Good adventure survival film
10/10
Author: LDQ409 from Farmingdale, NY
20 December 2004

I saw Flight of the Phoenix Saturday night and thoroughly enjoyed it. The special effects were wonderful and the acting was great. I am a big fan of Dennis Quaid, and he did a great job in the role of Frank Townes. Taking a role that the icon Jimmy Stewart had is not easy but Dennis did it admirably, and Stewart would have been proud(?) the way it turned out. Giovanni Ribisi was in top form as Elliot, and the rest of the cast played their roles well. A lot of people have compared it to the original, but it is really unfair to do so. The original came out in 1965 when we were still in the Cold War, and WWII was a recent memory.

There were also more character actors, and there was the German in Ribisi's role. This cast is multi ethnic and there is a woman, reflecting the advances made in society since then. It certainly doesn't detract from the movie and you don't think about it while watching. There is more action in this version, but that is not a bad thing. The desert scenes were fantastic. I actually came out of the movie thirsty! LOL ! I just wish they had left the movie in October, as there are so many films out now, it will get lost in the shuffle. If you are a fan of survivor movies, go see it.

-The production built a "Phoenix" that could be taxied, but were unable to safely build a flying version economically. Mindful of the original production which did build a "Phoenix" that could fly, but was structurally unsound and crashed killing stuntman Paul Mantz, the flying scenes were done using a radio controlled model and computer graphics.

-Miranda Otto's character, an engineer, is named "Kelly Johnson". Kelly Johnson is the name of a legendary aircraft engineer for Lockheed who designed the P-388 Lightning fighter of WWII. Later he ran the Lockheed "Skunk Works" which secretly produced the U-2 and SR-71 spy planes. In view of the fact that aircraft design is a key element of the plot, it is unlikely that the name is a coincidence.

-The aircraft used in the film is a Fairchild C-119, a direct descendent of the WWII era C-82 used in the original film
 
-The production transported three C-119 fuselages to Namibia where the film was shot. During transportation, a ferry carrying the fuselage and its trailer across a river sank and the parts had to be salvaged.

-Miranda Otto's character was not in the original version of the film.

-This film premiered in U.S. theaters on December 17, 2004, which marked cast member Giovanni Ribisi's 30th birthday.

*

*

Wasted 2 hours of my life

Author: Thatoneguyimet from United States
23 January 2013
 

Great actors, horrible movie. The story was rambling, confused, and seemed to be dark just to be dark.

The narration was horrible; Macy Gray is incoherent throughout. I'm sure there was a reason to have a narrator, but the fact that she was completely unable to be understood kind of eliminates the benefit.

Characters were poorly developed and there was never any build up to explain their behavior.

The director seemed to be searching for ways to degrade every character over and over and over. This movie was disturbing without any redeeming quality at all.

Don't waste your time or your money.

6 out of 7 people found the following review useful:

Worthless smelly garbage

Author: thunderhead from United States
13 July 2013

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Despite strong performances from some of the actors(Cusack was pretty creepy), none of the characters in this film vaguely resembles any person who has actually lived on this planet. There are only one-dimensional stereotypes and excuses to insert "shocking twists" into a rather unimportant and undeveloped "story".

You have a reporter(?) out to expose the truth about a wrongful conviction. A woman obsessed with a imprisoned killer who says it's because he is innocent, but really she just doesn't think she deserves any better. A housekeeper who is narrating the story(who is difficult to understand) for some unknown person for some unknown purpose. A kid who sits around and feels jealous of everyone else's relationships and pines for the previously mentioned prison groupie, because, well as is the norm in this film who knows(or cares for that matter).But it is insinuated because she reminds him of his mommy. And she is of course unrealistically hot for a prison groupie. These characters are not explained or developed in any meaningful way aside from the fact that the boy has mommy abandonment issues, the reporter is ashamed by his homosexual desire for black men and, oh white people were really racist back in the day. And swamp people walk around naked with dead alligators hanging everywhere. And eat ice cream out of pots. And I guess they had not yet invented air-conditioning or indoor plumbing whenever this film was supposed to take place. Because most of the characters are covered in dirt and sweat throughout.

