I rented this in hopes of seeing, at the least, a film with some memorable lines or fun moments, and hoped that possibly I was stumbling across an underrated, obscure gem. I didn't even get any memorable lines or fun moments. It seems that what the film is trying to do is show a feminist view of sex, but the viewpoint doesn't go very deep or really seem that intriguing. It hardly even makes sense. The characters don't do much to support this attempt at deepness, and the acting is lousy all around. One of the main girls is trying her best to be an Angelina Jolie type, but she has zero charisma or screen presence. I think the best acting in the film was from a minor female character in a bar that one of the male characters was trying to pick up, and she had about three lines. Seriously, the acting is that noticeably bad. Thora Birch must be trying to earn indie cred by appearing in this right around the time her career was taking off, and she does have one of the better moments towards the beginning involving playing a Russian roulette-type game with an almost completely loaded gun, but the fact that the gun is loaded is the only fascinating part about this scene because her acting isn't particularly stellar. Dominique Swain doesn't even shine at all, and she has definitely saved some films I've seen in the past. The pot smoking seemed like a gimmick tacked onto the film. It's a shame. This movie looks good on paper, but suffers from weakness factoring in from all aspects that go into the making of it.
Add a Review
-
PickUrFeetInPoughkeepsie4 September 2003
-
Captain Ed30 December 2002Completely laughable depiction of three private-school girls who, fed up with the domination boys have over them, decide on some violent revenge that ultimately backfires on them. At first, I assumed that the movie would be a dark-comedy satire -- which might have worked -- but instead it was a straight-up drama that will head directly to the Camp section of your local all-night video rental.
There is no one element of this movie that fails; the acting, script, cinematography, sound, music, and direction all stink. Busy Phillips as Karen is so over-the-top psycho you wonder why anyone else hangs around her. Keri Lynn Pratt simpers and whimpers as victim-for-life Lisa (take two big career steps backwards, Keri!). Dominique Swain as Jefferson is (I guess) the voice of reason between the two, and lends a completely unnecessary and ludicrous narration to the movie. Thora Birch attempts to out-psycho Phillips and succeeds, and both of them corner the market on Wal-Mart cosmetics. And those four were actually the best actors in the film!
The men were so much worse, especially Nicholas Loeb. He sleepwalks through his part as Jeremy the Dork Who Really Is A Great Guy and mumbles his lines and makes standing still and looking stupid a virtue. How did he get cast in this role, you may ask? Well, he did a gig as a waiter in "Primary Colors" ... and he was the producer for "The Smokers". Wow, a double whammy! He's a multi-tasking stinker! Oliver Hudson and Ryan Browning don't do a lot better, although one of them (who cares) gets to get shot by Miss Victim -- accidentally, of course -- after getting totally turned on by her secret identity as one of the three female rapists.
So our intrepid young female rapists don't actually rape anyone, but they wag their pistol in some male faces, which they deem equivalent to the way guys have sex with them. (This is the problem with sleeping with teen-age boys, by the way.) Karen flips out and gets more and more difficult to control, but it's Lisa who gets to blow someone away. While Jefferson attempts to create a diversion and Jeremy TDWRIAGG helps Lisa, Karen gets caught in a bathroom with a burning shower curtain and manages to die with the pistol. How convenient! How Deus Ex Machina can you get? Well ... the movie ends with narration as Jefferson tells us how everyone ends up ten or fifteen years down the road, despite the fact that everything in this movie looks like it's in present time.
In short, this movie manages to be misogynistic and demeaning while supposedly championing feminist impulses. Pseudo-rapes are eroticized to pander to hormonal audiences, while consensual sex is mostly portrayed as degrading. This film has absolutely no redeeming qualities whatsoever, which makes you wonder what the New York Independent Film & Video Festival was thinking when it gave this crap the Audience Award. Dreck like this is almost enough to make you avoid independent films altogether. I give it a 2; it would be camp except that it's not funny enough, a la Battlefield Earth, one of the great unintentional comedies of the last ten years. -
Rolanzo31 March 2002I wish I had checked the IMDB reviews for this movie before renting it.
