82 user reviews
6.1
/10
| Average votes grouped by age and by sex: | |||||||
| Age: | 1-12 | 13-17 | 18-25 | 26-35 | 36-49 | 50+ | Total |
| Men: Votes: |
- 0 |
6 2 |
7.8 6 |
5.5 4 |
6.1 10 |
6.1 12 |
6.3 34 |
| Women: Votes: |
- 0 |
7 1 |
7.7 4 |
5.9 12 |
5.4 14 |
6.8 13 |
6.2 44 |
| Total: Votes: |
- 0 |
6.3 3 |
7.8 10 |
5.8 16 |
5.7 24 |
6.3 26 |
6.1 82 |
| Total includes those who didn't specify sex. | |||||||
Reviews from 1 to 50 (total: 82)
It was worth seeing. A true lite comedy that is with meaningful scenes and decision making - Then again that's life!
| 7/10 | shazjoao@ - 1728 reviews 19.6.2012 |
Another movie that shows just how unfunny Jennifer Aniston is! I am very glad the ratings of this movie are bad because this movie doesn't really deserve any good hype at all. This movie Wanderlust does have a couple of good laughs here and there, but that still doesn't change the fact that this movie is stupid and overly crude. I know some crude movies that are very funny like Knocked Up, Forgetting Sarah Marshall, The 40 Year Old Virgin and Bridesmaids are good, but the reason those movies are so good is because they know how to use the crude humor, but this movie just uses it to no end almost every joke is crude or every joke involves nudity or drugs. It's just like the movie My Best Friends Girl, that movie is all crude jokes and that's what made the movie really stupid and that's what makes this movie really stupid. If you think the performances will make this movie some what good you're wrong because the entire cast in this movie sucks, Paul Rudd may have delivered some funny jokes and he's probably the only thing in this movie that's good, but even Paul Rudd was a little over the top and even at times kind of stupid. So this movie Wanderlust I do not recommend, it's really unoriginal and really boring at times so skip this one and go see a better movie.
| 4/10 | lil_shorty_69er@ - 391 reviews 13.6.2012 - age: 18-25 |
I loved this movie more than expected. It is heightened reality created for humour - right up there with The Hangover for dividing audience opinion. (I loved that one, too!) I chucked all the way through, and laughed out loud a lot. And was in hysterics a few times with tears rolling down my cheeks when Paul Rudd was psyching myself up in front of the mirror. I'd see it again just for that scene, and the one that followed. I usually hate "drugs taken by accident" scenarios but this psychedelic trip was perfectly rendered and edited.
| 10/10 | seesamdance@ - 17 reviews 4.4.2012 - age: 50+ |
So funny, will be going again to see w/friend. Funny, good break from everyday life. Dream a little people, don't be so prudish and have some fun. All the movies about killing and violence are bad for you.
| 9/10 | arizonapam@ - first review 1.4.2012 - age: 50+ |
Great comedy. Life experience. Good for a laugh and removes you from our difficult world and problems for a short time!!
| 8/10 | sandra@ - 2 reviews 28.3.2012 - age: 50+ |
This movie is hilarious, not a typical Jennifer Aniston movie. It has a heart with a good laugh at the hippy dippy flakey!!! If you happened to be living in the West Coast of Canada then you might just relate.
| 9/10 | cootiebaby8@ - 51 reviews 22.3.2012 - age: 36-49 |
It's totally goofy, a great laugh, nearly unbelievable, but, in this day and age with all the stress of real life, more than a few of us can totally sympathize with these two "try-hards"... who just get fed up and try out a "different" style of life. I say go see it... if nothing else, you'll leave with a smile.
| 9/10 | anniemae21@ - first review 20.3.2012 - age: 26-35 |
Jennifer needed the money. Crude language completely unnecessary, probably to pass time. I did not laugh, was bored and waiting fot the movie to end. It's a waste of your time and money.
| 2/10 | mhadrien@ - first review 18.3.2012 - age: 50+ |
I was hesitant to see this, as was my boyfriend, however we thought it was funny and a good time. I'm surprised of the negative ratings, we would see it again and I don't usually watch movies more than once.
| 7/10 | frisky_in_the_sun@ - 2 reviews 18.3.2012 - age: 36-49 |
Story line was alright, but the language and obnoxiousness of gestures overwhelmed (and I have no problem with language) and took away from the story. I feel this film was very beneath Jennifer Aniston. If producers/directors whatever, had been more creative rather than resorting to crudity, I'd have enjoyed the movie far more.