These characters serve only as a prop, as does the story and film itself for the writer/director's desire to "shock" the audience and show how brave they are for using the "n-word" and showing taboo things like masturbation, rape, gay bondage rape and alligator guts. Oh and don't forget pointless urination and the constant reminder that the world is and has always been a terrible place and any attempts to do the right thing will be met with disappointment and murder.

They do not develop any tension in the so-called story relating to the completely inconsequential investigation and consistently have every major plot development off screen. Focusing mostly on the fantasies (twisted and otherwise) of I presume the writer. A complete waste of time and film. All concerned should be ashamed to be associated with this cinematic cum stain.

12 out of 20 people found the following review useful:

One of the 2 WORST Movies I've ever seen!

Author: hugh-584-419666 from United States
17 January 2013

Pointless - deliberately shocking and senseless. The vulgarity was inane. Whoever wrote this is in a very dark place. Careers can be made by one great role (Pacino as Michael Corleone). Careers have been ruined in the same manner. Kidman, McConaughey, and Cusack have deteriorated to porn star level. We watched the movie because of past film performances of these actors. They are now on our DO NOT WATCH list. We could never watch another film of theirs and not think of this disgrace. No doubt this film was made for its shock and sex value. Artistically it equals the efforts of junior high school. If it was supposed to be an attack on Southerns, it missed its mark. "The Help" accurately portrayed the Southern temperature - not this tripe. Hollywood has sunk to a "disturbing place".

4 out of 5 people found the following review useful:

Pointless

Author: memyselfblogger from South Africa
7 September 2013

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

While the acting is pretty good and the film explores some very interesting ideas, it sadly has no point whatsoever. The storyline severely lacks any kind of line and leaves you feeling like you've wasted your time. Weird flashback techniques occasionally overly subtle script make it difficult to understand or enjoy. I found the scenes where Hillary and Charlotte engage exceptionally disturbing and unnecessary. Issues with love, self-acceptance and racism are well dealt with and carried by outstanding acting, however the movie falls apart because the nonsensical storyline doesn't pull anything together and fails miserably to garner any understanding or interest. Very disappointed.

4 out of 5 people found the following review useful:

This may be the worst movie I've ever watched.

Author: imartz123 from california
14 July 2013

Albeit the concept of the movie was compelling, and certainly the star quality is impressive, the story is simply over the top of AWFUL! It confuses the audience with too many unnecessary and disturbing graphic images. It did what every movie maker wants by permeating my thoughts but in a nightmarish way. The story simply didn't need to be told. It seemed the director only made it for its shock value. The movie was so horribly graphic I needed to fast forward though parts of the violence hoping some purpose or substance to the story would reveal itself afterward. Usually it did not. I would be curious to discuss it with the actors. I can't imagine any of them having any pride of ownership after this movie.

7 out of 11 people found the following review useful:

Self Indulgence at its finest....

Author: Niko Miller from United States
25 January 2013

What a self-indulgent piece of crap....3 actors exploring the darker sides of themselves? How the f#ck did they get a routinely great actor like John Cusack to sign up for this.....

And Nicole Kidman (a fantastically beautiful woman)....did she undergo drastic botox treatments for the part?

Every single cliché pulled out of a Harry Crews novel about swamps, Florida and the people who live there is contained in this movie. Did this director have one original idea?

This movie wasn't even good enough at being bad to make me watch and see how much worse it could get.

Really, really, really BAD.