Don't be fooled by the reasonably interesting summary on the back of the box, this is one of the worst films I have ever sat through. The acting is laughable, with lines being delivered in a horribly stilted, mechanical style by all but one actor (excepting Thora Birch, who only has about ten minutes of screen time). Of course, you can't fault the actors for having to deliver lines that are horribly cliched or needlessly dramatic. Finally, it appears to have been edited by fairly intelligent chimps, with massive skips in the story leaving you trying desperately to figure out what's going on. The last ten minutes are among the worst ever commited to celluloid in movie that is trying to take itself seriously. -
There's not many movies where I seriously consider not seeing it all the way through. I watch 5-12 movies a week, new releases and classics, and typically I see them all through to the bitter end.
But 20 minutes into "The Smokers" I was fighting a most uncharacteristic urge to hit the Stop button.
And 30 minutes into the film I found myself in great sympathy of those animals who gnaw their legs off to escape a trap.
I picked up the film on spec because it had some good people involved with it. And I cannot hold them at fault for my discomfort -- all of the actors do their best with the material. (Thora Birch is a standout as the younger sister.)
But it is the material itself which is at the root of my desire to flee. What was (I believe) intended as a trenchant commentary on power, empowerment, and male-female relations instead struck me as a mean-spirited, dark and ultimately pointless exercise.
Perhaps if I were more familiar with the subjects of the film -- rich, bored, disaffected boarding school girls -- it would be more poignant for me. But I'm not a rich, bored, disaffected boarding school girl (nor do I think I ever shall be), just a film enthusiast with the ability to empathize with characters on screen if given half a chance. I ended up not caring two squirts what happened to any of these characters, and the vague message of the movie regarding the validity of the culture which produces rich, bored, disaffected etc. -- one of the characters tells her little sister "I don't want you to end up like mom" -- was insufficient reason to care about the film itself.
This film obviously comes from a very personal space, as many films which are written and directed by the same person do. Just as obviously, the director had it in the back of her mind that this film become a cult favorite -- the wild makeup is otherwise largely pointless.
An ardent feminist might claim that the source of my discomfort comes from receiving the barbs directed at self-serving men. To which I say pish. *And* tosh. The characters are empty on both sides of the sexual divide. I am a feminist (a humanist!) myself, and I feel this movie makes no contribution to insight regarding the opposite sex, and is in fact so confused and hostile that it can actually cause greater problems. My wife felt the same way.
Midway through the film, my wife and I debated whether or not to see it through; we decided to reach the bitter end, to see if *any* redemption was offered. But we also discussed what movie we should watch afterward, to take the taste of "The Smokers" out of our mouths. Something cheerier, like "Apocalypse Now".
And I found myself thinking of Kurtz's penned message: "Drop the bombs. Exterminate them all."
The horror. The horror... -
su11a26 May 2002don't bother renting it!!! despite the fact that there was a female director, this movie seemed more like male fantasy masquerading as female fantasy. the premise of the movie is basically, "what happens when you give hot chicks who love sex guns?" the whiny statement which the movie is trying to make is "you don't know what it's like to be a girl!!!"
well, i do know what it's like, and i think it's pathetic that these girls pretend to be feminists when they define themselves by how many guys they've slept with or what sorts of guys they've slept with. they feel powerful because they're wielding guns, but they're weak without them. these ladies deserve our pity!!! no, wait, they don't even deserve our attention!!! -
aimless-4616 September 2005So these three girls are outcasts, because they smoke but mostly because they are infantile. There's Karen (Freaks & Geek's/Dawson's Creek's Busy Phillips), a scholarship girl who is as irritating but not quite as sexy as Shelley Winters in "The Poseidon Adventure", and Lisa (Keri Lynn Pratt who was Miss New Hampshire a couple years earlier), and Jefferson (Ms. Swain-everyone's favorite "Lolita"). So guess who the writer/director uses for her most erotic shots? That's right Phillips the screaming buffalo. And they wonder why these things lose money.
My guess is a no-talent and soon to be pornmaker woman happened to see a 1968 movie called "Three In the Attic" (which has never been released on video) and thought that she could get away with stealing the story. So she began to remake the film without buying the rights or acknowledging that it was a remake. Her boyfriend, who financed it so he could co-star and drool on "Lolita", panicked and ordered her to make last minute script changes to avoid a lawsuit. At least this would account for the totally nonsensical storyline.
One easy and generally reliable way to avoid dogmeat stuff like this is to check out the industry experience of whoever is credited with art direction and production design. If it is their first credit you know the picture will be horrible.
