IMDb > Wanderlust (2012) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Wanderlust
Quicklinks
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
Overview
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
Promotional
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
Wanderlust More at IMDbPro »

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 2 of 14:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [Next]
Index 140 reviews in total 

21 out of 38 people found the following review useful:

10 Minutes of Funny - ** Definitely Not For Children **

5/10
Author: TheTruthDoor from Austin, Texas
6 March 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

This movie has about 10 minutes of actual laughter, the rest is just mediocre adult dialog and situations. In typical feminist controlled Hollywood fashion, you get to see guys naked, but you don't get to see any attractive females nude, including Jennifer Aniston. The only females that are nude are in a group of old nudists running in slow motion close to the end of the film, I promise you don't want to see this part.

I question the very positive reviews posted here, I am starting to think that Hollywood studios have paid employees that post positive reviews of turkey movies on IMDb, and other sites. This is definitely NOT a great movie.

Please note that this is not a movie for children. You get shown a man in FULL nudity, both front and back, in the first 10 minutes of the film and other adult situations and visuals throughout.

QUICK SUMMARY: Wait until this movie comes out on DVD, and watch it when the kids have gone to bed.

Was the above review useful to you?

6 out of 9 people found the following review useful:

My face hurts!

9/10
Author: the guy on the couch (themoviecouch.blogspot.com) from United States
19 August 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

What a laugh riot! I can't believe this movie slipped by me in theaters, but I'm glad we put it on our Netflix queue. "Wanderlust" brings together some of my favorite people in comedy. Written and directed by alums of the MTV comedy show "The State" (David Wain and Ken Marino), the movie features several of the old "The State" actors as well as Paul Rudd and Jennifer Aniston. On top of all that, Judd Apatow produces. With a pedigree like that, you may expect something hilarious, and you would be right!

Rudd and Aniston play George and Linda, an attractive pair of New Yorkers who have just purchased a tiny, expensive West Village apartment when their economic world collapses. Unemployed and facing homelessness, they head to Georgia so George can work for his hilariously boorish brother (Ken Marino). Along the way they accidentally spend the night at a hippie commune and find the experience surprisingly liberating. Working and living with George's brother turns out to be so unbearable that the pair flee back to the commune to give "intentional community" a try.

Someone needs to come up with some kind of facial yoga I can do before watching a movie like this, because "Wanderlust" made me smile and laugh until my face hurt. From the very first scene, Rudd and Aniston knock the ball right out of the park, and every new character who walks across the screen lights it up. Everyone is so good that I really can't mention all the great comedic performances, although Justin Theroux does deserve mention for his over-the-top portrayal of hippie alpha-male Seth. They also brought in Alan Alda to play the senile commune founder and add a touch of class. I suppose if I had any criticism it would be that most of the hippie jokes are pretty well- worn. The movie is fairly predictable, but big deal, they are all predictable once you've seen enough of them. When the story is this funny and told this joyously, it doesn't matter.

Just. Watch. It!

Was the above review useful to you?

8 out of 13 people found the following review useful:

Uncomfortable to watch, Ridiculous and WEIRD!!!!

1/10
Author: Paul Anthony from United Kingdom
2 July 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Usually love comedies and don't mind some bad language etc but way too much crude language, nudity and crap jokes. Thought it looked OK at the very start but never got going at all. Not keen on Paul Rudd at the best of times but bad acting from him, Jennifer Aniston was not as good as usual.

Delt really uncomfortable to watch with my wife and made us cringe with bad plots and attempts at being funny! I just wanted to switch it off after 20 minutes but gave it the benefit of the doubt,It got worse as it went on Im afraid.

Overacting to the Max and just very crass.

Weirdest movie I've seen in sometime. not sure what they were thinking!

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

Loved it and I really laughed but may not be for everyone

8/10
Author: amshotwell from East Coast
16 January 2013

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I watched this not knowing anything about it and had no preconceived ideas of what it would be about and I cracked up the whole time. It has a lot of my favorite comic actors in it. I am pretty picky really and did find some of it rather predictable but did not mind that but I found some things to be not predictable too. Full frontal male nudity (spoiler perhaps not sure) is a bit jarring at first but it makes the movie. I guess if you have ever lived with or been around a group of people like this it makes it a little more funny. I say watch but don't expect too much and maybe you will be pleasantly surprised. Not for everyone. Lots of subtle humor that I found great. It think the characters in this movie make you uncomfortable in a lot of scenes on purpose. The Sister in law was my favorite and the best character, her acting is superb!

Was the above review useful to you?

8 out of 14 people found the following review useful:

The funniest movie since Bridesmaids.