| 5/10 | cobywle@ - first review 12.3.2012 - age: 36-49 |
We plan to see it again. It is light entertainment with a more important question about how you live your life.
| 9/10 | dduffus@ - 4 reviews 12.3.2012 - age: 50+ |
Don't know why everyone is down on this film. It's a fun comedy with some truisms in a midst of crummy CGI fantasy movies and just plain bad run of films. This is a refreshing break. Go see it and have a laugh instead of indigestion.
| 8/10 | franknfriend@ - 18 reviews 12.3.2012 - age: 26-35 |
BAD BAD BAD! And I usually love everything, but this movie sucked!! I guess Jennifer Aniston really needed the money.
| 4/10 | guccirushgirl@ - 6 reviews 11.3.2012 |
I enjoyed this movie much more than I thought I would. It was a great date movie with some good laughs. It wasn't laugh out loud funny but it definitely had some funny spots. I liked the actors and the story flowed. Worth seeing.
| 7/10 | staciep@ - 84 reviews 11.3.2012 - age: 26-35 |
It's not a great movie, but not a horrible one either. It just feels like it could have been much funnier, with many good comedic actors not being utilized. Jennifer Aniston gives her best performance in a while, but as a whole the movie is frustratingly average.
| 6/10 | andrew_atkinson_@ - 36 reviews 9.3.2012 - age: 18-25 |
I thought that this movie was very funny! Lots of very funny scenes.
| 8/10 | juanitacao@ - 9 reviews 9.3.2012 - age: 50+ |
Very funny and light. The adult comedy about relationship and what's the best way of living. I will definitely recommend to watch this movie.
| 8/10 | alena.lissina@ - 163 reviews 9.3.2012 - age: 26-35 |
Had some funny scenes. Not bad but could have been a little better story line.
| 6/10 | kgaley5@ - 2 reviews 8.3.2012 - age: 36-49 |
This was an entertaining movie with lots of laughs for a bunch of dope smoking hippies.
| 8/10 | army_and_trucker@ - 291 reviews 8.3.2012 - age: 36-49 |
Almost didn't see it based on reviews here. My wife and I had a good time and some good laughs. Haters! It's not bad!
| 7/10 | jayque@ - 3 reviews 8.3.2012 - age: 36-49 |
Despite the poor ratings, my friend and I had a lot of laughs, thought it was fun and well worth seeing. Jennifer is good, as usual.
| 7/10 | mallydee@ - 17 reviews 7.3.2012 - age: 50+ |
Funny and entertaining - good adult entertainment for a great price. Some of you are so negative about these movies, truly sad that you cannot find some good in them.
| 7/10 | mew53@ - 23 reviews 7.3.2012 - age: 50+ |
Hard to see why Jennifer Aniston did this movie, plot and story very lacking. Boring movie.
| 5/10 | richg@ - 4 reviews 7.3.2012 - age: 36-49 |
This movie was definitely not worth the money we paid to see it (and we went on "cheapy Tuesday")!! I normally like Jennifer Aniston movies but this was awful and uncomfortable to watch. The bad scenes seemed to go on and on and the few good scenes were very short. Go see This Means War instead.
| 4/10 | calsal@ - first review 7.3.2012 - age: 36-49 |
This movie was hillarious. Loved it from start to finish. I don't know why people rated this movie so unfairly.
| 10/10 | troy@ - 10 reviews 7.3.2012 - age: 18-25 |
Wanderlust is a complete BUST. Do yourself a favor and don't go and see this movie. You will never regret it. Why Jennifer Aniston and Alan Alda ever accepted to play in this movie only they will ever know. This film should never have been made. A waste of time and money!
| 1/10 | viger@ - 5 reviews 7.3.2012 - age: 50+ |
Worst movie ever, you need to be high just to tolerate it. Felt like brain cells died by end of movie.
| 1/10 | saranpalbajaj@ - first review 6.3.2012 - age: 26-35 |
As a Jennifer fan it was great to see. Storyline was good and humorous, and interactions with Rudd were spot on.
| 7/10 | wing.rider@ - 34 reviews 6.3.2012 - age: 50+ |
A disappointing movie with what I'd consider to be "A" list actors. Some funny parts but there really isn't much of a plot. Very predictable with shock-value nudity that was in poor taste. I did enjoy the out-takes though.
| 4/10 | pauloretta@ - 2 reviews 6.3.2012 - age: 50+ |
[ATTENTION: This review reveals content of the movie.]