14 out of 25 people found the following review useful:

Paperboy

Author: Cheryl6750 from United States
27 January 2013

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Most disturbing movie I have ever seen. How in the world did Lee Daniels put his name on this movie. And how did he get this kind of talent to do this movie. ALL time worse movie. I was hopeful when I saw who was starring in this movie. I am puzzled as to why someone would write a book of this nature and further puzzled that a movie was made with this theme. I can honestly say I couldn't believe what I was watching but I stuck it out until the end. Wish I had stopped half way through the movie because it only got worse. I have never given this kind of critique to a movie. I usually think enjoyment of a movie is a personal experience. I can't imagine anyone enjoying this movie.

3 out of 5 people found the following review useful:

Painful

Author: John E Chandler from Rome, NY
6 March 2013

I really wanted to finish the movie, but it was so uninteresting and silly that I didn't care how it ended and spent the last half hour I missed of it doing something constructive like returning this movie to the video store and paying the late fee. The person I was watching this with was thankful to me for speaking up and not torturing them any further. I expected something from this movie. Not something more, just something at all. Imagine the Lincoln Lawyer meets Boogie Nights meets Deliverance and somehow make a movie combining all the elements; but somehow do it with actors that are making the movie to get a paycheck and an editor that has a billion projects going at once.

5 out of 9 people found the following review useful:

VERY disturbing

Author: bianca_man from Ohio, USA
22 March 2013

WARNING! DO NOT WATCH THIS MOVIE! The movie was very obscene and disturbing. It was all just rape, murder, and racism. It is pretty rare for such great actors to play in such a bad movie, but this was definitely one of those cases. I don't recommend watching it; you'll just lose 2 hours of your life. I don't usually regret anything, but I do regret watching this movie. I'm writing this review to warn you before you watch it. I know I wish somebody warned me before.. But everybody to his taste; some of you might consider this interesting, some of you might like violent movies-for whatever reason-but there really are LOTS of disturbing scene, most of the movie is, really. At the end of the movie, my first thought was " I REALLY hate that movie.", followed by " This movie makes me lose faith in humanity.." and "My stomach is kinda upset now". The trailer of the movie was OK-that's how I got to watch it in the first place-but now that I take a second look and read the comments too, I realize that I could have done a little research before that and spared myself some time.

A disgusting film in every respect

Author: robert-temple-1 from United Kingdom
4 August 2014

There are not enough unfavourable adjectives to describe this disgusting, revolting, offensive, and deeply sick film. Presumably people are watching it because Nicole Kidman is in it. But she has really demeaned herself by having anything to do with this project. She plays a 'wild Southern girl' who laughs with a crazy look in her eye, but all her performance amounts to is simply a good Juliette Lewis impersonation. OK, so Kidman has proved that despite being an Australian, she can imitate an American Southern accent of a 'poor white trash' girl passably well. Isn't she clever? So versatile! But everything about the film, and that certainly includes the psychologically deranged character she plays, is so utterly disgusting that Kidman might as well make a new career for herself in hard core porn films, if that is the kind of admiration she is seeking. So low does she sink, that at one point we actually see a closeup of urine pouring out of her backside. Well that is good for the perverts who get excited by urinating women. Well done, Kidman, that's a great step forward in your career. The director, co-producer and co-writer of this horrible film is called Lee Daniels. I would not want to be his psychiatrist. And I hope I never meet him, as I would feel required to disinfect myself all over. John Cusack has also demeaned himself by playing a psychopathic killer so intensely that the lust to kill slops all over the screen like treacle. David Oyelowo is meant to be playing a good guy, but his acting style is so irritating, artificial and over-mannered that he should give up film acting if he cannot do better than that. Scott Glenn is his usual sturdy self, with not much of a part, however. Zac Efron does a good job as a decent young man who becomes obsessed by the decadent and insane Kidman character. Matthew McConaughey also does well in an over-the-top role as Efron's brother. The best, and only sympathetic, performance is the film is by Macy Gray, a very sensitive black actress. She could do with a bit of speech therapy because it is not always possible to hear her words distinctly, and I am not referring to the heavy accent required for her character but to her apparent inability to enunciate so that an audience can make out everything she is saying. Otherwise, she glows like a pearl in this dung heap of a film.

