Compare Girls Like Girls vs The Weight

The wistful, intimate mood remains remarkably steady, avoiding both excessive melodrama and sugary sentimentality.

The film's tone is a repeated concern, especially when its grim, punishing journey gives way to a sunnier resolution or an anachronistic musical flourish. Reviewers who raise the issue generally find those shifts mismatched.

The story is simple and easy to follow, centering Coley’s growth more than the fate of the romance.

Several reviewers report moments of confusion, especially during fast-cut action or late-story developments. The underlying mission remains simple, but visual and narrative transitions sometimes make execution harder to follow.

The film treats queer teenage love as ordinary, specific, and worthy of a wide theatrical canvas. Its unapologetically sapphic focus is a major strength for viewers who rarely saw themselves centered in coming-of-age stories.

Anna's assimilation history gives the film some meaningful cultural texture, but multiple reviewers criticize the Native character's narrative function or say the racial politics are too bluntly handled.

The dialogue ranges from natural, awkward teenage speech to lines described as stiff, cringey, or overly YA-styled. The quiet visual storytelling often works better than the spoken exchanges.

The dialogue is generally praised as sharp and purposeful, with several reviewers singling out the writing enough to want every line to land clearly. Even positive accounts note that some delivery can be very quiet.

AIM exchanges and romantic uncertainty create localized tension, but the larger conflict is often too abstract or underdeveloped to sustain strong suspense.

The bridge and river sequences generate the strongest agreement, with many reviewers describing them as gripping or nerve-racking. Still, a substantial minority feel the film never sustains the white-knuckle tension its premise suggests.

The central romance is tender, volatile, and emotionally recognizable, with strong moments of yearning and intimacy. Some viewers wanted more dialogue, development, or chemistry before the heartbreak intensified.

The quiet connection between Murphy and Anna works best when treated as mutual respect and tenderness rather than a conventional romance. Several critics, however, find the romantic thread unnecessary, thin, or underdeveloped.

The decision to remove the original music video’s homophobic assault is seen as a thoughtful improvement that keeps the focus on emotional growth rather than physical trauma.

One reviewer approves of the rough, unglamorized handling of violence because it carries emotional impact rather than feeling like polished action spectacle.

The awkward glances, mixed signals, and queer uncertainty often feel authentic and lived-in. A few stylized or scripted moments undercut that naturalism.

The grounded locations, practical texture, and believable problem-solving often make the danger feel immediate. However, a few major set-piece choices—especially the bridge solution—are criticized as forced or implausible.

Playful moments and awkward teenage behavior provide welcome relief from the grief and romantic turmoil.

Humor is used sparingly but effectively, with reviewers noticing both subtle comic touches in the script and lighter moments that relieve the otherwise grim trek.

The screenplay has genuine sensitivity and several strong emotional ideas, but it often relies on familiar structure, thin side characters, and abbreviated development.

The script earns praise for its premise, momentum, character relationships, and class themes, but reactions are uneven. Critics of it point to contrivances, thin secondary characters, forced beats, and shortcuts in the final act.

The final resolution is divisive because the main cut to black can feel abrupt, while the post-credits scene supplies the romantic closure many viewers wanted. Staying through the credits materially improves the payoff.

The finale divides opinion. Some find the hard-won resolution entertaining and emotionally earned, while others think its cheerful turn clashes with the story's darker themes or arrives too neatly.

At roughly 95 minutes, the film can paradoxically feel both stretched in its quieter passages and too compressed in its dramatic transitions.

The nearly two-hour length is a recurring drawback, with several reviewers arguing that tighter cuts would improve the film. One more positive assessment considers the 113-minute ride an uncomplicated, worthwhile use of time.

The film follows a recognizable summer-romance and coming-of-age structure, with few major surprises or unconventional turns.

Some viewers enjoy the story's surprises and resistance to cookie-cutter plotting, but others see predictable bones and familiar turns beneath the polished execution.

The film meaningfully connects queer self-acceptance, grief, parental wounds, and the need to choose healthier love. Its emotional themes are deeper than its simple plot suggests.

Many critics appreciate the survival story's deeper interest in class, labor, greed, solidarity, fatherhood, and institutional cruelty. Others find those ideas blunt, shallow, or insufficiently explored.

The film’s clearest message is that self-acceptance and healthy love begin with believing you are worthy of both. Its queer representation is framed through ordinary human longing rather than spectacle.

Reviewers respond strongly to the film's ideas about labor, class, institutional power, greed, and solidarity. Even when the politics are called direct or blunt, the social message is generally seen as meaningful rather than disposable.

Sunlit exteriors, intimate close-ups, and a hazy summer palette create a dreamy sense of longing. The look is widely admired, though some found the soft-focus style too uniform for heavier scenes.

The wilderness photography is one of the most consistently praised crafts, with reviewers admiring its foreboding landscapes, period texture, and composed imagery. A few object to murky lighting, shallow focus, or claustrophobic framing.

The story is emotionally sincere and easy to connect with, especially through Coley’s grief and self-worth arc. Its main limitation is a familiar, sometimes underdeveloped narrative framework.

The core premise—a desperate father leading a dangerous gold transport—is often called a strong, well-told yarn with clear stakes. Less enthusiastic critics find the execution saggy, familiar, or weaker than the setup.

The deliberate, slow-burn rhythm works for viewers who enjoy lingering mood and emotional detail. Others find the montages, dead air, and rushed late developments an uneven combination.

Pacing is one of the most divided attributes. Positive reviews praise sustained momentum and a confident clip, while critics of the film point to a long setup, a sagging middle, or an overlong runtime.

Coley receives a clear grief-and-self-acceptance arc, while Sonya and several side characters often feel less fully explored. The imbalance leaves parts of the relationship emotionally convincing but narratively underwritten.

Some reviews find the travelers distinct, sympathetic, and well-defined enough for their changing dynamics to matter. Others see thin archetypes, an over-idealized protagonist, and underwritten supporting characters.

The editing can effectively capture glances, memory, and emotional shifts, but rapid cuts and montage-heavy passages sometimes rush key developments or blur the passage of time.

Editing is a major point of disagreement: some critics call it sharp, intentional, or even stunning, while others say fast cuts and disjointed transitions make climactic action rushed or hard to follow.

The film’s strongest moments make first love, grief, rejection, and self-acceptance feel immediate and raw. Even mixed reactions often acknowledge that the central emotions land.

Murphy's separation from his daughter gives the film a strong emotional anchor, and several critics find the opening or quieter character beats genuinely affecting. Others feel the movie pushes the pathos too hard or leaves emotional potential underdeveloped.

As a queer coming-of-age romance, it delivers tenderness, yearning, heartbreak, and self-discovery even when it follows familiar genre beats.

The film is widely seen as a satisfying throwback survival thriller, with its 1970s-style grit and character-driven adventure earning repeated praise. Even mixed reviews generally recognize the appeal of its old-fashioned genre approach.

The leads’ chemistry is usually the film’s strongest pull, especially in quiet looks, touches, and private moments. A minority found the spark too muted to justify the relationship’s pain.

The strongest relationship work comes from the believable camaraderie and friction within the group and the understated connection between Murphy and Anna. A few reviews find some alliances too thinly developed.

The moody score and era-aware musical cues deepen the film’s wistful tone and emotional beats without overwhelming the story.

The metallic, propulsive score is often praised for adding dread, momentum, and scale to the journey. Some critics find it distracting, overbearing, or stylistically out of place.

Hayley Kiyoko shows a strong eye for intimacy, mood, and emotional detail in her feature debut. Reactions split over whether the music-video sensibility fully sustains a feature-length narrative.

Padraic McKinley's debut is frequently praised for confidence, atmosphere, and physical staging, especially in the survival set pieces. Dissenting reviews fault uneven visual choices, limited suspense, or action coverage that sacrifices clarity.

Period needle drops and queer artists give the soundtrack strong nostalgic and emotional appeal. The music feels carefully chosen rather than used as a greatest-hits showcase.

The music choices outside the score are much more divisive, especially the anachronistic rock needle drop near the ending. A few viewers enjoy that choice, while several critics call it jarring or tonally wrong.

The supporting cast has warm individual moments, but thinly written roles limit their impact and leave the film heavily dependent on the leads.

Russell Crowe, Julia Jones, Avi Nash, Austin Amelio, and the broader ensemble receive frequent praise for adding menace, warmth, or personality around Hawke. Even reviews critical of the characters often distinguish the performances as strong.

