The Foxfire Movie

The movie Foxfire, which came out in 1996, was based on the Foxfire novel. However, the differences between them are so great that I'm surprised they even considered it to be based on the book. The movie, although not nearly as good as the book, does have its strong points, the most important of which is its portrayal of the bond formed between the girls.

Personally, I think they could have done a much better job making this movie. Some of the things they changed seem so pointless--what reason could they have for changing the last names of Rita and Goldie? If they had kept Legs as a friend from childhood, kept the group as a real gang bent on justice and revenge, and kept the setting as the 50's, the movie would have been a lot stronger. It lost meaning by changing all those things.

While the movie is a poor representation of the book, on its own, it's a good movie. Some of the acting is fantastic, particularly Angelina Jolie as Legs Sadovsky, and it's popular among young women because of its portrayal of female bonding and rebellion against men and adults in general. This is the movie's strong point, and it's what interested me in reading the book in the first place. This is one of my favorite movies, as long as I don't compare it to the book too much as I'm watching, and I highly recommend it. And if you are a fan of the movie but haven't yet read the book, I urge you to read it.

Differences between the book and movie
Reviews
Cast & Credits
Pictures
Quotes
Soundtrack

Synopsis|Members|Proverbs|Quotes|Reviews|Oates|The Movie
Store|The Fanlisting|Guestbook|Home