Séduit par le nom du réalisateur et par le casting...g zappé au bout de 40mn

*

*

Unfathomably awful

Author: thoward1223 from Virginia, USA
2 April 2006
 

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Just horrifying. I like Cameron Crowe, I sat through Vanilla Sky (although mostly just for the soundtrack), and I think Orlando Bloom is likable enough. But I wanted this movie to end more than any movie I've seen in years. It just seemed like one big contrived emotional breakdown in search of a catharsis that never arrives.

Here's the thing. The last section of the movie -- in which Orlando Bloom's character follows the map laid out by Kirsten Dunst's creepy stalker-ish character to finally open up and find himself and blah blah blah -- was also awful, and staggeringly dumb. BUT -- that could have been the basis for a real movie. Not the map part, just the wandering around and finding himself part. Maybe not an original movie, but a real one. Instead it was just one more disconnected sequence tacked onto a whole slew of them, and it made me angry that the movie was made in the first place.

Hated it.

72 out of 128 people found the following review useful:

A study in the overuse of cloying, trite plot devices

Author: yegdad from Edmonton, Canada
8 July 2006

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Every time I thought this movie couldn't get worse, it did.

For this reason alone, I kept watching: morbid fascination.

It was a slow-motion traffic accident.

Stereotyping small town locals as one-dimensional hicks is such a lame and tiresome plot device. NOT stereotyping would have made things interesting. (For example, the movie "Junebug" shows how apparently simple town folk can have depth.) There must have been some temporal anomalies from Star Trek afoot in Elizabethtown -- how else can you explain:

- how Claire Colburn (Kirsten Dunst) was able assemble a scrapbook/map and accompanying 42-hour CD music mix (complete with her perky voice-over!) while also spending all her time seducing Drew Baylor (Orlando Bloom), chatting him up over the phone, and saving guests from a burning hotel?

- how Hollie Baylor (Susan Sarandon) was able to take stand-up comic classes, tap dancing lessons, learn organic cooking techniques and auto-repair, and travel from Oregon to Kentucky all in the time between hearing of the death of her husband and burying him? (Her scene on stage was the most painful part of this "traffic accident". I just couldn't take my eyes away!)

- how a running shoe product launch could possibly cost a billion dollars and why 28-year old is given a billion dollars to play with in the first place?

Finally, the road trip is the final offender.

Because the movie couldn't dredge up any of its own meaningful iconic symbolism, it tries to cheat by force-feeding movie-goers with motherhood Americana. The movie takes us to the Lorraine Motel balcony where Martin Luther King was assassinated -- presumably, the audience would be loath to criticize a motherhood icon such as Marting Luther King and -- the producers hope -- would be loath to criticize the movie.

They're wrong -- we can tell the difference.

(Notice that Tom Cruise is one of the producers so, on several levels, we shouldn't be so surprised by this.)

20 out of 32 people found the following review useful:

Dull as a cloudy day at the beach !!

Author: statajack from United Kingdom
15 December 2006

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

With OB playing the lead role, I was hoping to get a glimpse of his acting prowess in a film that doesn't involve swords, arrows, ugly creatures and fast action camera-work. The first ten minutes started quite well, with possible undertones of some ironic black humour coming up. He gets fired for losing his employer the best part of USD 1 billion. Fair do's ! Then he's on a jumbo jet heading for Kentucky, the only passenger, and the stewardess (KD) tells him with a straight face that he saved all their jobs for being on that flight. Oh Oh ! The alarm bells start ringing. Was that supposed to be serious, or an attempt at humour !! The film then switches to Elizabethtown, and dies completely........

The relationship development between OB and KD is completely nauseating, and so endlessly boring with clichéd dialogue. It goes on and on and on, with no meaningful or interesting word from either of them. I pity both these actors for having to spout the most monotonous and diabolical script I have heard in years.

