will surely disappoint. It is a western all the way.

"I've shown you mine, you show me yours".

[classicsoncall · 7/10 · 8 September 2016]

My summary line sounds a lot more risqué than it actually is. Turns out Kid Jarrett (James Russo) was talking about his hostage McCoy (Dermot Mulroney), while Cody Zamora's (Madeleine Stowe) offer in trade was a new fangled Gatling gun. So all you readers with a dirty mind, you don't have to go back and look it up.

Quite out of habit now, I enable captioning while watching movies because even though I got hearing aids recently, I've realized that sometimes the person doing the captioning will go out on a limb and have some fun at the expense of his employer. (See my review for "The Telegraph Trail"). In this picture, there was a scene in which the Pinkerton Detectives were questioning Josh McCoy, and the term was used twice, but captioning had it as 'Peckerton Ditinctives'. Once might have been a goof, but someone, somewhere had to work at being consistent. If you're watching this flick on Encore Westerns, check it out for yourself before someone is called to task for it.

Tell you what, I like it when a story line has their principals stay in character at the expense of personal safety. This one had two neat touches, the first was when McCoy shot Frank Jarrett (Robert Loggia) for bad mouthing McCoy's mother; the other was when Lilly (Drew Barrymore) shot scumbag Ned (Neil Summers) for being just that, a scumbag. Both instances were problematic for completing the mission, but turned out well enough for the good guys, should say gals, to come out on top.

So maybe not the most credible of Western movies, but kind of entertaining in it's own way. The female leads are in it for their eye candy appeal, with Drew Barrymore taking top honors in that particular department. That they started out as harlots working an Echo City 'parlor house' didn't seem all that credible once the action started, since virtually every close-up of the girls was carefully framed to highlight their glamorous looks. In Barrymore's case, the camera guy probably needed a cold shower between takes.

Not bad, but half-hearted, attempt at a feminist Western

[gridoon · 5/10 · 29 July 2005]

The idea of making a Western with women in the leading roles was an interesting one, but the casting was not exactly ideal. Don't get me wrong, the women in "Bad Girls" look great in their Western outfits, and they do a fine acting job as well, but only Drew Barrymore really convinces as a "bad girl" - you can see the fire of intensity burning in her eyes (Madeleine Stowe is a close second - at times she is convincingly defiant). And for a "feminist" Western, the women get mistreated rather frequently. But the biggest problem with this film is an unfocused script that never really takes off. "Bad Girls" was a big commercial and critical flop, but I don't think it's such a bad movie - it's just not as good as it should have been. (**)

If you are a female and a horse lover, then you will like this movie!

[lillisam · 24 April 2004]

I really liked this movie because I love horses and I like the actors in this movie. The storyline is simple and it is a great action chick flick. It has humor, adventure and a great overall girl bonding feel to it. It is the story of four friends who work in a parlor house who find themselves getting into trouble and having to go on the run. It is a story of the depth of friendship, strength, starting over, finding love and fighting back. Who said women can't kick some butt. A real feel good movie that is great to watch on a rainy Sunday afternoon. I would recommend adding this movie to one's movie collection. This is one movie where women are the heroes of the movie.

Rubbish plot, Poor Script and REALLY Bad Acting

[Sheamus-2 · 1/10 · 28 January 2000]

The plot of this film is simple. Some prostitutes get blamed for killing a man in self defence, and the town wants to string em up. So the girls escape and go on a rampage.

I don't know what happens next, because the opening 30 minutes was so bad that i switched off my video and watched the news instead (Thats REALLY bad!!!).

With the cast, the films should have been able to be carried on their star qualities alone... if the main players had chosen to attempt to act the film. But they didn't...

Suffice to say, in a recent poll for the worst film of all time, I voted for Bad Girls.

Lighter version of "Young Guns", with an all female leading cast, that failed to achieve the same success...

[DeuceWild_77 · 6/10 · 23 February 2020]

Directed by Jonathan Kaplan, succeeding Tamra Davis which was fired after a few days of filming a more 'artsy' oriented film and it was an obvious replacement choice, because Kaplan have proved to be a good director of women. He directed Kelly McGillis and Academy Award winner for her role, Jodie Foster in "The Accused"; Glenn Close and Mary Stuart Masterson in "Immediate Family" and the Academy Award nominee for her role, Michelle Pfeiffer in "Love Field", but unfortunelly the underdeveloped re-written script wasn't au pair with its famed director and the rushed production, after several changes made to its cast and crew, didn't help either.