9/10
Author: Christian_Dimartino from United States
25 July 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

You may not know a lot about writer/director/actor David Wain, or even know who he is, but I will tell you that he is an underrated talent. He doesn't do much, but he used to have a short-lived sitcom called Stella, which I thought was hilarious, and he also directed Role Models and A Wet Hot American Summer. his latest film, Wanderlust, was in and out of theatres very quickly, which is a shame, because it's the funniest movie since Bridesmaids.

Paul Rudd and Jennifer Aniston play a New york couple who basically lose everything. So on their way to visit Rudd's brother, they end up staying at a camp called Elysium, which is a strange hippie inn that believes in free love, and basically doing nothing and being worry free. Once the couple decides to stay there, they both are put in a position that could tear them apart.

The film has a weird cast of characters that include Alan Alda as the owner of Elysium, Justin Theroux as the bizarre leader, Malin Ackerman as his girlfriend, sort of, and Ken Marino, who co-wrote the script, as Rudd's bizarre brother, but I would hate to give any more away, because everyone is just too funny here.

There is probably a joke every thirty seconds, whether funny, hilarious, or just plain disgusting, and everyone who is given the joke nails it. I was really hoping that its premise wouldn't grow tired, but thank goodness it doesn't. There is no hit-or-miss jokes here, all simply funny.

There are also plenty of unforgettable moments to, such as when Rudd's character is trying to get jazzed up for sex... the actors know it's funny, and it's amazing they can pull straight faces.There is no single great performance here, everyone is hilarious, and it's not fair that The Hangover Part II can make millions and millions of dollars over something that is genuinely funny. This is one of the best movies of the year so far.

A-

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 3 people found the following review useful:

Sophomoric Softie

3/10
Author: seagem from United States
23 August 2014

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Back in the 70's this would have been classified as soft porn - flaccid, bouncing body parts make you want to look away, dialogue so laden with sexual content only those registering as mental pre-teen are going to snicker and enjoy this kind of fare. Keep moving folks, nothing to see here: isn't that what they say at the scene of an accident? Well, this movie certainly is one in so many ways.

It was fun to see Alan Alda and Linda Lavin in their supporting roles - if you are going back to the '70's who better than these two stalwarts of the period - problem is they have limited time on the screen and don't really have a chance to show their chops.

Paul Rudd is very talented but mostly in the length of a SNL television skit. Painful to watch the scene where he is psyching himself up in the bathroom to stray into infidelity - talking to himself to build his courage. Way too long and most of the scene should have been edited out.

Jennifer Aniston is very likable and is much better in Horrible Bosses and We're the Millers which isn't saying a lot but gives perspective that she is wasted here. I could have gone a long time without seeing her simulate using a leaf on herself while she squats in the commune front yard.

The supporting cast especially the women did a good job in each of their roles. Justin Theroux as Seth did not help his film career. An age peer of Alan Alda would have been much better than Theroux. Someone against type who could be over the top as the commune leader. I would loved to have seen Al Pacino in the role or even Tom Selleck (another TV throwback to go along with Alda and Lavin) as the out of touch emotional cannonball/still horny-for-strange women-leader of the pack. Now that could have made this watchable. Plus a better script. Plus better editing. Plus abandon the stream of consciousness trash mouth scenes. You get the idea.

I saw this on DVD and couldn't bear to watch the extras. My first thought was to throw this in the trash. This one is Not recommended.

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 5 people found the following review useful:

Not a bad movie, but can Aniston ever not act "Aniston"?

6/10
Author: Heidi Standell from Canada
3 June 2013

I wish there was a 6.5 rating. This film doesn't deserve a seven, but it's not quite so low as a six either. It's a meandering film at times, and while Rudd is always great when he's in the role of the middle class and dependable husband/boyfriend put into an unexpected situation, he does have a great deal of comedic talent, and even when he's in a supporting or ensemble cast he generally winds up carrying and being the best thing about most of the movies he's in, Aniston on the other hand is still trying to play the young ingénue she played on "Friends" a decade ago (though she appears to be a sweet woman no matter what role she's playing, and I think that's because she really is a sweet woman who unfortunately isn't a great actress; I think most of her roles to date are basically Aniston playing Aniston). Yes, "Horrible Bosses" WAS a step away from her comfort zone, but her success in that film seemed more based on the character having been created for her than what I can only say was obviously the little and forced effort she put into creating the character. With that movie she could have gone a lot further; despite her supposed sex/power addiction she still seemed like Rachel dressed up like a dominatrix for Halloween, more interested in how she might still look pretty in the nightclub light than how to wield the power her character so desperately needs to make her believable. In "Wanderlust" Aniston's performance is woody, she just can't get into playing a middle aged woman (and c'mon, despite the lighting and the makeup and the botox that's what she is!) who just might want to explore and find out that she is or can be more than the shallow, hungry to succeed city girl that she plays so well in movies and in Hollywood. I'm a middle aged woman myself, and while Rudd's journey is funny and at times touching in his innocent exploration of his societally defined identity, Aniston doesn't bring to the role a sense of identity that a woman her age should have acquired by now. She has a lot of money in real life, so maybe she can stay virtually young forever on the outside, but her acting tells me she's also stayed young, far too young, on the inside. Maybe she'll find that depth as she grows older; if not then she's a TV star past her prime who should stick to the small screen, maybe there she'll again find a niche by playing yet another version of herself. I just hope she learns to play closer to her age -- perhaps a daily job to remind her she's not a twenty something anymore will help her grow up and stop it with the coy little gestures and the wide eye surprise that are cute with the Twilight set but not at all so in a menopausal (or close to it) woman in her mid-forties.

