Ho-hum. I guess this movie is lauded because it was co-written by an actual 13 year old, based on her life, in 6 days. Great - except she says she had little to do with the subsequent rewrites.
The movie was produced as an "independent" by a first-time director, so not much money was available, and it was hurriedly shot in less than 30 days. This means that there were seldom more than one or two takes per scene, tending not to produce the best result.
I found both lead girls fairly convincing as 15-year olds, but much less so as the 13 year olds they portrayed. They and their friends just seemed too old.
As someone else astutely posted, the movie "Christiane F." is a much better look at problems of underaged girls. However, it is in German with English subtitles, or in poorly dubbed English. I suggest the book (if you can find it) which was much better (aren't they all?) and had more detail. After "Christiane F.", "Thirteen" seems negligible.
I give it 2/10 only for the effort, not the result.
The movie was produced as an "independent" by a first-time director, so not much money was available, and it was hurriedly shot in less than 30 days. This means that there were seldom more than one or two takes per scene, tending not to produce the best result.
I found both lead girls fairly convincing as 15-year olds, but much less so as the 13 year olds they portrayed. They and their friends just seemed too old.
As someone else astutely posted, the movie "Christiane F." is a much better look at problems of underaged girls. However, it is in German with English subtitles, or in poorly dubbed English. I suggest the book (if you can find it) which was much better (aren't they all?) and had more detail. After "Christiane F.", "Thirteen" seems negligible.
I give it 2/10 only for the effort, not the result.