If she's such a tomboy...
...why is her make-up/skin/hair/wardrobe "perfect"? I understand this movie is meant to be "just for fun", and to an extent I enjoyed it in the sense that it's completely unrealistic and silly, but in the world of a film there has to be a sense of continuity and believability.
Sydney claims she doesn't have much dating experience (or any). Yet she's obviously beautiful, sexy and an all-around fun girl. There's no WAY this girl hasn't at least been asked out or had a couple dates in her life. Girls who have far less charm and aesthetics have boyfriends all the time. Are we really expected to believe that just because she likes construction, doesn't have a mother or a lot of girlfriends that she is THAT clueless? She's obviously witty, so what's the deal here? Why is the world being depicted as overly vapid? Where was she in high school?
The movie is rife with nauseating stereotypes that try to take themselves seriously to the point that you just want to turn it off. (The ending sequence with all the "groups" on campus was just awful) Not to mention that Rachel was a total caricature of herself, with no humanity or interesting features. Come to think of it, everyone was pretty 2D.
One film that uses stereotypes in a way that works but doesn't take itself too seriously is "Mean Girls". Things typically make sense in the context of that film because the jokes and parodies stretched to encompass bits of reality and familiarity, but here I kept going "COME ON".
Anyone else feel that way? I just had to rant. :)