Rating: 1.69/10
Spoilers ahead for “Babygirl”.
I will acknowledge that I’m not the target audience for this movie. I don’t watch romance movies, I don’t read romance books and I’m generally of the opinion that love interests ruin perfectly good storylines. So if you’re into that kind of thing, you’ll probably like this movie.
I, lamentably, am not and did not, and I admit this review reflects that.
Moving on: “Babygirl” is a wet dream for the kind of older women who like to self-insert when they watch “Fifty Shades of Grey”. It’s essentially the same plot, except the protagonist is an older woman, and instead of bondage, there’s milk. A lot of milk. Like two separate milk scenes.
The film follows 57-year-old CEO Romy (Nicole Kidman) as she is seduced, if it can be called that, by 28-year-old Samuel (Harris Dickinson). And … yep. That’s pretty much the whole plot.
For the target audience, it’s a way to live out the whole younger-man-is-into-you-and-also-you’re-into-humiliation-and-milk fantasy. It’s a way for menopausal women to be hot without the flashes. Or at least, that’s what I’m getting from “I’m gonna pee.” Honestly, I have no idea what the point of this movie was.
The first half of it was just sex. Like, an insane amount of sex. I tried to keep track of the sex scenes, but I lost count pretty early on. Then I tried to keep track of the sex montages … I also lost count. Even the music had moaning.
The second half was, predictably, the crash and burn that comes with sleeping around. Every time Romy dramatically teared up — cue the violins, cause we’re supposed to feel sorry for her for some reason — all I could think was, “Oh no, if it isn’t the consequences of my own actions.” Like, honey, you’re the one who cheated. With an intern. At the company you own and operate. And you have the audacity to whine and cry when your life falls apart?
I mean, this is a woman who went 19 years sans orgasm and jumped on the first hot white twink that looked her way. Don’t get me wrong, he wasn’t hard to look at, but that’s pretty much all he had going for him.
No rizz, no aura and, no game — his sexy face looked a lot like he was secretly sucking on a lemon, but he didn’t want anyone to notice. Mind you, I’m not saying it didn’t work for him. I’m just saying it was an odd choice. Also, he was doing a lot of fingerbanging at work and not a lot of washing his hands, so … do with that what you will.
In spite of all that, Romy decided he was enough to ruin her life over for a little stand-in-the-corner sexual exploration. I guess sitting down and having an actual conversation with her husband — the man she “loves” — wasn’t an option?
Sure, we saw the one — only one — scene in which this was attempted: Her flopping around like a wet fish in bed and randomly dropping kink bombs on him. Whatever happened to a mature conversation? If the man didn’t know, how is he supposed to fix anything?
As I’ve said before, I still don’t fully understand the purpose of this movie. Because it seems like it’s got a pro-cheating message behind it, but that can’t be right, can it?
It’s true. They tried to portray her as a power mom — CEO and founder of a company, packing up her kids’ lunches, pretty much keeping the household running — but at the end of the day, she didn’t give a flying flipper about her children. She handed them over along with her career and husband at the mere prospect of milk and sexy time.
When Samuel showed up to her house the first time, Romy positively crashed out. I specifically remember her yelling something akin to “my family is the most important thing in my life.”
Really? Well, you’ve got a funny way of showing it. Cheated on your husband, completely neglected your kids, not to mention the moral ball-dropping of not telling your daughter not to sleep around. Grade A mom, truly.
And after all that, the movie ends with her family magically forgiving her, Samuel conveniently shipped off to Japan and Romy spontaneously growing the balls to tell off the big man in the office. Really?
I wonder what Keith Urban thought of this movie.
Charis Adkins is an English senior and opinion editor for The Battalion.
Ashley • Feb 15, 2025 at 5:00 pm
The pee comment was about squirting. You feel a pressure building and the only thing you acquaint it to is peeing but if you relax and don’t fight it you’ll squirt. I struggled with the feeling for a long time but it’s silly because in order to pee you have to push, whereas when you squirt squeeze (push vs pull) so it’s quite literally not pee. The female body is rarely researched so we have to learn these things for ourselves while struggling with stereotypes and antiquated judgment. If you suddenly feel that pressure every time the going gets good just push those negative thoughts out your mind and you’ll finally be satisfied 🙂
Robbo • Feb 10, 2025 at 5:33 pm
I paid $7 Australian (about $4 US) on cheap Mondays to watch this. That was a high price to pay. So sad to see such a well known established actor be part of such a poorly put together “sex romp”. The dreadful “carry on” films of the 60s far superior!
