Metascore
39

Generally unfavorable reviews - based on 10 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 1 out of 10
  2. Negative: 3 out of 10
  1. 63
    Sadly, the movie is a zoo.
  2. Anyone with a fondness for the midcentury cartoons and films that inspired this scrappy comedy will appreciate the latest trip to the titular British boarding school.
  3. Reviewed by: Ella Taylor
    60
    Can be enjoyed in all its endearing awfulness, as a loony "High School Musical" with posher accents and a lot more going on upstairs.
  4. Remaking eccentric English comedies is seldom a good idea, especially the ones from Ealing Studios with all those wonderful character actors. But against all odds, the new version of St. Trinian's almost pulls it off.
  5. Reviewed by: Derek Elley
    50
    Mildly amusing result, with plenty of slack in its 100 minutes, should work OK with its target audience of female Brit tweenies, who won't notice the pic's shoddy technical package, sloppy direction and the way the original films' antiestablishment tone has morphed into a celebration of dumbed-down "yoof" culture.
  6. Reviewed by: Mark Jenkins
    40
    At heart, though, the movie is as tame as "The Belles of St. Trinian's," the 1954 farce that started it all.
  7. Reviewed by: Sam Toy
    40
    The target audience - pre-teen girls - aren’t going to notice the many shortfalls behind the camera. What they’ll enjoy, regardless of quality, is some naughtiness true to the spirit of the series, Russell Brand and Girls Aloud. For the rest of us it’s tougher going with mostly Everett and Firth to see us through.
  8. 38
    Bad in ways that are almost endearing, St. Trinian's does offer the spectacle of Rupert Everett mincing around in drag as a headmistress bedeviled by Colin Firth, as an education minister and former lover who wants to shut down her out-of-control school.
  9. Despite a plucky soundtrack and frantic editing, the movie shows otherwise wan interest in the gaggle of faux-transgressive bad girls who bare their dulled claws at England’s establishment ethos, as though that notion alone were somehow fresh and cheeky.
  10. A stunningly witless revival of the infamous British film series about a girls’ boarding school.
User Score
6.4

Generally favorable reviews- based on 9 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 1 out of 2
  2. Mixed: 0 out of 2
  3. Negative: 1 out of 2
  1. Jan 12, 2012
    10
    I actually found the film a pleasant homage to the original. It has the same mad-cap pacing and has excellent cast with highly entertaining characters. It's predictable, but sweet. And the plot is silly but satisfying.

    Perhaps not a perfect ten movie, more of an eight or seven really, but it deserves higher then a zero so I'm marking up a little. It's good for a night with a nice meal, a bit too much wine and a few friends over. If you're looking to act like a movie critic and hate this movie i'm sure you wouldn't have too much trouble, but give it a chance and you might enjoy yourself. Oh, and watch one of the originals first! they're still great!
    Full Review »
  2. May 27, 2011
    0
    This is a movie of absolute blinding stupidity and incompetent filmaking. How Colin Firth got involved in this mess is astonishing. Mischa Barton, who only has a walk on part in the film and yet recieved top billing was clearly conned and should file a law suit. Russel Brand however has no excuse. Every joke, every gag, every scenario is a poorly executed cliche. The hack writing and even worse delivery are an affront to comedic acting as an artform. Rupert Everett, who stars in (clumsily in a dual role) and produced this apocolypse of base humor appears to be responsible. Whats even more unbelivable is that apparently a sequal has been made, when in my opinion everyone involved in this mess should be banned from any involvement in motion pictures for the rest of their careers. That includes the caterers. Full Review »