Wanderlust

I love the humor in this movie, it is very dry with subtle irony mixed in. It is a much better film than many critics have given it credit for. If you enjoyed Wet Hot American Summer, then you are sure to enjoy this one as well. Often, this type of humor can be missed if you take the movie too seriously. Rudd and Aniston work well together with plenty of other talent in the cast you'll likely recognize. But it is all the secondary characters that really keep this movie interesting. David Wain does an excellent job managing these characters as the movie plot can bring about dramatically different sets and character types.

The premise of the movie, that two city folks stumble upon a hippie commune when they want to stay at a bed and breakfast (like people short on cash would even stop at a bed and breakfast rather than a Motel 8 or sleep in the car) and that the residents are stoned all the time yet are able to live off the land so adeptly that life is easy breezy all the time is really stupid. If that was where the laughs came from, maybe the movie would make a little sense. But the laughs are actually vulgar, tiresome, and heehaw the male lead thinks whoopee how great and the female is not sure and then of course the tables are turned. Who would have seen that coming? Don't waste your time.

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 *, including Jennifer Aniston. The only females that are * 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.

Basically, if you fancy stupidity and disgusting comedy then this might be something you like. it's the stupidest most worthless movie I've seen in a decade. 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.

This was one of the funniest movies I've seen in a long time! Cute storyline & very entertaining! Not appropriate for under 17 (nudity & language). Jennifer Aniston is awesome in this role, she's very funny and fun to watch. Paul Rudd is hysterical in this role! Paul Rudd & Jennifer Aniston are great together in this movie. The storyline is unique - there's nothing out there like this. All of the actors in this movie are funny. They all mesh well together and do an awesome job of really making you feel like you are there with them in the movie! There's nudity and language, but if you're not too squeamish ore sensitive, it is just hilarious!

My room mates watched this flick, told me it was worth a watch but nothing special. 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.

I have watched this film twice now and off the back of the second viewing thought I would see what others thought of it. I was surprised and increasingly confused as I read one negative review after another. My confusion grew to frustration as I read comments like "the only nudity is old, unattractive people" and "the characters aren't believable". I feel these people have completely missed the point! First of all, if you want to see attractive people naked then may I politely suggest that romantic comedy is the wrong genre for you, I believe you'd get what you want in the 'adult' category - it's certainly bizarre and irrelevant to give this film a negative review because you don't get to see Jennifer Aniston in the buff! 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!

I had high hopes for this film at the beginning. The scene where the Jennifer Anniston character pitches her save-the-penguins film to HBO satirizes both her and the network. And the montage of the auto trip, showing the various changes of mood they go through over several hours, is both realistic and hilarious. But I didn't laugh much after that. 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.

I had to write a review for this movie because I read some reviews on this site before I watched it and was really debating on whether I should even see it, but my girlfriend insisted. I thought from other people's reviews that this movie was going to SUCK. 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.