After an hour and a quarter, I couldn't stand anymore, and switched it off.

A few nights later I returned to the rest of the 2-hour film hoping that it would get going. It just got worse. Susan Sarandon at a sickly American-style funeral party doing a daft little jig on stage, and finally OB's road trip which made me want to tear out teeth.

The bit that bugged me the most, we never find out how OB lost his employer a large wad of cash !! If anybody wants a free DVD, you can have my copy with pleasure, otherwise it's going for a flying lesson out the window !

26 out of 45 people found the following review useful:

Just terrible!!!

Author: jyoti-gori from United States
10 April 2006

This movie was just awful. I had such high hopes for Orli, but man, he's like the vacusuck of personality--he pulls personality out of other people! So, they paired him with an overly gregarious KD in an attempt to level out to semi-normal people but to a very ill effect. She was annoying, he was boring, the family was farcical, the setting was a shallow stereotype of mid-America, and the attempt to evoke an emotional tie with the main character by having his father die was absurdly misplaced since the character himself obviously didn't seem to care a whole heck of a lot.

I hate not finishing movies, stories, what have you. But this, I could not bear to sit through. After cleaning half my house in sheer boredom during the first half, I finally turned it off to find something better to do, like counting the dog hairs on the back of my couch ...

9 out of 12 people found the following review useful:

it amazes me that there is a market for this

Author: robotgrass from Canada
25 June 2007

Just a horrible attempt at a feel good movie which losses it luster after the first 12 minutes. The most annoying unresolved issues that were simply not addressed included:

1. What went so terribly wrong with the design of a single shoe that could possibly cost a company one billion dollars? A mystery...!

2. Why was the father who passed away such a revered individual? Why did a whole town to come to a halt, pay tribute, and mourn?? Come on Mr / Ms. Scriptwriter; give us something here...was he a war hero? Did he foil a bank robbery?

3. How is it possible that the main character was the only one on a 747 ? Has anyone out there ever been the only one on a major airliner going to where ever?

These points are not details, they are gnawing issues which demand answers.

Someone out there wasted two hours of my life, and I am not happy.

30 out of 55 people found the following review useful:

Get out of Elizabethtown...

Author: Oliver-50 from United States
4 February 2006

Watching 'Elizabethtown' is in many ways like watching a young strange child approach you in the supermarket and start yapping your ear off. Sure it's kind of cute, but you just wish it would shut up and leave you alone.

Orlando Bloom plays Drew who after being responsible for the loss of nearly a billion dollars at a his company, decides he wants to kill himself. Just as he is about to commit the act he learns of his fathers death and has to go to Kentucky to arrange the burial plans. As luck would have it he meets a plucky young flight attendent and during an all night phone conversation they fall head over heels in love. Isn't that nice.

It's hard to attack a film whose intentions are so good-natured and sweet - but boy, do I need to. It's very hard to appreciate the happy moments in a film when even the scenes where people are hurting reek of tacky sentiment. As example - when Bloom decides to strap a knife to his stationary bike and kill himself; Bloom has this smirky pretty-boy daftness as if winking at the audience saying "I'm not really going to die, don't worry" and it kills a scene that with a stronger actor could have worked.

Throughout the entire film Bloom lovingly sulks and cheerily grins at every turn. He is a weak actor who can't even come close to the heart of a character. He can pull off action fare like Lord of the Rings or Pirates of the Caribbean - mostly because there are stronger actors to assist, and it's physical work - but he is the whole show here and it's a performance to scoff at, not laugh with.

On to Kirsten Dunst; a much more credible actor that Bloom who as well manages to fall flat on her face. Perhaps it's the southern accent that fades in and out with every passing scene. Or maybe it's the way she plays ditzy one moment and then switches to deep-thinker the next. Whatever the case it's a performance that is cheerily annoyingly off balance. It makes one wonder what the wonderful Amy Adams (Junebug) could have done with this role. Dunst can usually find sympathy in overbearing characters (Crazy/Beautiful, Virgin Suicides, Spiderman) but just like Bloom, all she has to do is look pretty and smile for the camera.