The cast features the beautiful brunette, Madeleine Stowe (joining Kaplan again after playing Kurt Russell's wife in "Unlawful Entry" 2 years prior) as Cody Zamora, the leader of the 4 honky tonk harlots turned outlaws after Cody killed a wealthy customer, which was abusing one of her girls, Anita Crown, played by the sweet 'girl next door' blondie, Mary Stuart Masterson ("At Close Range", "Benny & Joon", "Fried Green Tomatoes"). Andie MacDowell, ("Greystoke: The Legend of Tarzan, Lord of the Apes", "Sex, Lies and Videotape", "Four Weddings and a Funeral"), who never was a great actress to begin it, plays Eileen Spenser in her natural southern accent, but she's the 'elephant in the room' here and blonde bombshell, Drew Barrymore ("Poison Ivy", "Scream", "The Wedding Singer"), in one of her sexiest roles ever, plays the wild Lily Laronette in which Sharon Stone took notice to create her character in "The Quick and the Dead" ('95)

The male cast is composed by Dermot Mulroney, who can surely ride a horse after his roles in "Young Guns" and "The Last Outlaw", but lacks charisma and screen presence, playing the good farmer turned gunfighter; James LeGros ("Drugstore Cowboy", "Point Break"), who just can't act, playing the naive young rancher and the screen veteran, Robert Loggia ("Somebody Up There Likes Me", "An Officer and a Gentleman", "Jagged Edge") and the forever baddie, James Russo ("Extremities", "Cotton Club", "We're No Angels") as father and son playing nasty pistoleros.

The movie is similar to "Young Guns" ('88), minus the real life characters, like if it was intended to be a female version of that film, but lacks the production quality, the better script and staging of the action scenes present in the Christopher Cain film. Some scenes are routine directed, almost approaching the made-for-TV films; the editing leaves much to be desire and some situations doesn't even make sense at all, just for the sake of a hour and a half of a popcorn flick to entertain the less demanding audiences.

The best of it, it's the 4 leading actresses, if you're a fan of Madeleine, Mary, Andie or Drew, you'll be thrilled to watch them ride together in this action / drama / romance / western film set around 1895, a year before the Klondike Gold Rush.

Kudos to the cover art of the poster, 4 beautiful ladies turned bad girls is always a joy to watch.

I give it a 6.5

Recommended, but not expect "Unforgiven" or "Open Range"....

Start with a ridiculous premise, add a cliché-ridden script and bad acting,

[Captain_Augustus_McCrae · 1/10 · 19 January 2008]

And you will end up with this nonsensical mish-mash excuse for a film. Individually, I like the actresses who portray the "Bad Girls", but they are totally wasted in this steaming pile of horse $**t. The concept of making a western that expands and amplifies the contributions of women in the Old West has merit, but this kind of "girl-power" fantasy is a disservice to that concept. "Sarah, Plain and Tall", "Thousand Pieces of Gold" or even the classic "Stagecoach" (1939 version) take that concept and run with it, but this so-called movie instead erects a totally fictitious framework of... empowering prostitutes(?) to try and make some kind of bogus feminist point (whoring for success, I guess). Avoid this film. There are better films for those who like eye candy, better feminist/oppressive men movies (try "Thelma and Louise), and Heaven knows, better Westerns. I liked "The Daughters of Joshua Cabe" a hundred times more than this road muffin.

BAD GIRLS - *** out of *****

[unclejeff · 6/10 · 17 March 2024]

I think I'll chalk this up as a guilty pleasure. This female-driven Western was absolutely trounced by the critics upon its release, and I honestly can't argue with them. Much of this is a rather unpleasant experience as the four spunky heroines are not only repeatedly referred to in negative connotation from first moment to last, but they are also subjected to various bouts of violence that feel very uncomfortable at times. The male characters are either ruthless scoundrels or smooth-skinned saints. The plot is predictable and performances sketchy. And yet... AND YET... I have to admit that the movie held my attention, and I was for the most part entertained. There is something contagious about watching these actresses obviously having the time of their lives, even when the posing and posturing feels like they're doing a shoot for ELLE magazine. And I will argue that Stowe actually has some great moments and holds the movie together. There is also an affectionate relationship between MacDowell and Barrymore that feels very authentic. I'm not a Westerns fan, and this will not persuade me to think differently. But for what it is, hey, it wasn't the worst time I've ever had watching a movie.

