Pete and Debbie are both about to turn 40, their kids hate each other, both of their businesses are failing, they're on the verge of losing their house, and their relationship is threatening to fall apart.
Devastated Peter takes a Hawaiian vacation in order to deal with the recent break-up with his TV star girlfriend, Sarah. Little does he know, Sarah's traveling to the same resort as her ex - and she's bringing along her new boyfriend.
Friendless Peter Klaven goes on a series of man-dates to find a Best Man for his wedding. But, when his insta-bond with his new B.F.F. puts a strain on his relationship with his fiancée, can the trio learn to live happily ever after?
Iris invites her friend Jack to stay at her family's island getaway after the death of his brother. At their remote cabin, Jack's drunken encounter with Hannah, Iris' sister, kicks off a revealing stretch of days.
In San Francisco, after a year's relationship, Tom proposes to Violet; she accepts. She's an experimental psychologist, hoping for a post-doc at Cal. He's a sous chef who runs the kitchen when the chef is away. When Cal falls through and she gets an offer in Ann Arbor, Tom agrees to support the move, turning down a job as chef at a new restaurant. The move requires postponing the wedding. At Michigan, Violet is in her element, but Tom is underemployed and frustrated; he's Stoic for a while, but when two years in Michigan become four, Tom's frustrations boil over, and on the eve of yet another wedding date, they must make a choice. Is there any other alternative? Written by
One of the tacos that Tom sells is called the 'wolverine' taco. The Wolverine also happens to be the mascot of The University of Michigan, which Violet attends. See more »
Throughout the film, Violet and her colleagues refer to people taking part in their psychology experiments as "subjects". This term is no longer used in psychology (and has not been used for decades) as it is thought to be disrespectful and has unethical, dehumanising connotations. Rather, today psychologists use the term "participant" to refer to people who take part in an experiment. See more »
Alas, this is another example of a movie with some possibility it has a plot, decent casting and acting, some humor but it still manages to leave the viewer, for the most part, having fallen into the pit of displeasure. Once again the writers have chosen to forgo sparkling dialog, or even intelligent dialog, in favor of the gratuitous foul language and blatant sex. Such a waste. Makes me wonder if today's screenwriters opt to cop out on creativity on purpose. Or - have they no imagination? Do they assume the theater audience has none? Trust me, a few things left to the imagination can be far sexier,and probably funnier and entertaining than the in-your-face stuff. And tossing the F word around like confetti at Mardi Gras is boring. Maybe this actually does indicate a severe lack of talent on the parts of the writers/producers. Or could it be that movies like this, that have their moments, but not enough of them, are produced for the soul purpose of making the good movies look even better. Just a thought.
53 of 97 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?