IMDb > Friends with Benefits (2011) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Friends with Benefits
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guide
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
Friends with Benefits More at IMDbPro »

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 2 of 21:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [Next]
Index 201 reviews in total 

7 out of 11 people found the following review useful:

Lame.... Useless waste of time.

Author: imbluzclooby from United States
9 July 2013

Watching movies about shallow premises coupled by lame dialogue and Narcissistic acting are enough to sour me early on. Why did I invest my time watching this pointless bilge. Apparently, the supposed "Most beautiful woman in the world', Mila Kunis is what kept me somewhat intrigued. close ups of her stunning face and dark beauty is what keeps me watching. Outside of the aesthetic quality of her appearance I had to constantly get up out of my couch to do something more useful like wash dishes or clip my fingernails.

This movie is lame and is just a feeble excuse to showcase the two leads and the materialistic world they live in. I don't know much about Justin Timberlake, because I never paid much attention to him outside of Hollywood tabloids forcing this drip into our living room. I also hate when they have to incorporate the obligatory Rap music into movies with White actors, as if they genuinely like this putrid form of noise.

It's annoying and makes young people look shallow, self-serving and apathetic.

If you want to look at Mila and her entrancing beauty, click on some thumbnails online. otherwise, save yourself 95 minutes.

Was the above review useful to you?

9 out of 15 people found the following review useful:

this is not a romcom

Author: Aiki40 from Dublin, Ireland
8 November 2011

Is not.. and maybe is good. Justin Timberlake is like a piece of wood.. and wood express emotions very hardly. Is not.. because "sex is like tennis" so.. its predictable from begging to end. Is not comedy to.. I try very hard to find any funny moments.. was hopeless. OK.. its maybe any interesting story here?.. Which mean.. you can watch this movie and you don't know what happen next? Sorry.. no! Wooden hero meets beautiful girl, go to bed, split up, hero talk with Yoda, they meet again.. end of story. Familiar? To much familiar for me. A few weeks ago I saw "No Strings Attached".. there Natalie Portman can lift and rescue this movie.. (another wooden hero BTW - Ashton Kutsher). Big Mila Kunis eyes can't help here. Its a pity. so.. what you get? you can remember something when you get out from cinema? Not too much I think... nothing maybe.. You forgot this movie before you arrive home. My prediction for Golden Raspberries this year: - worst scenario - worst couple - worst male performer - worst director

Was the above review useful to you?

10 out of 17 people found the following review useful:


Author: thetruth45 from United States
28 January 2012

This movie was absolutely horrendous. There was not a single positive aspect to this movie. First of all, it's not funny. Second of all, the acting is lousy. I understand that this is a romantic comedy and it's supposed to be a bit light and not so deep...but this was really bad. I mean, there really wasn't a single truthful moment in this movie from an acting perspective. I've seen children have more substance that Justin Timberlake and his female counterpart. Third of all, this movie was really awkward- like neither of these individuals have had sex in their life..... Fourth, the plot/story is literally non-existent--> we are literally forced to watch the first hour of the movie in this sort of trance-like mirage of weird images of Justin trying to be funny in bed with this chick....but all the audience could do is cringe in utter embarrassment at this fiasco.

Fifth, they kept trying to get Justin Timberlake naked--> but is he supposed to have a great body or something? I mean he looks like a highschool kid...what woman is salivating for the body of a highschooler? They should have been doing everything possible to keep his clothes on and not off. The list of flaws could go on for infinite....this movie blows. I give it an F.

The only thing that keeps this movie from being a 1 is Woody Harrelson who's awesome as usual. I.e. he's the only positive to the entire movie.

Was the above review useful to you?

14 out of 25 people found the following review useful:

Unbelievably irritating

Author: ozi_wozzy from United Kingdom
6 October 2013

I was staying in on Saturday night and wanted to watch something light hearted and humorous. Friends with benefits seemed the perfect fit. Mila Kunis is usually talented and Justin Timberlake has done some good stuff. Add to it the glamour of NY and sharp comedy, things looked promising.

I lasted about 30 minutes. I don't know how they managed turn talent and sharp humour into something so annoying. Mila Kunis came across as a fake, arrogant brat and Justin Timberlake had about as much charm as a broom stick. I ended up just being irritated by a lot of things in the film. Such as when Mila Kunis asks Justing Timeberlake if he thinks she's pretty. This is Mila Kunis - voted the sexiest woman in the world for god sake. They both have glamorous jobs, look perfect and have perfect blend of humour and wit...just too damn perfect with absolutely no touch of reality. Not even a hint of chemistry between the two.

It's such a shame because Mila Kunis was excellent in Forgetting Sarah Marshall, and her voice over work in Family Guy is brilliant. So I can only blame the director in this movie for turning her into such an annoying character. As for Justin Timberlake...bland, just bland.

Irritating film. Luckily, Predator was on and saved the evening. At least Arnie can do proper humour.

Was the above review useful to you?

25 out of 47 people found the following review useful:

Why did i expect more?

