Saturday, July 23, 2011

Friends With Benefits

Plot: Jamie (Mila Kunis) is a headhunter and she recruits Dylan (Justin Timberlake) to Manhattan for a job interview. He gets the job, and Jamie and Dylan become friends They starting hanging out and afterwhile they start having sex too. But that is too simple, so they start falling for each other. Soon Dylan takes Jamie to meet the family, and Jamie's hippy mom (Patricia Clarkson) shows up.


Review: Less than the sum of its parts. Friends with Benefits has some likeable actors and some clever jokes, but the first part of the movie is forced and tense not fun. The second part relaxes, but the plot become more sitcom when the parents arrive.

The sex scenes are especially un-natural and odd. The dialog during sex is clever and snappy, but it does not fit the rushed sex they are having -- making the whole thing weird. This sex is supposed to be emotionless and "like playing tennis," but it is worse than that.

There are some good things. Mila and Justin are likeable and cute, plus the dialog is pretty witty. I liked how Justin gets goofy sometimes and sings. Woody Harrelson plays a super gay GQ writer, and he is the great -- the funniest guy in the movie. I liked the art direction: the framed art and the all the video screens were pretty cool.

The movie does not have a regular soundtrack, and I wonder if music would have helped the mood. They spoofed other romantic comedies' soundtrack. Justin should have sung more.

The sex without a relationship theme was done better in January's No Strings Attached, with Natalie Portman and Ashton Kuscher.  Here is a funny mash-up of the trailers.  Natalie is a better actress than Mila, but Justin is a better actor than Ashton.


Cast: Justin Timberlake, Mila Kunis


Directed by: Will Glick


Rating:   2.0 stars: Less than the sum of the parts


More: Interesting how they carried some jokes through the movie, like sneezing, not wearing pants, and flash mobs. 

Even more: Flash mobs are so 2003; not new and trendy.

Yet more: There is no way there would be bad cell reception on the roof of a Manhattan skyscraper. 
.


No comments: