User ReviewsReview this title
When I go and see a film which the critics say is awful, I always go in hoping that, for me, I will find them wrong. The critics said this was awful. I say they were right.
If I go and see a Spider-Man movie, it is important that the movie sells me the idea that a radioactive spider bite can give someone the ability to stick to a wall. If I go and see a Die Hard movie, it is important that the movie sells me the notion that John Maclane can out-think and out-gun hordes of bad guys. The first and worst (but by no means only) flaw in this film is that, with the arguable exceptions of George and Linda, the movie parades before us a cast of characters each of which is no more than a container for a specific "amusing" schtick: none of them convinces us that they are a real person at all. They might as well be wearing labels - "Funny obnoxious brother", "funny spaced out sister in law", "funny nudist man who doesn't listen to you", "funny weird hippy lady", "funny pregnant lady" etc. Because the characters are contrived and unbelievable, what might have otherwise worked as far as story is concerned fails to do so. The fact that what is supposed to be funny actually isn't doesn't help either.
I hated hated hated the bad language. It was crass and gratuitously unpleasant. It was one of the factors, but not the only one, why I hated the scene where Paul Rudd was stuck in front of a mirror gurning "hilarious" obscenities in a squirmingly embarrassing sequence where he is trying to work himself up for a sexual encounter. Simply awful.
There was moderate nudity: not from the young people with attractive bodies (which Hollywood seems scared of), but from older performers. I don't have anything against this, but I would rather such a sequence included younger people.
Jennifer Aniston gave yet another lazy performance.
This was a bad film. Avoid it.
Secondly,regarding the characters and all the oh-so-serious reviewers commenting on the silliness and irreverence of the plot and the character development, this is the sort of film that doesn't need to develop the characters or have a deep plot, it wouldn't work as well if it did actually. It's a light-hearted, fun movie. And it works. In my opinion it actually works beautifully, the whole film has a great vibe to it and certainly had me thinking that I might enjoy a brief dalliance on a commune! It's witty, amusing, warm and titillating at times, not for what it does show but for what it suggests about the lifestyle the couple find themselves in.
Take this film at face value and suspend your disbelief, take off your critic hat and just enjoy!
The real problem with this film is that it is essentially a satire directed at the hippie movement. There might have been a point to this thirty years ago, but now??? I don't know if there even are any hippie communes left, but they are hardly significant enough in our culture to rate a full-length satire. And are we surprised that the most outspoken proponent of free love and spirituality turns out to be a hypocritical jerk? And how about the attack on the heartless developers? Are we supposed to take that seriously? This theme was developed more effectively, tongue-in-cheek, in "The Muppets" where at least we knew it was intended as a cliché.
I usually like Paul Rudd, but I found his attempt to come off as macho to get into bed with a gorgeous blonde totally unconvincing and unfunny. He is such a cool guy that I could not believe he would not know how to approach a woman for sex.
For me the one bright spot in the film was Alan Alda's portrayal of an aging hippie, possibly in the early stages of Alzheimers. He was the one character who came across as genuine. In fact, in a better film he might have gotten some Oscar buzz for best supporting actor.
Overall, a pointless film.
Not that a movie like this requires great acting skills, but the roles played by Rudd, Aniston and Watkins are at least believable. But the credibility stops there. Most of the other characters are over-acted, and poorly-developed.
And one of my biggest pet peeves: scenes from the trailer were NOT in the film. THIS DRIVES ME MAD! It's like a restaurant advertising a lunch special that they don't have in stock.
Bottom line: save your movie, and save your time.
Full disclosure: I am a huge David Wain fan, I loved Stella, I watch Wainy Days, etc.
This movie is about two city types who have a run of bad luck, end up at hippie commune. Funny stuff ensues.
Not an original concept by any means but comedic none the less. Purely hilarious cast sans Paul Rudd, I'm not a huge fan but I understand why people do.
To the guy saying "its unrealistic": Hi, I'm movies. Have you ever seen me before? Bottom Line: If you liked The State, Stella, Michael & Michael Have Issues, Children's Hospital, or the like. You will more than likely enjoy this movie.
7 out of 10.
There are some intense and somewhat "uncomfortable" moments but, to me, they were believable and gave the film some depth. I loved the way the characters dropped their facades in the final scenes - now that's a real "truth-telling circle".
The juxtaposition of different cultures and personalities was written brilliantly. I expect that sociologists will have a blast with this film.
I rented this, despite the low rating, because of Jennifer Aniston and Paul Rudd whom I consider to be wonderful comedic actors. It's great to see them together again.
However it didn't. Far from it, I actually found myself laughing the entire movie. Not a single actor, line or scene disappointed me. Yes there was some awkward moments and characters, but hell, what's a comedy without that? It didn't censor itself but rather embraced it's originality; and that's why I think I enjoyed it so much. So to anybody reading these reviews that are saying it's not funny, don't listen to them, give it a chance and I doubt you'll be disappointed. I sure as hell wasn't.
And to any male readers discouraged by the fact that there is a male nudist in the movie, you can breathe easy- it's a prosthetic.
