Why was this movie so negatively received by critics?

Probably because it tackles an awkward and uncomfortable issue in a brutal way that just might not appeal to viewers who want to sit back and relax for 2 hours. Especially if you don't know the full premise ahead of time- the beginning makes you think you're sitting down to a rebellious-teen comedy. It sort of turns the 'I was 12 when my stepfather first had sex with me' scene into a major WTF?! moment and obviously completely overhauls the entire tone, not just of the REST of the movie, but of everything you've already seen without the full context.

I just watched this a few days ago. I generally liked it, but I also knew about the molestation/rape plot ahead of time from a friend. Wasn't a wonderful movie- I felt that it got really bogged down in the mother's drama with her parents, and all the discussion about her dead father just sort of went over my head. But I think, on average, I liked it more than other people on here.

Let us step out in to the night and pursue that flighty temptress, adventure. ~Albus Dumbledore

I was also quite surprized to see the rating and critics for this movie. When I started watching, I had no idea about the story and in my opinion, the actors did a good job in their respective roles.

This film was not well received by both critics and the viewing public. I don’t think the film did poorly because of Lindsay’s poor public approval rating. Sometimes, negative publicity could even increase the public’s interest on a particular actor or director and so help promote the film. Several years ago, Polanski’s films were displayed prominently in video stores at the height of the scandal.

I also don’t think that it was because the film was wrongly marketed as family comedy in the trailer while it in fact dealt with serious matters. Rather, the main problem was that the filmmakers seemed uncertain what kind of film they wanted to make. While the film dealt with serious issues including child abuse, they decided not to deal with those same issues seriously. The film was poorly scripted and characters were given little development. The film tended to sugarcoat over everything and gloss over the problems faced by the characters. It even has a “happy ending” suggesting that all their problems had been solved and everything was fine, while in reality everything was not.

Rachel had been molested as a child and adolescent and it appeared that they were not going to press charges against the stepfather. Arnold the stepfather claimed that Rachel had seduced him, and that of course did not change the fact that what he did was criminal. Nevertheless, in the film, we see Rachel did try to seduce everybody in sight – Harlan, Dr. Simon, among others – and for absolutely no reason. She offered to let Harlan touch her private parts and later gave him an oral job. She threatened several girls saying that she would f-word all of their boyfriends if they badmouthed her, and I have little doubt that she would have carried her threats into action. To be brief, she clearly needed long hours with doctors and psychiatrists at a minimum. In addition she might need treatment for drug addiction and detox.

The grandmother and mother were in need of psychiatric help too. The grandmother was obviously a control freak, to put it mildly – in fact the strict “Georgia Rules” were signs of more deep-seated emotional problems. The mother was in some kind of denial and (until the end) refused to believe her daughter for fear of losing her man. In addition to a psychiatrist, she might need treatment for alcoholism too.

So as you see, all the characters were completely messed up. Yet at the end we are supposed to think that the long hug meant that Rachel was fully reconciled with her mother. Rachel even got the boy! For some reason, Harlan decided that he was “in love” with her and wanted to marry her.

The filmmakers tried to deal with serious issues but did not choose to deal with those issues in an honest manner. Thus the emotions that they attempted to generate were fake and totally unconvincing. As a result, the plot developments and the final resolution came close to being preposterous. To answer the OP's question briefly, it was rather poorly received by the critics simply because it was not a good film.

I don't know why it got bad reviews either. I enjoyed it. I think I read one review when it came out that was complaining that a comedy movie would deal with a serious issue such as child molestation. I could see their point but I still thought it was a good movie. It was a lot better than some of Lindsay Lohan's other crappy movies like Just my Luck and Confessions of a Teenage Drama Queen.

[deleted]

Because it's a mainstream movie directed by Garry Marshall (known for romcoms) which was marketed as a chick flick and which turned out to be a pure drama with very serious topics. I'm sure if it was a cheap indie directed by some unknown, feedback would be different.

Because it was horribly written and directed. And as good an actress as Lohan can be, she was mis-directed from the first scene. Her character was too, obvious, too rebellious, and frankly, Lohan was way too worn-out looking even at that point. That was distracting, as were her ridiculous outfits. You just can't mix a light-hearted teen-girl rebellion movie and child molestation. Huffman and Fonda weren't much help, especially Huffman--a deeply unconvincing performance.

It deserved every bad review.