I don't think a lot of people have
talked about the movie I'll be reviewing below. Well, there must be
reviews, but it's not used in the same sentence with movies like
Prometheus, Ted, The Avengers or Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter.
Hell, I only know one person who's even seen it, he's a friend of
mine. And he wasn't kind to it. Will I be any different or is he
right?
At any rate, let's look at Wanderlust.
George (Paul Rudd) and Linda (Jennifer
Aniston) are a married couple with high hopes for the future in their
respective careers. When things take a bad turn, they go to live with
George's brother, Rick (Dan Marino). On the way, they encounter the
commune Elysium and choose to live their lives there instead. Until
they find out commune living may not be for them.
I once saw a poster for this film at my
local cinema, only to find next time it had been taken down. My first
thought was “I guess it's going straight to DVD instead”, which
turned out to be the case, since next month, there it was. After
watching it... yeah, I can see why they made that decision.
It isn't the worst movie I've seen this
year, but there's a lot that could have done to fix this movie.
For starters, I'm confused about what
the movie is trying to say. At first, I thought the central message
would be “People need to be more carefree in their lives, and worry
less about money or material goods, so embrace a simpler life”,
which I would be fine with. But the people at the commune... well, a
lot of them are douchebags. They pick on George because he's not
“attuned” to their lifestyle (he's been there barely two weeks,
what do you want from him?), like in a scene in which George and
Linda are confessing truths, and everyone seems to gang up on George,
even though he's more in the right than Linda.
Now, Linda makes documentaries for a
living, which is fine, more power to her. And George worked in an
office, often supporting the two of them. And this is somehow a bad
thing? I'm sorry, but I'm on the side of “Money= good”. And this
isn't a sexism thing, I'd support Linda if she was the one working in
an office. Linda criticizes George for going to that job, since it
pissed him off and he doesn't even have it anymore. To address the
second point first, George's boss was arrested, so the company ceased
to be. His lack of job happened through no fault of his own, and she
knew that. But to the first point, THAT'S HOW THE WORKING WORLD
WORKS! It's not all fun and games, it's often very demanding, that
comes with the territory of the working stiff. But we do it because
we need the money to survive in a world that doesn't run on dreams.
Sometimes, you have to put your own happiness and passion aside to
carve out a living. So for her to call him out on this just screams
ingratitude and self-centeredness.
Also, for something that celebrates a
lot of freedom, there are apparently rules and things that are
frowned upon. Like when George kills a fly, something that comes
naturally to a lot of us, and he gets chastised for this act, being
compared to a murderer of soldiers. Again, he's been there for under
a fortnight, he hasn't conformed to your meaningless lifestyle yet.
But also, for a place that lets people be free, you're kind of
pushing him into your way of life, aren't you?
That's pretty much why I hate fictional
characters with that attitude, one that's so “free and in tune with
nature”: they're hypocrites, but often get portrayed as being in
the right because their outlook on life is less aggressive.
Speaking of poorly done characters, the
“villains”. A bunch of developers who want to take the land of
Elysium and make it into a casino. Oh wow, wonder how this will play
out? You're truly breaking new ground, here. So, naturally, the king
douche of the hippies, Seth (Justin Theroux) has to turn out to be in
league with the bad guys, to drive it further home how much we want
him to drown in a lake.
Also, one of the hippies wants to throw
a rock at the developers. Oh, so George kills a fly and gets treated
like he's a future Hitler but you want to throw a rock and nobody
pulls a “What the Hell is wrong with you” on her?
Not helping that particular scene is
Linda going topless to support the cause of keeping Elysium safe, in
front of a news crew. It's not so much the her-going-topless aspect,
but the reactions of the news team back on the show, most of them are
lewd comments made towards the lone female of the team. Uh, guys?
You're on the air. And even if you weren't, that's a sexual
harassment suit right there.
One last thing: early on in the film,
one of the people at the commune, Eva (Malin Akerman) shows
attraction to George and after he and Linda agree to experiment with
other people while still being married, she goes off and sleeps with
Seth (that's yet another problem I have with this film, since she
sleeps with him a few hours later), and encourages George to go after
Eva. So he spends a few minutes psyching himself up in front of the
mirror, and keeps talking about his penis and what he's going to do
with it. I didn't time in, but the whole thing goes on for far too
long. It's almost as bad as some of the jokes on Family Guy, with its
padded length. It wasn't funny from the start, and it's not funny at
the end. And he ends up saying more in front of Eva anyway, just when
I thought they finally killed the joke.
So, you're probably asking, did I like
ANYTHING from this movie?
Well, acting-wise, Paul Rudd does a
pretty good job. But then, much like I'll discuss in my next log
post, he's playing a role that's not too far removed from his usual
schtick. And I hate to say that, as I love that guy! He's one of my
favourite actors still present on the scene today.
Jennifer Aniston, I think she's gotten
better since her days on Friends. Now, I didn't hate Friends (it's
actually a really good show, I need new copies of the entire run on
DVD too), but Rachel was my least favourite of the six leads, so it's
nice to see her so removed from that role. That being said, if you
want a great movie with her in a leading role, I recommend The Good
Girl (or even in a really good supporting role, Horrible Bosses).
The big draw for me, however, is Alan
Alda. That guy's awesome. And in this movie, he's easily the best
thing about it. Despite being one of the founders of the commune,
he's way less restrictive than the other members. Actually, that
could make for a metaphor on how the messages from our elders get
polluted and corrupted by young people who think they know how the
world works.
Alan's character, Carvin, doesn't get
involved with a lot of what's going on, but he doesn't come down on
anyone like a disciplinarian. In fact, he even breaks a few of the
rules of the commune itself, mostly by sneaking off to a diner every
Sunday for various plates of meat. His conversation with Linda is the
highlight of the movie, with Carvin coming across as a little
fatherly and wise, without disparaging her former lifestyle. The fact
that Alan Alda is the last name in the opening credits seems
disrespectful to me. The man was Hawkeye Pierce for the love of God!
So yeah, the cons outweigh the pros.
It's not a terrible movie, but I wouldn't blame you if you wanted to
rent it or watch it on TV. Or skip it altogether. 2/5
No comments:
Post a Comment