The two leads carry the film with expressive, emotionally grounded work, and even harsher reactions usually separate their performances from the script’s weaknesses. Supporting performances draw more mixed responses.

The cast is widely praised for giving the rugged material credibility, with the strongest notices going to Ethan Hawke and several supporting players. Even more reserved assessments still describe the ensemble as solid.

Maya da Costa gives the film its emotional center with restrained body language, wounded intensity, and a believable progression from guarded grief to self-possession.

Ethan Hawke's restrained, gravel-voiced turn is the clearest point of consensus, repeatedly described as the film's anchor and among his strongest recent work. The main reservation is that a few critics find him less convincing in full action-hero mode.

Its emotional warmth and representation inspired at least one strong desire to watch it again, especially among viewers connected to the original song and video.

Rewatch interest is mixed and sparsely discussed: one critic predicts a long afterlife as a comfort-watch 'dad movie,' while others expect it to be remembered pleasantly rather than revisited often.

Its warm atmosphere, emotional leads, and Pride-season appeal make it an enjoyable watch despite familiar plotting.

For many reviewers, the straightforward adventure delivers sturdy, old-school entertainment with enough peril and character interplay to stay engaging. More negative critics find it merely agreeable or weighed down by sluggish stretches.

Ambient outdoor sound and intimate sonic detail can be immersive, though one reaction criticized the music mix for becoming too loud.

Creaking forests, environmental texture, and impact-heavy action sound are frequently praised for increasing immersion and tension. One notable complaint is a dialogue mix so quiet that lines become difficult to hear.

The warm, colorful, close-up-heavy style creates a strong dreamlike identity. Some viewers find the nostalgic orange haze heavy-handed or insufficiently varied.

The weathered 1970s throwback look, natural environments, and period imagery are frequently admired. Critics who dissent complain about overly murky images, shallow focus, or stylized framing that distracts from the action.

Mid-2000s fashion details such as platform flip-flops and period styling reinforce the setting without feeling like costume-party shorthand.

Period clothing, especially the worn workwear and denim, is repeatedly credited with helping the 1933 setting feel lived-in and authentic.

The small-town spaces, early internet culture, and mid-2000s objects create a convincing social world shaped by isolation, nostalgia, and closeted desire.

The 1933 wilderness and labor-camp setting are often described as immersive, lived-in, and carefully developed, giving the heist real social and physical context.

AIM windows, Sidekicks, iPods, CDs, bedrooms, and small-town hangouts make 2006 feel lived-in and emotionally specific. The period detail is one of the most consistently praised elements.

Sets, period vehicles, worn environments, and other production details are consistently credited with making the Depression-era world believable and textured.

The film connects most strongly with queer viewers, nostalgic millennials, and anyone who remembers the intensity of first love. Some viewers outside its core fan base may find the story too thin or inward-looking.

Several critics describe the film as crowd-pleasing, theater-worthy adult entertainment, particularly for viewers who miss old-fashioned survival adventures. Others think its slow stretches make streaming a better fit.

The physical set pieces—especially the rope bridge, river crossing, and later confrontations—are often tense, tactile highlights. A minority find some action confusingly cut, implausible, or less exciting than the setup promises.

The drama is strongest when the performances keep the human stakes grounded between bursts of action. Reviewers who mention these quieter scenes often find them among the film's best material.

The adaptation preserves the music video’s visual DNA, emotional core, and fan callbacks while condensing or changing several book elements. The removal of the original assault is widely welcomed.

Real locations and tactile, practical filmmaking are praised for giving the danger physical credibility and a rugged texture that more polished studio action can lack.

The restrained approach to physical intimacy is viewed as appropriate and refreshingly non-exploitative.

Age-appropriate casting helps the teenage emotions and awkwardness feel believable rather than overly polished.

Critical reactions lean positive but not unanimous, with praise for the performances and emotional sincerity balanced by complaints about thin plotting and uneven pacing.

The period setting is largely praised for researched detail, convincing production texture, and Depression-era context. A few critics question specific historical or geographic choices, including how convincingly the Pacific Northwest is represented.

Most direct recommendations say the film is worth seeking out, and several specifically encourage seeing its physical set pieces on a big screen. More qualified praise still frames it as worthwhile genre entertainment.