Watch this only is you are determined to see everything Thora Birch has done. She made this between "American Beauty" (before its release) and "Ghost World". Although I am sure that she would like it off her resume she actually does a good job in a small role. You recognize her voice more than her face and it takes a while because you are struggling internally with disbelief, like if Emma Thompson had made an appearance in "The New Guy". -
roeperdan16 September 2002This movie is an insult to film makers and movie watchers everywhere. The premise is offensive. To say the acting is "bad" is an insult to truly bad acting. The lighting, writing, sound, and camera work make my dad's Super 8 home movies look good. If you were to turn it on in the middle of the film, you would think you were watching a home video. Made by a child. In a coma.
-
cuban_QT4 June 2002Spoiler Ahead
I can't stop beating myself up for having fallen for the snazzy cover and video summary on this one! I thought to myself, sounds like Heathers (and we all know, if it sounds like Heathers, there's very little that could make it bad). But I would like to take this moment to make it crystal clear that, despite what some misguided viewers might tell you, this film is not even in the galaxy of cult classics such as Heathers!!! This film is bad, as it is described in the GOOD movie with Ms. Birch, so bad that it's beyond good and back to bad again. I can't believe a woman created this. Their "liberation," realized by blindfolding a guy and making him wear a chicken hat (since nothing else really happened) is far overshadowed by the graphic scenes of not one, but two of the three heroines being raped. There couldn't have been more thrusting, sweating, crying, and runny make-up if they tried. Unnecessarily long, detailed, and of course totally eroticized, these scenes have no place in a film that purports to be about female liberation. The director/writer should be ashamed. When the girls say that they do what they do for all womankind, I beg that they speak for themselves, and refrain from embarrassing my sex.
However, it has not been in vain. I have derived several chuckles and hearty guffaws from reading the numerous digs others have made on the film here at IMDB, and now share a special bond with them. As I said to my boyfriend after the credits rolled, I hear that sharing a traumatic experience with someone can make the relationship even stronger.
Tip: For gleaning extra fun from this movie, cover up the clocks in the room. Periodically, guess how much time has elapsed, then glance at the clock and see how accurate your estimation was. You'll be amazed at the warp in the space-time continuum created by this film. 90 minutes really can feel like an eternity! -
newtmcknz11 June 2002No need to go into a really long description of what I hate about this movie...just read all of the other below comments and you'll get the picture. Bad acting, bad dialogue, and atrociously directed. The fire scene at the end was hilarious though.
-
planktonrules16 February 2010This movie seems to go out of its way to be trashy and after a few minutes, it all seems pretty boring. The film is about three obnoxious girls who go to a boarding school. They spend most of their time having sex, smoking, doing drugs, drinking and cursing and seem to have little personality otherwise. It's like the film makers are trying very hard to shock the audience, but it all comes off as fake with these white-break girls spouting their trashy lines with little conviction. There appears to be no inner personality or depth or any life outside of behaving trashy--just garishness. It all just seems awfully sad and pathetic.
Eventually, these worthless young ladies hit upon a way to break up the boredom that is their lives. They decide to become female rapists--forcing guys to "know what it's like". However, instead of being about empowerment or feminism, it's about worthless people committing criminal sexual assaults. I am sure this is NOT what Betty Friedan and Susan B. Anthony had envisioned as the future of women! So is there any reason to watch this socially irresponsible and dreadful film? Nope. It's worthless and surely deserves its position on IMDb's Bottom 100 list--the 100 lowest rated films with at least 1500 votes. This would officially make this film the crème de la crap out of the thousands and thousands and thousands of entries on the web site!
Bad acting, bad direction, an annoying soundtrack and a script that is not just offensive but stupid--there is nothing to recommend this film...nothing. -
This is the kind of film that would embarrass you if you watched it with someone else. A movie this bad only comes around every 30-40 years. So why not watch it?! It's not as crappy as Alone in the Dark or Cool as Ice. There are moments in this movie that will make you almost die laughing. As bad as it is, it certainly isn't forgettable. I didn't think that I would miss this movie, but I lost my VHS copy last year and I kind of want to watch it again. No, I REALLY want to watch it again! Of course, I will skip every scene that that Loeb waste of life is in. You'd think it would be funny to see someone recite lines with a blank expression on their face and put absolutely no feeling into what they say. He's not even good enough to be an extra.