As for Cameron Crowe who's hollow screenplay is so cheerily in your face happy - it becomes devoid of any credible sentiment. This, much like the slightly better but still awful Singles - is just another excuse for Crowe to make a great mix tape. The music is terrific, but we're not paying to listen to a great soundtrack, we're paying to watch a movie. And this movie is so excruciatingly awful that's it's a waste of some fine music.

7 out of 10 people found the following review useful:

One of the Worst Movies of my Long Lifetime

Author: ld8t from United States
7 August 2007

Hell, I'm even FROM Elizabethtown (Kentucky), where most of this dog takes place, and even that fact couldn't keep me awake. Doggedly slow pace, mind-numblingly boring characters (especially the flight attendant played by the leading lady), hideous writing, no conflict, no nothing. Just two hours of dumb. My wife and I (she has also spent some time in Elizabethtown, or "E-Town" as it's known in Kentucky) can't understand how such an execrable movie got some good reviews and some good WOM. The positive comments on this site mystify us further. I don't think further words are necessary, but the IMDb just bounced my review for not being long enough -- minimum of eight lines, it said. I can't even imagine any way "Elizabethtown" could merit eight lines of criticism, but here are some tries. Thumbs down! Blech! Sheesh! Enough?

28 out of 52 people found the following review useful:

Worst movie of the year!

Author: Samantha Clemans from United States
11 February 2006

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I just watched Elizabethtown last night, and all day today I have been thinking of all the reasons why this movie was the worst movie I have seen all year.

*First of all, the creators of this film were totally trying to rip off the movie Garden State, and they did a horrible job at it! the whole fact that Drew's dad died and he went back to a small town to visit family and to "try and find himself" is totally ridiculous and almost an exact replica of Garden State.

*Second, the acting was LAME!!! Orlando Bloom should stick to Pirates of the Caribbean or Lord of the Rings, he definitely does not do well in phony love stories. Kirsten Dunst was totally annoying, the whole camera picture thing she did, was stupid, and it makes me hate her as an actress....ughhh.

*Third, Alec Baldwin was in it! how low can you go??!! *fourth, I just didn't believe that there are characters like these in real life. the way the actors talk with each other was simply just phony and not genuine.

*Fifth and for all, the plot was ridden with holes. Conversations characters had were unrealistic and unimportant. I feel like Cameron Crowe just watched Garden State and decided like he could steal the ideas from the movie and make a ton of money off of it So if you want to see a really lame, boring, horribly acted movie, watch this one, otherwise read a book or watch a truly good movie. Don't waste your time!!!!

45 out of 86 people found the following review useful:

Waste of time

Author: Pamsterdam from Netherlands
6 December 2005

I didn't even have high expectations of this movie. I just wanted to sit back and enjoy a typical boy-meets-girl boy-likes-girl boy-gets-girl movie. How hard can it be to make another romcom? Well, very, apparently. For starters, it is extremely slow-paced. It just doesn't set off, drags on forever and simply won't end. Every time the romance kicks in, the story switches to another family-related and totally non-interesting subject. The scene of Mitch Baylor's memorial service was the absolute limit. I can just see my mother give away a show of stand-up comedy and tap-dancing on stage in front of a bunch of family members she hasn't spoken to in 17 years, when her beloved husband has just died. Yeah right. Why on earth did Susan Sarandon sign up for this?? She looked great, but shouldn't have lowered herself to this level. As for our golden couple, Kirsten and Orlando, I didn't buy it. When she was standing behind the mike, yelling "I like you!", it just didn't arrive. And her constantly making these imaginary photographs was the most annoying thing ever!! Sorry to say, but she's just not hot enough for Orlando. Which brings me to the one thing worth looking at in this movie: Orlando Bloom. And that's just for his looks, not his acting. Steer clear of this movie!