All in all I'll give this movie a 9 because it's funny, original, kind of weird, and yet totally awesome.
The tale of a new york couple that struggles with money and failure and finds themselves in a small hippie commune it's simple but heartfelt, Paul and Jennifer are quite good in this and move from serious to awkward with ease, being in my late 30's i could relate with their dilemma since i'm living through a similar f****d up system and the desire to leave everything behind.
It's a comedy for adults so i didn't mind the more uncomfortable bits, there's a lot of nudity (sorry, no Paul or Jen, only ugly folks), I can't recommend it without reservations but I've had a good time.
Even the adorable Jennifer Aniston could not make this movie watchable.
There was nothing but a couple giggles due to a crazy scene or word but it was torture!
Other than the multiple shots of penises and floppy breasts by unknown actors and actresses there was nothing of note.
Boring from start to finish, the film just kept dragging and dragging on.
I expected something of worth but never got it. The few outtakes at the end of the film were the only thing worth watching so don't forget to watch those.
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.
George (Paul Rudd) and Linda (Jennifer Aniston) are moving to New York to follow their dreams. Well, George is reluctantly moving there while Linda follows her dreams. Now they find themselves with a studio apartment (oh excuse me, a "micro-loft") that is incredibly tiny and massively expensive. But things get rough when Linda's hopes get washed down the drain and George loses his job. George's brother Rick (Ken Marino) has a job waiting for George, but they're all the way in Atlanta. Leaving their dreams behind, George and Linda go on a road trip and stop at Elysium before reaching their destination. Elysium is unlike anything George and Linda have ever experienced before as everyone shares everything, is so open with one another, and even believes in free love. As everything that could go wrong does, George and Linda are faced with the decision of continuing to live in the city for the technology and advancements they love or moving to the country, being stripped of that technology, and feeling happier than they can ever remember.
One could argue that Wanderlust uses the same formula over and over involving raunchy jokes and dialogue and featuring the most nudity of any film in your recent memory. That may be the case, but if you're familiar with David Wain's humor then this should come as no surprise. You probably know what you're getting yourself into and you're either a fan of his work or you hate it (but then why would you be seeing this anyway?). Wanderlust is labeled as a comedy and if it makes you laugh, then it's done its job. If anything, this is actually a return to form for both Wain and the majority of the cast of "The State." The film throws you headfirst into hilarity as the "breaking the apartment in the old fashioned way" scene is kind of a warm-up for what's to come. George's sarcasm is what will more than likely win you over the most while Linda's inability to commit to any sort of career causes her character to be pretty unpredictable. Elysium is a gold mine of eccentric characters; the most noteworthy being Wayne (Joe Lo Truglio) the nudist and Seth (Justin Theroux). Wayne's nude habits will either have you in tears from laughing so hard or cause you to turn away in disgust while Seth's outdated technology references, his ability to loiter around doorways out of sight and selfish tendencies are hilarious in their own right. Paul Rudd's mirror scene is what you'll remember the most though as you'll be laughing for a good two or three minutes straight from that scene alone.
Wanderlust does get pretty outlandish in its second half, but it isn't exactly the most grounded concept to begin with. There are several dream-like sequences that are fantastically surreal. The two that come to mind are Linda's peyote-like trip during the trust circle and George's fly dream. The fly dream is actually one of my favorite scenes in the movie since it's just so bizarre and random yet manages to fit the flow of the movie somehow.
The R-rated comedy does have its shortcomings though. Rick is easily the most annoying character to be featured in any film so far in 2012. You'll breathe a sigh of relief once his story arc is resolved. The other main one is the film's conclusion. It feels a bit generic when all of the raunchiness is dropped for heartfelt speeches and the struggle to do what's right. Everything still comes together in a logical sense, but it's in a way that seems so familiar which is kind of a letdown. The transition just doesn't feel as smooth as it should.
Wanderlust is vulgar, obscene, littered with jiggling unclothed man and lady parts, and downright disgusting at times, but it's laugh out loud funny because of all of these things. The story may be a bit lacking in parts, but your laughter will drown out whatever flaws the movie may have. While Wanderlust may not be for everyone, it certainly soars and caters to those who love this type of comedy.
Rudd and Aniston are New Yorkers who must leave the city to pursue less expensive living arrangements. The move to Atlanta to live with Rudd's obnoxious brother, but on the way, get side tracked at a commune.
The commune seems like a fun change for Rudd, but Aniston is unsure. As it turns out, Aniston likes the commune more than Rudd.
There is so much crazy humor in this movie that I don't know where to begin. There is a scene where Rudd is talking to himself in a mirror that brought my girlfriend and I to tears. The entire theater was rolling in laughter...and to me THAT is always a lot of fun.
If you like comedies and don't mind crude humor, do yourself a favor and go see this movie in the theaters. This comedy is a must see at the theater. I think because of the nature of the humor, it is best viewed when you can laugh along with a big crowd.
I rate this 9 of 10 stars. Absolutely hilarious!