Author: dave-995-288520
2 September 2011

I saw the advert for this on TV and thought that this could have potential to watch with my girlfriend so we went to see it. Ohh how i was wrong, i can honestly say i can't think of a worse film i have seen all year. The acting was terrible the storyline was predictable the editing was shocking too.

The whole film seems rushed in the sense that for the 1st 20mins the conversation is back and forth so fast it all drowns in to one monotone noise. It does ease off a bit towards the end but it was too little too late.

I can see JT being in films as a cameo role but to be a lead actor that takes some acting talent which he has none of.

I want the 90mins back of my life.

Was the above review useful to you?

28 out of 53 people found the following review useful:

A film with nothing

Author: dbrando from United States
29 July 2011

Friends with Benefits seems like it might be a satire of Nora Ehpron's feel good films,or Neil Simon's one dimensional types with just TV cracks as substitutes for any kind of genuine dialogue. Not the case here. This film makes Ephron's screenplays and directed films, along with N. Simon's stuff, look like classics. Friends with Benefits has no acting in it, except for Patricia Clarkson, and she is debased as one of those old women- mothers who swear and screw around with men etc.

There isn't one line that is funny,there is not a scene between Timberlake and Kunis that has any chemistry to it. He is always seen as potentially gay, and Woody Harrelson's gay character keeps us wondering, if anyone would care to wonder.

Timberlake plays it all as sort of gay and sort of straight, but comes up neuter. I think the reason why there are so many nude shots of him is because you never take his gender seriously, like one of the dwarfs in Snow White, you never fear for Snow White's sexual safety; the dwarfs have nothing that would cause fear. So it is with Timberlake. Even when there is sex between Kunis and Timberlake, it looks like wrestling at summer camp.

The Altzheimer scenes are appalling, along with the gay male model scenes that are deeply homophobic.

This film needed a script, director, producer, and stars, not non-actors, who stomp around the set with no sense of mimesis, mimicking at all.

Avoid this, and watch "The Nanny."

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Oh Come On

Author: hjames-97822 from United States
10 September 2015

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Cheesy forced dialogue.A ridiculous screenplay. Did we really have to have the usual "Mom caught us having sex" scene. How bogus can you get? Timberlake can not act. Sorry. He's too much a newbie to have tried to carry this. I found the so called sex scenes to be trite and routine and mostly unfunny.

There must be a director's play book out there for doing sex scenes. It's all predictable. She's on top. Then he's on top. Then he's bobbing ridiculously around under the sheets. Then he has to pee. Gotta get in those butt shots, right? Had don't forget those breasts, but be sure and keep one leg up. At least she demanded a butt double.

A snore. Yawn...............................

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Movies With No Benefits.

Author: Python Hyena from Canada
11 August 2015

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Friends With Benefits (2011): Dir: Will Gluck / Cast: Justin Timberlake, Mila Kunis, Woody Harrelson, Patricia Clarkson, Jenna Elfman: Xerox piece of sh*t about crossing friendship and sex. We have seen this bullshit situation a million times. In fact, No Strings Attached was released earlier in the year and seems like the same stupid plot. Leaving all details aside, it breaks down like this. Justin Timberlake and Mila Kunis meet after they have broken up in other relationships. Now they decide to avoid feelings and have lots of sex. What is so pathetic about this is how it jerks viewers around. We know where this is headed. Timberlake and Kunis have sex and pretend that they don't care for each other then tension interrupts their friendship. Then they avoid each other before that overly bullshit contrived ending that works like a punch to the groin. The supporting roles are even more over the top. Woody Harrelson plays a co-worker of Timberlake's and he is openly gay to the point of being too creepy. Patricia Clarkson plays Kunis's mother who shows up drunk and plays off the world's most idiotic cougar. Clarkson is a decent performer but here she is undone by the absurdity of the role and its over the top presentation. Jenna Elfman is also hilarious but none of that comes across in this junk. This is directed by Will Gluck who made the witty and funny teen comedy Easy A. He doesn't strike lightning twice here. We are given enticing musical street numbers that are suppose to reference films that are far better than this. Friends will benefit by just avoiding this stupid film. Score: 3 / 10

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

When Justin Met Mila . . .