It really wasn't as funny as expected, or funny at all. All of the humour was very in your face and nobody in the theatre even chuckled. Unfortunately a neurotic male who won't make love to a beautiful female, really?
| 5/10 | pjfletcher@ - 5 reviews 6.3.2012 - age: 36-49 |
Great movie! So funny. Paul Rudd is so good!
| 8/10 | brokenenglish27@ - first review 6.3.2012 - age: 36-49 |
Not worth it. Even when there are no alternatives - skip this one. The acting (except for Aniston, and even she is getting older) is poor all around, and the story is non-existent. Cliché characters are present in abundance and the moral of the story is glued with a big fat band-aid.
| 2/10 | drozzy@ - 40 reviews 4.3.2012 - age: 26-35 |
Really horrible movie. Waste of time, money and bad mood till the end of the day.
| 2/10 | neoxi33@ - first review 3.3.2012 - age: 26-35 |
[ATTENTION: This review reveals content of the movie.]
This is another juvenile, shock-value movie filled with crude and rude and highly sexual/demeaning "humour". There are MANY full frontals for men and woman. Parents be warned this is not a movie for kids or even young teens. This is the last Jennifer Aniston movie we'll see.
| 3/10 | notimpressed@ - first review 3.3.2012 - age: 36-49 |
Funny movie with Paul Rudd and Jennifer Aniston very well. The movie has its dull moments but it is worth seeing.
| 7/10 | luciano.santos@ - 46 reviews 3.3.2012 - age: 36-49 |
Aniston and Rudd are hilarious in this awesome comedy!
| 8/10 | goosebumps84@ - 187 reviews 3.3.2012 - age: 13-17 |
It was really bad. With that cast, I would've expected a much better movie. I laughed maybe twice or thrice during the whole movie. Bad story, bad dialog and just plain stupid really. I don't know why I didn't walk out.
| 4/10 | sidnator@ - 3 reviews 3.3.2012 - age: 13-17 |
7.5 but there isn't an option so I'll be nice and give it a 8. Its funny, way better then Paul's last movie, our idiot brother, got a good point to it, all the right elements are there but I feel like Jennifer was the weakest part, she isnt comedy she is just put into comedies and wish they went with a different actress who can really go better with Paul's comedy, Jennifer was amazing in Horrible bosses but this movie just she felt out of place. Thats my only issue.
| 8/10 | no.life1allscared@ - 86 reviews 2.3.2012 - age: 18-25 |
This movie was awful for one main reason... Jennifer Aniston acting like she's a good actress!!! Don't see this movie!!
| 1/10 | balina03@ - first review 2.3.2012 - age: 26-35 |
[ATTENTION: This review reveals content of the movie.]
By the end of the movie I was laughing so hard I could hardly see where the exit was. It's great to see Alan Alda playing a genial senile hippie. The very silliness of the situations is still bringing a smile to my face. Wait till you meet the evil older brother who's made a modest fortune providing porto-toilets to the construction industry, or the commune leader obsessing on obsolete technology, or the new mother who intends to keep her infant's umbilical cord attached to its placenta in a dish. What a wonderful break from the winter doldrums!
| 9/10 | recneser@ - 2 reviews 2.3.2012 - age: 50+ |
Waste of money to spend it on this kind of movie! Also bad acting and waste of time!
| 2/10 | eva@ - first review 1.3.2012 - age: 50+ |
Disappointing. Good cast, should've been better. I was expecting a nice comedy/romance. Very Disappointed.
| 5/10 | beatriceannstarz@ - 2 reviews 1.3.2012 - age: 50+ |
So many mixed reviews. I personally thought the movie was going to be a lot better then what it was. So many missing parts that were in the trailers that weren't actually in the movie! It was not a side-splitting comedy that Paul Rudd and Jennifer Aniston are capable of (separately of course), but it had a couple of moments where I giggled. All in all... not one to pay the theatre prices, but a good at-home-date-night movie.
| 5/10 | k8eo@ - 2 reviews 1.3.2012 - age: 18-25 |
The movie was not bad, worth seeing on a cheap night.
| 6/10 | debbieparillo@ - 20 reviews 29.2.2012 - age: 26-35 |
Note: User reviews posted on this page are personal opinions of our readers. We are not responsible for their content.
Click to see more reviews:
[1-50]
[51-82]
Did you see ''Wanderlust''?
Terms and Privacy Policy under which this service is provided to you.
© 1996-2013 CinemaClock Canada Inc.