Just as New York couple George (Paul Rudd) and Linda (Jennifer Aniston) finally commit to purchasing an apartment, sudden unemployment forces them to give up their new dream and head to Atlanta to stay with George's brother. Stopping at a wayside bed and breakfast, the couple discovers Elysium, a free-spirited commune where peace, love and happiness abound – as does a host of bizarre nudists and hippies, led by the brusque but eloquent Seth (Justin Theroux). Seduced by their carefree lifestyle, Linda elects to stay, but George isn't as easily dazzled and soon becomes vexed by the group's unorthodox and outlandish customs.
There's a lot missing from Wanderlust. It feels like 30 minutes or more have been noticeably expunged from key areas that would have established characters and running jokes (made more apparent from the theatrical trailer, which shows several scenes that never make it into the final cut). The conclusion isn't based on anything previously hinted at, the antagonist is appropriated without warning just to provide villainy, and abrupt decisions are made by unprovoked characters, resulting in a gaping lack of realism. The initial proposition is a one-note gag that sets up potential but is never given a chance to blossom. Every time locations or characters are introduced, many are ignored, forgotten, or left devoid of humorous implications. Even the most obvious involvement, such as George's brother manning a Porta-Potty company, never gets an opportunity to present the simplest, go-to gross-out skit that inevitably rears its head when dealing with carriageable sanitation units.
Thick, palpable sarcasm permeates all of Paul Rudd's lines while Aniston is utilized primarily for physical comedy. The opening scene is well done, with creative editing, weird expressions and montage, but after about fifteen minutes or so, the humor begins to dwindle rapidly. With expected stereotypes and generic sidekicks that include an obnoxious brother, a foul-mouthed kid, a crazy old man, a longhaired mantra-spewing hippie guru, and a young blonde female with evanescent inhibitions, nothing particularly unique is submitted. Nonsense takes over when verbal comedy ceases, and uncomfortable or disgustingly awkward situations shoulder those moments when absurdity stops working. It's troublesome when end credit bloopers are funnier than anything in the film. Based on early screenings and gossip, the only thing Wanderlust is likely to be remembered for is Jennifer Aniston's nude scene, which was filmed but then removed from the theatrical version.
- The Massie Twins (GoneWithTheTwins.com)
And Alan Alda, I mean ALANNNNNNNNNNNNN AWLDA with a pronounced nasal banality lilt, is enough to ruin any film. Who said he is talented and funny? He is a schmuck. Boring, snobbish, condescending aloofness, talks through his Yankee nose and just all around disgusting to hear and see on the screen.
Paul Rudd, he's funny. Too bad he's in this movie with Jennifer and Alannnnnnnnnnnn AWLDA.
Being as I am more than fond of both Judd Apatow (Producer) and Paul Rudd (Lead Actor/Co. Producer) I was extremely eager to watch Wanderlust but came out of it disappointed and honestly quite shocked by the fact that Apatow had produced something so mediocre!
That being said I did laugh in this film on quite a few occasions actually, in particular the mirror scene which was to say the least hilarious. In my opinion it was these rare moments of overstated humour and light satire which made the film bearable. Another strong point is the running time; thankfully this film doesn't drag on too much to the point where it becomes tedious.
Rudd is consistently brilliant in nearly every release he has been in and Wanderlust is certainly no exception, but the person that stole the show for me personally was Joe Lo Truglio as Wayne the nudist novelist. I feel that in previous films Truglio has shined, never having a large part but still managing to have a huge impact on the overall humour of a film, notable examples are Kuzzick in Role Models (also alongside Rudd and director David Wain) and my personal favourite Lonnie in I Love You, Man (again, alongside Rudd). I feel that Truglio has this same effect in Wanderlust and that he played one of the more likable and overall interesting characters amongst a cast that is generally dull.
Jennifer Aniston tries. Everything she does in this film comes off as a bit too eccentric, for example the weird acid trip she has just felt awkward and kind of unnecessary. The only thing that the does to a truly good standard is playing the 'un-employed go-getter living in the midst of a bustling Manhattan' but to be fair this sort of role has got to be second nature for her. Frankly the more in-your-face kind of comedy is a little out of Aniston's comfort zone and this does show a bit in Wanderlust.
A lot of other reviews are advising you not to watch it but I disagree based on the fact that you could definitely do a lot worse. You should especially watch this if you enjoyed Wain's Wet Hot American Summer being as both films share a light form of satire. Wanderlust does not match Wet Hot American Summer in terms of overall comedy but I feel that the two are still comparable. Sure, nothing in Wanderlust is worth writing home about (apart from maybe the mirror scene which truly is, hilarious) and it is fairly forgettable but if you are ever in the mood for something light-hearted not to be taken too seriously kind of film then you can't go wrong with Wanderlust.
I wanted to leave 20 minutes in but I had to stay because it was a birthday present.
The stupidity, disgusting images and regret for the 2 hours waste of my life haunted me for days.
Intelligent and creative humor is absent except for a 1 minute scene in the whole movie.
Not worth it.
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.