Author: zardoz-13 from United States
1 August 2011

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

It is difficult to believe that talented "Easy A" writer & director Will Gluck had anything to do with this shallow as well as satiric romantic comedy about a loquacious couple who tumble in the sack but shun wearing their feelings on the their respective sleeves. You'd think that these youngsters were the first who preferred sex without sentiment. Each of these commitment-leery lovers has been through the wringer in a previous relationship that left them with nothing but bad vibes and the desire to never succumb so such sadness again. Sexy Mila Kunis plays a single but sexually active corporate headhunter named Jamie who recruits Los Angeles-based website editor Dylan (Justin Timberlake of "The Social Network") to be the new art director opening at GQ magazine. Predictably, not only does Dylan take this dream job, but he also bundles up with Jamie in bed in an R-rated movie that lacks both steam and momentum. You will find about as much meaningful nudity here as you might find in an issue of Maxim magazine. The entire plot revolves around their relationship after coitus and the ups and downs that they endure before Gluck and scenarists Keith Merryman and David A. Newman bring the leads full circle in Grand Central Station in the Big Apple. Just to add some sparkle to the shenanigans we are treated to Patricia Clarkson cast as the liberated mom of our heroine who raves about the 1970s and Woody Harrelson as Tommy an openly gay sports writer. "Saturday Night Live" fans will recognize Andy Samberg breaking up with Mila in an opening gambit while Emma Stone ditches Timberlake. Probably the slickest thing that Gluck pulls off is his surprising cross-cutting between the guys and the gals in this scene. Initially, we assume that Mila and Jamie are breaking up until we see that it is two couples. Richard Jenkins injects some heavy-handed gravitas as Jamie's Alzheimer's addled father who steals every scene in which he appears. Gluck tries his best (or worst) to skewer the conventions of romantic comedies, but he only winds up skewering himself. Mind you, Mila has some nice-looking skin and Justin has a washboard belly to die-for if you're into looking physically fit. Unfortunately, good looks, great chemistry, and rapid-fire dialogue delivery cannot overcome the one cliché after another. Altogether, if you have not seen "When Harry Met Sally," watch "When Harry Met Sally after you see "Friends with Benefits."

Was the above review useful to you?

4 out of 6 people found the following review useful:

Uff, this was bad

Author: plasticanimalz from United States
21 April 2012

My motivation for see this was that I thought 'No Strings Attached' was hilarious and I like Milla Kunis. The previews for this film looked like it would be funny, and though I don't really care for Justin as an actor, I like him on 'SNL,' so, I thought he would at least be funny. This seemed to me like it was a rushed project. I got the feeling the whole time that this was written by some decent writers in the 2 nights and filmed in 2 weeks. Everything felt rushed, predictable and cliché. Maybe a better actor could have pulled Justin's lines off better, giving them some punch...but instead, whenever he and Milla and long diatribe's of banter, I felt like I was watching an acting scene in a class, rather than a movie. It also felt like maybe they had as much time to rehearse the scenes as a cold reading. The only good thing about the movie was Woody Harrelson. He was great. Milla's mom was good..., some of the lines were good, but too rushed through to really come across as good or leave any weight, and Milla and Justin had good chemistry. The only thing believable about this film was that they would make good friends. A good couple, is questionable, but they at least seemed to be having fun together. The movie was also extremely formula with no twists or surprises. I didn't see the flash mob coming, at the end, but, really, who cares. I would not call that a good or emotional scene. It seemed more like this went on in a producer meeting. "Flash mobs are big right now. We should throw one in there at least a couple times. The audience loves it when the actors do a group singing number in a film, and flash mobs are the next big thing!" EHHHHHH!!!!! Wrong. There was one, of sorts, in 'Enchanted,' but it worked only because it was a musical and was more of a Broadway number than a flash mob. I didn't care about anyone in this film. And how can you when it's paint-by-the-numbers formula without any real depth whatsoever? Everything in this film was a gimmick to make you "feel" something, but it was so all so transparent and spoon fed that it didn't carry any weight.

Justin should stick to singing. He's not a good actor. Being a good sketch actor on 'SNL' does not mean you can read lines. The only reason he was halfway OK, but I wouldn't go as far as good, in "The Social Network' was because his part was small and he wasn't really acting, he just seemed to be reading lines and being himself. Not to mention, he's got a nice body but kind of Cro-Magnon looking. Without singing and dancing I don't really get his appeal...unless, of course, when he's Photoshopped. And him as an action star is even more ridiculous. What happened to the days of guys like Keanau Reeves? I mean, Jeremy Renner, Justin Timberlake, Adrian Brody? Seriously? None of these guys look like they could even take a serious punch, nor do they look lithe and stealth enough to avoid one. Though, I'm getting off track of the romantic comedy massacre, of this film.

It was on every level bad, other than Woody Harrleson, and completely unbelievable, on every level. The fact that Justin, or a 26-yr-old, is some high-paid sought after art director is ridiculous. They might as well have said he was a wealthy astronaut, which would have been just as believable. Topher Grace could pull off the young, over-achieving marketing director in that Dennis Quaid film, because he's a good actor...and they played up the fact that it was unusual for someone so young to be in that position.

Watch 'No Strings Attached,' rather than wasting any time on this film. Two great actors, great script, great chemistry, feel good. This is a film Milla should have turned down 'cause it did nothing for her career, and only cemented for me to avoid Justin in starring roles. He's just not good. The only film I liked him in was 'Southland Tales,' but he didn't say that much, does a musical number, and it was more of a cameo that added a funny element to the film. This was probably one of the worst romantic comedies I've seen in a long time. Two thumbs down.

Was the above review useful to you?

Page 2 of 21:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [Next]

Add another review

Related Links

Plot summary Plot synopsis Ratings
Awards External reviews Parents Guide
Official site Plot keywords Main details
Your user reviews Your vote history