7 out of 11 people found the following review useful:

There's something worse than a failure and a fiasco. It is called "Elizabethtown"

Author: Galina from Virginia, USA
22 October 2007

I've seen four movies directed Cameron Crowe and I like three of them very much, "Jerry Maguire", "Almost Famous" (which is one of the best films of last years), and "Vanilla Sky" which was a successful remake and very interesting mysterious movie. Crowe's latest, Elizabethtown (2005), though, was one of the most horrifying and embarrassing watching experiences I've ever had and I've seen thousands of movies. I always try to (and usually able to) find some redeeming values even in the movies that I strongly dislike but I found nothing to like, to be involved with, to identify with in "Elizabethtown". In the opening scene, Phil DeVoss, (Alec Baldwin), the owner of the multi-billion shoe company and Drew Baylor's (Orlando Bloom) boss predicted that "sh*t will hit the fence". He was right in his prediction. I think Baldwin was the luckiest actor because that opening scene was his only scene and he did not have to participate in the "embarassmenttown". I can see that Cameron Crowe wanted to make a film that celebrates life, with the main character sorting out his priorities, realizing what is really important in life and meeting his true love. Perhaps... but I believe that Crowe has failed miserably, at least for me. More than anything I wanted this movie to end. Everything and everyone seemed un-natural and false, the dialogs, the ridiculous un-involving situations, the unfunny and tasteless jokes, the complete lack of chemistry between two romantic leads. Orlando Bloom was quite tolerable but Kirsten Dunst's character Claire simply scared and annoyed me; she was sooo good and sweet, and kind, and supportive that it made me cringe every time she was on the screen. The road trip across America that Drew took in the last 30 minutes of the film in search of himself or whatever, has offered few interesting historical places but they would be better presented on the Travel channel. The most memorable (but for the wrong reasons) single moment in the movie belongs to Susan Sarandon as Hollie Baylor. Sarandon is a wonderful actress and a beautiful woman. Time has no power over her. She is the closest to screen Goddess we have and she had a 10 minutes monologue at her husband's funeral which is easily the most ridiculous and stupidest scene I've seen (and heard) in the movies in the long time. Perhaps, there was a good movie, funny and moving, subtle and sweet hiding inside the monster called "Elizabethtown" but hard as I tried I could not find it.

*

*

Uncomfortable to watch, Ridiculous and WEIRD!!!!

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!

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Stay away, Jennifer Aniston is kissing goodbye her career...

Author: cablooie from United Kingdom
18 May 2014

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I mean, 90% of the time you will think "did they really think this stuff can be funny? Or even interesting? Is it really possible to get THIS low?". Folks, if the story sucks, how can the movie be good? This dough is the ultimate cloned-stereotype festival. Not funny at all, incredibly boring when not disturbing here and there. In spite of her age, looks like Jennifer Aniston would do anything to get undressed. After all she didn't spend all that money on cosmetic surgery to keep the silicone into her shirt, so any script requiring her to drop her clothes is a yes, regardless how crappy it is. OK, she has never been as gorgeous as Angelina Jolie, but she used to be somewhat averagely pretty. Now her face is made of rubber making her look like Gary Busey, yet another Hollywood transvestite, hurray...

As about the movie, it's cheesier than cheddar. It seems the ideas for funny gags and interesting story simple didn't come out, so they just tried to clone Borat hardly being nearly as funny, when not spreading wrong, twisted values: life sucks unless it's hi voltage, people who don't like reality shows and fast foods all are brainless weirdos talking to trees, you have to stay with your wife regardless whom she sleeps with. If you can't make em laugh at least strike em hard. Undelivered, too boring to strike anybody. And no, all wrong. Life is good in big cities as well provided you aren't an imbecile, I detest crappy TV shows and junk food and I am not a weirdo, if anybody's wife sleeps with another man they are going to kick her out goodbye. Empty story without any sense, dull characters and not a single laugh. I ended up hoping some random lunatic would come up and kill everybody, just to have some actual facts I could mention in this review, but it simply didn't happen. Nothing interesting happens in this bad clone of the lowest spoof flicks with unfunny comedians.