There's a scene where Thora Birch does a parody of Night Before Christmas. During this scene there's some girl just sitting there lighting an empty bong. Seriously! There's nothing in the bowl, there's no smoke coming through the chamber, and you clearly hear and see that they didn't put any water in it. Doesn't anybody just roll a blunt anymore? During the second near-rape scene, Karen says one of the most messed up things I will ever hear in my life. "You don't know what it's like to have this gaping hole between your legs just waiting to be filled by the likes of you." I could not make that up even if I tried. Just before saying that, she ordered him to fill that hole with his tongue. Are you following this? She hates men, but is convinced that she needs them as well. Her character would've been better off just switching teams entirely. It certainly would've been more entertaining.
When the snobby rich parents come to visit, they decide to take their kids to lunch. Lisa's mom starts reciting poetry for no reason at all until the husband finally interrupts her by saying, "That's nice, dear." A nice way of saying, "If I cared about poetry, I'd just read it my damn self." Lisa is clearly offended for some reason.
During the third near-rape scene, after the guy that thinks he's a cowboy takes Jefferson's gun, his boyfriend walks in. Jefferson says, "Oh my God! You have AIDS?!" Did I miss something? Just because the man's gay? Most of the time when AIDS or HIV is transmitted sexually, it's from the opposite sex. Freddy Mercury didn't catch AIDS because he was gay, it was because he didn't think he needed protection.
Near the end, when Jefferson sets off the fire alarm, the teacher or principal orders the students to exit the building single file. This character makes it confusing as to who's worse at acting. The whole movie I thought it was Loeb, but I think this woman takes the cake. She doesn't say, "Single file." She actually says, "Single.....file. Single.....file." She doesn't even look at the students when she...tries to say these simple lines. She looks at the floor! At least Loeb can make eye contact.
Anyway, I said at the beginning of this comment that everybody should watch this at least once and I mean it. Why? Are you really gonna miss out on one of the worst movies ever made? For those of you who work in film or are wanting to, you must see this movie so you will know what not to do. Just be glad that the writer/director is in porn where she belongs.
P.S. Don't listen to anyone who tells you that girls rape guys in this movie. There are three attempts that turn out to be pointless scenes. The only rape is when Karen gets Deliverance'd. I know, I was disappointed too. They could've at least sat on some guy's face. Did I say that out loud?! Well, how else are they gonna learn? Munch the muffin, baby! -
SHE-1025 October 2001Moviegoers who love cult films should take notice! The Smokers is a real contender. It's not fair to compare The Smokers with Heathers because Heathers characters were never this *@#%" Up! The Costumes and makeup were great and Christina Peters made an excellent contribution to the ever-growing coming of age category.
-
rooprect7 April 2013OK, let's look past the fact that the director, Christina Peters (aka Kat Slater), went on to direct a profusion of pulsating porn including, but not limited to, "Young Sluts, Inc." 1 thru 15 and "Cum Swappers" 1 thru 4.
Let's look past the fact that basically every review is slamming this film, and the IMDb rating is 2.4 (for reference, the movie "Electrocuting an Elephant" is rated 3.7, meaning audiences would rather watch an elephant fried alive than see this movie).
Regardless of all that, this movie rocks.
If you liked the dark comedy "Heathers" (1988) about a string of bizarre deaths at a high school, if you liked the Christina Ricci flick "Pumpkin" (2002) about a stuck-up sorority chick who falls for a handicapped kid, if you liked the book "Catcher in the Rye", I think you'll enjoy "The Smokers".
The plot is about 3 prep school girls, confused in matters of love, sex and authority, who get their hands on a gun and decide to lead their own sexual revolution by raping men at gunpoint. First of all, don't flip out because there's nothing explicit, and in fact the "rapes" don't exactly go as planned. Seriously, what guy could perform while staring down the barrel of a .44?
Now let's dig deeper for a minute. Check out the awesome symbolism of the story. The gun, of course, is a symbol of male sexuality. It represents the "power" men have over women. Here we have a bunch of females who attempt to steal that power and use it against men. The results are unpredictable, and although the movie proceeds with a feminist premise, it becomes a statement about the dangers of fanaticism.
Although I'm a guy, I consider myself to be a feminist. I love movies with interesting twists on feminism, movies where the tables are turned and we get interesting new viewpoints. That's why I really liked this movie.
Be forewarned, it starts out a bit confusing, setting up the characters and their complex social hierarchy. The second half is when things suddenly pick up speed, throwing in some nice twists and snowballing into a spectacular climax.