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 5 people found the following review useful:

Offensive to brain owners

1/10
Author: Massimiliano Masetti from Prato, Italy
31 May 2013

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

A real mess, stupid and boring. I cannot believe the talented Aniston and the very good Rudd accepted this role. This is a lousy movie, pointless, offensive to brain owners! Dialogues are creepy surreal, people shown are a bunch of fools and not a laugh is produced. The peak of gross is the birth of a kid on the porch I cannot believe I wasted my time on this crap!

Final scene is predictable an hour before it happens, and final fight between main characters is so nonsense and followed by excuses so fast that you cannot believe how lame that is! Aniston reaches her lowest point, She can only rise from this! And Rudd, with his monologue on approaching a whore going on for ten minutes of not at all funny crap has seriously jeopardized his career

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 5 people found the following review useful:

No One Would Lust Over This

1/10
Author: thesar-2 from United States
3 March 2013

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

This is what I thought: I really like Paul Rudd, I'm finally accepting Jennifer "Forever Rachel" Aniston is in two-thirds of every year's comedies and the trailer of Wanderlust looked like a funny and original film.

This is what I got: a migraine of mass destruction, a horribly put-together mess of absent laughs and long list of cameos that have to be ashamed to have had said yes in the first place.

Wanderlust is an abomination of wasted space and talent. I hated every minute of this movie and kept waiting for it to redeem itself. Instead, I witnessed Paul Rudd unconvincingly channeling Jim Carrey later in the picture and in front of a mirror talking about his little Rudd below. I think Mr. Carrey should sue for defamation of character.

After getting an apartment the size of the west wing of Karen Walker's closet, the zero-chemistry couple, George (Rudd) and Linda (Aniston) are jobless and homeless (overnight, no less.) Giving up within seconds of losing his job and solving their problem, they venture onto George's even less funny and dick of a brother, but along the route south, they happen along a hippie commune.

This happens to brighten up their last night before they reach George's sad brother and his wacked wife's house. When living with family goes south, they head back to fake "become one with nature" home. From there, they plan on a two-week trial to see if they like living with a wheelchair-bound Hawkeye Pierce and a butt-naked wine-maker. While you'll know exactly where each scene is headed, you'll expect laughs along the way but only to be disappointed with each missed opportunity. I mean, Paul's a funny guy…until now.

Maybe it's not his fault. Actually, I don't blame him for the aimless direction, poor editing, script problems and list of uninterested actors. It's supposed to make you feel good about life and nature, but I'd just as well take advice from Eric Cartman on going green than what they're trying to teach me.

Avoid this mess at all costs. Even if I was a vegan, I would rather sprint over to McDonald's for a Big Mac in protest…even though, I doubt that's real meat – but it's the effort that counts.

Was the above review useful to you?

4 out of 7 people found the following review useful:

Mirror Scene Makes the Movie

10/10
Author: rossangela from Oregon, USA
15 July 2013

What could have been a 5 or 6 star comedy film, is made a 10 star film by Paul Rudd's (improvised?) mirror scene. When I watched that part, I thought "What great directing!" But then, when I read on IMDb that Rudd improvised that scene, I thought "What a great comic acting genius he is". So although there are a few hokey scenes (the psychedelic trip, the 2 cars in the pond) in all, the film is entertaining at least, and hilarious at best, especially due to Rudd's great improvisation. With something this light, it's best not to over-analyze its elements. (and by the way, I thought that Jennifer Anniston was very good, despite other reviewers comments). So rather than picking it apart, as though it were up for an academy award, just watch, laugh and enjoy!!

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 2 of 14:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [Next]

Add another review


Related Links

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