Most critics liked this movie when it came out; as of 2019, it has a 78% approval rating on Rotten Tomatoes. The movie is now almost universally hailed as a classic. But Roger Ebert slammed this movie, giving it only one star and basically dismissing it as a vulgar teen exploitation pic: "The movie's another one of those adolescent sex romps, such as Porky's and Animal House, in which part of the humor comes from raunchy situations and dialogue. This movie is so raunchy, however, that the audience can't quite believe it. I went to a sneak preview thrown by a rock radio station, and the audience had come for a good time. But during a scene involving some extremely frank talk about certain popular methods of sexual behavior, even the rock fans were grossed out. There's a difference between raunchiness and gynecological detail. The movie's cast struggles valiantly through all this dreck. Rarely have I seen so many attractive young performers invited to appear in so many unattractive scenes. Leigh, for example, plays a virginal young student at Ridgemont High. She's curious about sex, so the script immediately turns her into a promiscuous sex machine who will go to bed with anybody. And then her sexual experiences all turn out to have an unnecessary element of realism, so that we have to see her humiliated, disappointed, and embarrassed. Whatever happened to upbeat sex? Whatever happened to love and lust and romance, and scenes where good-looking kids had a little joy and excitement in life, instead of all this grungy downbeat humiliation? Why does someone as pretty as Leigh have to have her nudity exploited in shots where the only point is to show her ill-at-ease?"
Scritto da il
05-03-2025 alle ore 09:33
Consiglia
Voto
Nessun dato in archivio
Commenti
Nessun dato in archivio