I thought the acting was great. Bear in mind these are high school kids, so they're going to talk and act like high school kids, not like Ben Kingsley doing Gandhi. I thought they did a perfect job.
My only real gripe with the movie is that the audio on the DVD isn't the greatest, and there were a few times I had to rewatch a scene with subtitles on. I think that's a minor nitpick, though.
Feminists, non-feminists and interested parties will probably enjoy this flick. It sets up a challenging social metaphor for you to decipher. If you like challenges like this, also check out the films "Attack the Gas Station!" (a Korean film about a bunch of kids who attack a gas station, a metaphor for Korean society), "The Ferpect Crime" (an Italian film about a man trapped in the women's section of a department store), and "The Host" (another Korean film about a sea monster (Western imperialism) terrorizing a city (Korean Culture). -
Kauna30 October 2003because they are all dead on. This movie was absolute crap from start to finish. Sometimes when you see a movie you haven't heard of on the video store shelf you find a gem, but not this one. Do not rent this, unless you are curious to see just how bad it is.
-
firewoman16 October 2002What was up with this film? I thought I was in for an edgy, interesting film. What I got was a montage of bad acting and even worse directing/writing. It just baffled me who would watch this movie and think it was good. The acting was so overdone. The camera work looked like the actors themselves shot it, heck - they may have done better! The plot was supposed to be in your face, it was just dumb. The fire scene looked like a skit from Saturday Night Live it was so unbelievably awful. These girls need to take some more acting lessons, or better yet - get a new agent or fire whoever suggested these parts to them. RUN FROM THIS MOVIE!!! RUN FAR, FAR AWAY!!!!!!!
-
natfan197130 December 2005I bought this DVD for a few bucks and am glad I didn't pay more. Busy Philipps should never be allowed in a film again. She is one of the most annoying, over-acting, no-talents ever. Even with Dominique Swain, Thora Birch, and Keri Lynn Pratt they are still not enough to save this movie. Birch basically has a glorified cameo, done up in "Whale Rider"/rave makeup. Swain is the reason I bought the film, she's always good, but gets plowed under by Philipps. Pratt is adorable but her character is uneven. The script is all over the place and the characters are such stoners, it is a hard movie to watch. One of the worst I've seen in a long time.
-
gfxdave9916 August 2003We were flipping channels on tv and came across this movie.. It drew us in with its complete lack of purpose and continuity. I have watched hardcore pornography with better acting and plots. If I ever happen to meet the person who wrote and directed this crap I would demand the two hours of my life back.
-
MBunge13 October 2010The only thing to be gleaned from this pitiful, high school A/V club-quality production is that Busy Philips and Dominique Swain are staggeringly unathletic. There's a scene in this film where Philips' character is playing field hockey and she displays all the reflexes and coordination of physicist Stephen Hawking. There's another scene were Swain is running, just running mind you, and it looks like she was born without legs and had them sewn on 30 seconds before they started filming. Absolutely nothing else in this movie is worth a damn. It's all bad, but not interestingly or weirdly bad, just incompetent through and through.
The Smokers is about three young women at a Milwaukee boarding school. There's Karen (Busy Philips), the wild one; Lisa (Keri Lynn Pratt), the preppie one; and Jefferson (Dominique Swain), who I guess is supposed to be the cool one, though she actually has no definable personality whatsoever. After a few scenes that establish that Karen is a slut, Lisa has awful taste in men and well, nothing's ever really established about Jefferson, the three girls get a gun from Jefferson's little sister (Thora Birch) and decide they're going to start raping men at gunpoint. Believe me, it makes even less sense in the movie. The characters mouth some words that make me think one of the writers once read the dust jacket of a feminist book on sex and power, but only the dust jacket and then forgot half of what he or she read.
The film pretty quickly forgets about the whole male rape thing and instead bumbles its way through a series of poorly written, poorly acted and poorly shot rubbish involving a gay singer, a middle aged guy in a limo, premature ejaculation and a doofus who could pass for Paul from the Wonder Years if you injected him with human growth hormone.