I noticed some reviewers gave this a 10. Either part of the crew or complete morons. If you give this crap a 10/10, how much do you assign to a real comedy, say "A Fish Called Wanda" ? 650/10 ?

Stay away, nothing can be this terrible on TV anyway. If it really sucks, it's the same stuff.

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Not worth it, only 2 mins of comedy

Author: latinohabanero from London
7 January 2014

I though the film was a bit cheese, I didn't buy it and it annoyed me quite a bit - the nudity was quite bad, the plot quite weak and honestly I would literally kill myself if I had to pay to watch this.

What's the point of making a romantic comedy if all it has is nudity (in which nobody has the right figure for the screen) and I know we mostly judge by shape and looks these days but it was all Eeeeeeewwwwww!

I originally though it was worth the watch since it got quite a lot of bad reviews and a few good ones but the ones that liked it were annoyed at those who didn't so I had to see what the fuss was all about and damn, it had bad reviews for a reason, if you want to get bored and waste your time then be my guest but you've been warned fellas.

12 out of 24 people found the following review useful:

Stupidest movie I watched in the last decade!

Author: Samer b
30 March 2012

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.

13 out of 26 people found the following review useful:

Horrid!

Author: jhartman1-2 from United States
3 September 2012

This film was painful to watch!

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.

47 out of 94 people found the following review useful:

Dreadful,...

Author: Saad Khan from Pakistan
11 June 2012

Wanderlust – TRASH IT (D) It won't be wrong to say that Wanderlust is Jennifer Aniston and Paul Rudd's worst movie till date. There is no story and even they don't utilize the R-Rating in their best benefits. For Jennifer, if she is not comfortable with the R-rated scenes she should not have done this movie. I think they did cut the Justin Theroux and Jennifer Aniston sex scene since they've started dating in real life. Anyways it wouldn't have made any difference but still at least it would have made sense to the story. Paul Rudd, Jennifer Aniston, Justin Thereoux, Malin Akerman all are victim of bad script and screenplay. There is nothing funny about cult or nudists as such. Simply trash this garbage. No wonder its one of the biggest duds of 2012.

1 out of 3 people found the following review useful:

Offensive to brain owners

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

1 out of 3 people found the following review useful:

No One Would Lust Over This

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.

4 out of 9 people found the following review useful:

What a piece of garbage

Author: Fearinahandfullofdust from United States
23 July 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I literally sat through the entire movie and didn't laugh once. Could we stop with the Forgetting Sarah Marshall clichés, like the man forced to watch the woman participate in rituals that are sexual in nature? It wasn't funny then, and it isn't funny now. What a horribly written waste of time. How many times exactly do Paul Rudd and Jennifer Aniston plan on playing the same characters? I cannot accurately put into words how disappointed I am that I was talked into enduring this movie. Please save yourselves the misery of watching the careers of the cast slowly drown before your very eyes. Somehow its a stand-alone movie with all the quality of a straight-to-DVD sequel, and it left me full of remorse for the hour and a half I lost.

5 out of 11 people found the following review useful:

Waste of Time

Author: Ace Rawrman from United States
7 August 2012

I like to compare it to "Did You Hear About the Morgans?" plot line trying to be "Dinner for Schmucks" with forced humor that wasn't really funny. I thought the other two were watchable at some degree, but this movie was just a waste of time. There was no character development, no character attachment, just a story line I can tell you in under 5 minutes and you'd be thankful that I saved you an hour and a half of your life. This might work a TV series, but for an hour and half it went no where. Might be even worth watch the other two movies back to back then watch this one. I don't know what else to say other then this movie was a waste of time and you should not even attempt to watch it unless you are a huge fan of one of the actors.