Rachel • Jan 25, 2025 at 9:05 am
I agree with most of this review.
Chris • Jan 24, 2025 at 5:12 pm
Morally judge women for what men do too. Lol. Just don’t throw around the word integrity.
Ol’Rusty • Jan 22, 2025 at 5:00 pm
I loved this man’s review. Please force him to watch more movies geared to women or imma do this shit my damned self.
Josie J • Jan 20, 2025 at 11:43 am
I paid to watch soft beastiality porn. That was the hidden message in the movie. Kidman played a role of a company CEO and a successful mother and wife. Then lends herself to being treated like a female dog being trained be the younger master. It was nauseating to watch. I was going to walk out but the next scene was Kidman making dinner for her family and the young lover knocks on the door. I thought maybe now there are thrilling scenes coming. Nope, more doggy porn and a disconnected tame husband who understands another man had his wife on all fours licking milk out of a bowl on the floor while he digitally penetrated while whispering “good girl”. Now I have to vomit so I’ll end this.
Jasmine • Jan 20, 2025 at 2:42 am
What an awful reviewer. I didn’t like the movie as well, but I feel like most of the movie went over the reviewer’s head and they just wanted to bash on it just for the sake of it. The critique is shit and misogynistic. Just eugh.
Nikki • Jan 31, 2025 at 10:14 pm
Cheating is bad. None of your misandry is going to change that. Trying to justify cheating by calling it empowerment is disgusting. And I am a woman.
The reviewer doesn’t hate women but you surely hate men. And monogamy, obv.
I agree with every word of this review as I’m sure many women do.
And if you want to call someone misogynistic, call Nicole Kidman misogynistic. She hates women so much that she can’t stand to see them age.
Sit down, girl.
Rizzabella • Jan 16, 2025 at 2:41 am
Resign your position as a journalist or find another career path or hobby immediately.
You can start reviewing movies again when you understand how to critically analyze film and have the mental capacity to look past the fact that the star actor is above the age of 25 and participating in sexual acts.
All this review was, was a pessimistic attack on Nicole Kidmans character and appearance, lazily attacking the fact that she is older and likes kinky shit.
Duh it had a plethora of sex scenes in it, the whole POINT of the movie was to describe an inexplicable urge for a kink you didn’t know you had – it also happens to be from the pov of a successful and mature woman.
The focus was on her personal experience in discovering and exploring this kink.
The focus was NOT on taking care of her husband or her children or ogling at the fact that she happens to be a successful woman CEO – which I know is so hard for some of the Texas A&M population to stomach ☹️. Unfortunately, women do have deeper and more personal desires and urges than constantly taking care of or helping support / help run other people’s lives efficiently (including their kids & husbands) Hence the emergence of her submissive kink. For Nicole’s character, it was exciting and new to be the one controlled instead of BEING in control of so many aspects of her own business and family life.
So yea, tbh I wasn’t a fan of the movie either but at least I could critically think about and understand the point of the movie
Carlos Rosales • Jan 16, 2025 at 6:42 pm
This whole thing just sounds like an excuse to film a soft porn movie with Nicole Kidman just because of similar films she did in the past …. So is m going to check it out anyways just because I like Nicole Kidman as an actor lol
Anna • Jan 18, 2025 at 10:35 pm
A vote for Charis-One should not assume that because the OP POV doesn’t align with yours that they are not critical thinkers.
This was soft porn at best, with low end, sexual deviancy and no gripping storyline that made any characters build up to a crashing crescendo. The dynamic of Nicole and Antonio was weak, but, yet sex scenes between her and him was more titillating than Intern and her IMO.
Wayyyy too tidy of an ending , all wrapped in a bow.
Yawn.
Nikki • Jan 31, 2025 at 10:23 pm
Agree. BTW never knew that if you don’t love watching Nicole ‘s plastic face in a p0rno that means you hate women. Yep makes so much sensenot 🙂
I’m just happy to see that many of us women agree with the reviewer and find this type of stuff distasteful and boring.
Nikki • Jan 31, 2025 at 10:17 pm
Kewl. You dig cheating.