The Smokers also features a lot of pot smoking, zero nudity and moments of violence more crudely staged than the sword fights in a 5th grade production of Romeo and Juliet. The plot is well, if you tried to diagram this story out you'd end up with an exploded labyrinth of lines going in all directions and never connecting to anything. That Swain, Philips and Birch went on to have legitimate careers after their work here is nothing short of stunning. After watching this movie, I wouldn't have believed anyone involved would have ever worked again in non-pornographic cinema. The dialog sounds like it was written by a deaf-mute. The actors somehow mange to look as if they're badly improvising their lines and badly reading them off cue cards AT THE SAME TIME. The direction has all the visual flair of a 1st trimester fetus with a cell phone camera.
Above all, The Smokers is dull. Really dull. Really, really dull. I mean "Do not operate heavy machinery after watching" dull.
Avoid this movie like you were a child molester and this film was Chris Hansen from Dateline NBC. -
katxo27 January 2003is it possible for a movie to suck more than "the smokers"? it's possible- "tart" (also starring Dominique Swain) was worse, but not by much. who cares about spoiled little rich kids at a prep school in wisconsin? answer: about as many as liked this movie (i.e. enough to fill phone booth and no more)
-
neophyte-318 February 2002I noticed that several people have given this film a 10/10 (!!?) rating...they could ONLY be the people who stand to make any money trying to rig this vote... Anybody who who pays to view this flick is gonna feel very ripped off. This is one of the worst i've ever tried to sit through. Thora Birch (in a small, ridiculous bit part) is the only actor with any talent in it -but i would have forced the producers to remove my name if i'd had anything to do with this film. I'm still tring to figure out why anybody made this and what the point was. Features the most pathetic attempt at slick film-making i've ever seen.
-
bazza2015 January 2002After about five minutes of this film starting I felt compelled to empty the contents of my stomach onto my designer coffe table. No plot (to speak of). Some of the worst acting I have ever seen. It was all I could do to stop myself from destroying the video tape to prevent anyone else falling into the same trap as I did.
Very poor indeed. -
This movie is horrible. The script is juvenile, I've heard better sound on soap operas, and the direction is just plain bad. The acting, for the most part, is stiff and unbelievable. The only semi-okay thing about this whole movie is Dominique Swain, whose acting ability is wasted. One of the strongest things I can say about this movie is that I want that 90 min of my life my life back. I don't know what these people were trying accomplish with this movie and I suspect that they don't either.
-
soleil_warhola25 September 2007i LOVE this movie! its actually one of my favorites! i really don't have anything to complain about except that i think it could have been longer! I think it's indie vibe and supposed 'bad acting' are a few of its many charms! and there are memorable characters AND quotes worth watching the movie for! perhaps i appreciate it more because i went to a boarding school as well and i can relate to a lot of it. or perhaps i just have a better sense of taste than the others! i don't know, all i have to say really, is that, myself and everyone that *i* know LOVE this movie so if you have never seen it, i think its at least worth watching ONCE to judge for yourself!
-
Son_of_Mansfield2 February 2005Giant clichéd characters try to teach us morals as they go through shocking events. This movie is gaudy and fake. If I have to watch one more movie where a girl sleeps with the wrong guy and declares all men are (insert derogatory animal reference here,) I am going to puke. It seems that everyone in this production knows how stupid these girls are, so they are displaying it in the writing and in the acting. This movie is trying to hard to appeal to all those girls in the audience that feel this way. I wasn't touched watching Shallow Hal, in fact as an overweight person I was just plain disgusted, so don't relate to this movie. I don't want a movie to think it is smarter than me and try to prove it to me, it should simply be smarter. Thora Birch and Dominique Swain deserved better than this. Thora Birch is the only one who seems to have their head right in this movie. Her part is underwritten and yet another cliché, but she is so crazy that it doesn't matter. As for Busy Phillips, she made me laugh like a little boy during her "we have to do this, for all woman" speech. This movie may have worked as a black comedy with all of the cardboard characters, but Dominique Swain's part wouldn't fit in that movie. The last scene is the apex of stupidity with the slutty Busy saving the sweet Dominique in a ridiculously filmed and wrongfully acted climax to the film.
-
Wow, did this movie ever suck. I don't usually write commentary, but for any girl who might think that this movie has anything to do with female empowerment, watch something else. The girls claim they want revenge on the cruelty of a male-dominated society that uses women only for their reproductive and pleasure-giving capacity, but the whole time all they do is bitch about wanting someone to complete them and make their lives meaningful, thereby contradicting the intent by inferring that men make our lives meaningful. argh. an hour and a half of my life I can never get back.