More than merely Hollywood production line pap

[AnusPresley · 1/10 · 13 October 2006]

This film could easily be dismissed (deservedly) as yet another McMovie off the assembly line, but for one thing - it appears to be a really lame homage (as opposed to blatant rip off) to the mother of all westerns, _The Wild Bunch_ (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0065214/). The opening features a Temperance Union march and the ending with a (lame and bloodless) shootout, complete with gattling gun - from which the heroines walk away unscathed and without a hair out of place. Everything in between is peppered with stuff lifted from _Wild Bunch_ - bandits robbing a US army arms shipment to sell in Mexico most prominent, and the lead up to the finale of the 4 gals on horseback riding into bandido town to rescue a compatriate is a carbon copy. Even chunks of dialog are lifted - "Well why dontcha all kiss my sister's black cat's ass"...

This is more than simply bad - its insulting. Peckinpah must be spinning in his grave.

"Bad Girls"

[zephyrean1 · 3/10 · 4 May 2006]

"Bad Girls" (1994) directed by Jonathan Kaplan is definitely a typical Western. It has the riding, the gun slinging, and the cowboys and prostitutes to fill it out. Yet with one large modification, the roles of the women are very different from what has come to be expected as the norm in this genre. The four leading women, even in their given roles as prostitutes, lead the movie and drive the storyline. The first woman, Cody Zamora (Madeleine Stowe) shoots a man for not stepping away from Anita Crown (Mary Stewart Masterson) her friend and fellow harlot. A group of religious zealots that happened to be protesting the hotel where the women worked brought her out to be hanged. Anita and the other two women, Eileen Spenser and Lilly Laronette (Andie MacDowell and Drew Barrymore) pack up to rescue Cody from the noose. From that point on, they are wanted women. They have strong wills and challenge the men that wish to capture them, or humiliate them. I like the idea of this movie in that you would turn gender roles in Westerns on its head, but there are so many instances that made the movie predictable and played down the intended role for the women. The women, regardless of how capable they are at shooting a gun and getting out of bad situations, seemed to just make trouble for themselves. This might have been a way to show the human fallibility, but it further perpetuates the Western genre classification. The only way they got out was though "movie luck," the event where the antagonists' bullets never reach the protagonists or miss them completely, while the protagonist has perfect aim. My opinion of this movie is that it gets a little tedious, has seemingly unnecessary nude scenes, and is fairly predictable. This movie is merely entertaining on a superficial level.

A fun, fast paced movie for all

[RCRGreenberet · 10/10 · 11 November 2005]

When I pick a movie to watch there are four elements that draw me to it. The cast, the story line, excitement and most of all I want the movie to be fun to watch. Bad Girls incorporates all four of these elements. The story centers on four former saloon prostitutes who are on the run after one of them shoots and kills a prominent citizen of Echo City. The four girls, Cody Zamora played by Madeleine Stowe, Anita Crown, played by Mary Stewart Masterson, Eileen Spencer played by Andie MacDowell and Lilly Laronette played by Drew Barrymore are great together. The story line may not be totally accurate from a historical standpoint but the action and acting are good and more than make up for whatever may be wrong. For me the story was more about the relationship that existed between the four girls without going over the line and making it sexual. For me, Bad Girls was a winner.

Wretched post-feminist western

[JohnSeal · 2/10 · 21 April 2000]

It's a tough choice: who's the worst empowered ex-prostitute in this movie? I had to settle on Drew Barrymore, who looks (and acts) totally out of place in the Old West. Consign this one to the dumpster and watch Johnny Guitar instead.

Fun movie

[montie_rowe · 1 December 2020]

Despite all the negative criticism it's fun to watch these four leading ladies play badass girls in the West It turns westerns on an opposite, and trite, formula. Watch the four leading ladies kick ass on Western stereotypes Enjoy

Don't make the mistake I did

[MI$ gUy · 1/10 · 19 June 1999]

A few years ago I reached down into the bargain movie bin for what I thought was The Quick and the Dead. To my horror it turned out that Bad Girls was also in that bin and I mistakenly grabbed it, bought it, and brought it home. When I realized the mistake, I decided "This movie can't be too bad." How farther from the truth could that be. I have a collection of several hundred movies, and too this day my worst movie still remains "Bad Girls". It is an abomination and a dishonor to all other movies (except maybe teen wolf too).

With such horrible acting (and plot...etc) at least they could have made this movie into a wannabe porn or something. Well, never mind. In order to do that they would need to hire actresses that wouldn't make you wanna puke if you saw some skin. I don't think even a combination of Jane March, Sharon Stone, Selma Hayek, and Jeniffer Lopez could have saved this film from a sub 5 rating...well maybe a 5.

I warn you now, do not see this movie. If you do not heed my warnings you will be wasting your money, your time, and my time for going through the trouble of warning you.