User Score
6.5

Generally favorable reviews- based on 48 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 32 out of 48
  2. Negative: 9 out of 48

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Feb 24, 2013
    6
    OK, let me say this... John Tucker is no prize, neither is the guy who played him. They could have done so much more and found 1000 better actors to play him. It wasn't a bad movie. It would have been better had the actors actually been high school students and not mid-late 20s actors/actresses. The story was simple, the acting was decent, and it had its funny moment, I defiantly loved your fashion sense John haha. It's worth checking out, but far from Oscar worthy. Expand
  2. Dec 2, 2011
    1
    Bottom Line: This film is dumb. D-U-M-B, dumb.

    There are three aspects to a comedy that should immediately tell you itâ
  3. Mar 8, 2011
    7
    In truth, not a bad movie. However, I agree with people who have said it is trying to be too much like Mean Girls. The plot was somewhat predictable in the fact that you knew what was going to happen with Kate and Tucker. Despite the predictable elements, the script is well written and the film on the whole isn't TOO bad.
Metascore
41

Mixed or average reviews - based on 27 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 6 out of 27
  2. Negative: 4 out of 27
  1. 50
    Revenge movies often end with the message that vengeance is empty and futile, but it's never encouraging when revenge seems pointless from the start.
  2. Whatever the target demographic was in the pre-production phase, now it's limited to sexually active 14-year-olds still retaking the sixth grade.
  3. Reviewed by: Gregory Kirschling
    25
    Astonishingly (and offensively), the witless ending comes down harder on the women than the cad.