Add a Review

  • This movie was all things cliché and predictable. Even though you know what is coming, the honesty with life's little quirks and human behavior was incredibly well done.

    Timberlake is an okay actor. I found him to be a fresh breath in this movie. The dialogue and scenario fit his charm quite well.

    I found Mila Kunis to be quite funny, and she pulled off that cute, charming, awkwardly damaged woman, perfectly. She was chic, yet easy to relate too. Down to earth, but an air of success and confidence, hidden in all the girly dreams and fairy-tales.

    If you want something original and never done before, this is the wrong movie to watch. If you wish to appreciate a good spin on an old concept with stellar humor and humanity, it is worth the watch..
  • "Friends with Benefits" has a predictable and unoriginal rom-com storyline and its ending is pretty lame. Yet this movie coasts on the charisma of Justin Timberlake and Mila Kunis and a lot of sharp and witty dialogue. As long as these two actors are talking to each other or having sex, there is hardly ever a dull moment. And the reason for this seems to be simple enough. In most rom-coms, the actors play pretty dim-witted, boring and superficial people and therefore there is no reason to take interest in anything they may say or do. In this rom-com, "Friends with Benefits," Timberlake and Kunis play fresh, independent and smart people and for this reason we are interested in the lives they lead and what they say to each other. So "Friends with Benefits" does not have much of a plot, but that does seem to matter because on this rare occasion we are happily distracted by the magnetism of two capable on screen actors who are playing two well-craft parts.
  • I was expecting to have to compare this movie with No Strings Attached (or whatever that movie with Ashton Kutcher was) all the way through however I was pleasantly surprised that the story was a bit more complex despite the obvious parallels.

    Yes it's the typical "boy and girl decide to be friends only but end up loving each other" movie .... but I must admit that it was a lot smarter in the delivery. Timberlake and Kunis have a lot of chemistry on camera ... It's shot primarily in new york so expect the clichéd new york locations ...

    The complexity of Timberlake's character is slowly revealed through the show as opposed to being revealed in the first 3 minutes like most other movies.

    A good watch ... not slap your knee funny but certainly entertaining to the end ... clichés and all
  • anthonydapiii10 May 2020
    6/10
    Funny
    Funny with a twist of relatability and drama.

    Justin Timberlake and Mila Kunos come to the table with a stellar performance for this cliche and comical movie.

    Great job cast and crew.
  • What I can say for Friends with Benefits is that it's a cute movie that doesn't reach it's full potential. The main problem to me is that when it starts, the film is being played as satire and when it ends, it's being played straight. As a result, Friends with Benefits does not quite rise above the romantic material it mocks, but on occasion it's funny and adorable.

    Actually for a while, the movie is on fire. The opening is cleverly handled, and is a good way to grab the audiences attention. Then for the next several scenes, Mila Kunis and Justin Timberlake demonstrate charm, comfort and overall competence and end up delivering a couple of the funniest sexual encounters I've seen in years. What I like about them both is that they bring enthusiasm to whatever they do, and this film is no exception.

    Around the halfway point, the film starts to feel a little boring. with a running time of just over a hundred minutes, Friends with Benefits is not a long movie, and while it's not exactly short either, it feels shorter than it should be. There are a few hints to suggest that a longer movie was intended but the Studio may have forced a cut down. In addition to an ending that feels rushed, all the supporting characters in the story seem futile, and underwritten. Woody Harrelsson, for example, can be a really funny guy, but he's not given the material or the screen time, to make his appearance worthwhile.

    The film has it's ups, it has it's downs. It doesn't end up being a bad Rom-com, but I've seen better.
  • I was unsure what to expect going into Friends with Benefits at an advanced screening a few weeks ago. It always seemed a bit too close in plot to No Strings Attached (made extra odd as the female leads Mila Kunis and Natalie Portman had literally just starred together in Black Swan), a film that came out less than six months ago, and while the trailers looked amusing, they seemed to look a little too close to an atypical romantic comedy. But the film actually ended up surprising me. Well, the first half at least.

    Jamie (Kunis) is a headhunter in New York City who helps aspiring graphic design artist Dylan (Justin Timberlake) land a prestigious job at GQ. They become good friends, and after a discussion about their relationship failures, decide to start having sex without the relationship schmaltz (hence the titular phrase). But the good times cannot stay uncomplicated for long.

    Rather surprisingly, the first half of Friends with Benefits is a ridiculously raunchy sex comedy that is sweeter than it is crude. The dialogue and one-liners drop at a steady pace, and there is plenty of laugh out loud moments. I was genuinely surprised at just how much I was enjoying the film, and how well co-writer/director Will Gluck (who knocked Easy A out of the park last year) helped capture the tropes and stereotypes of romantic comedies, and went entirely against them. The scene that starts the initial sexual antics is a complete dissection of the genre, and seeing the film twist and turn around the familiar plot devices was wonderful to see. It made the film feel hilarious, but also made it feel like it was attempting to do something different at the same time. Adding in a couple of random cameos from notable actors was a bit wacky (which the trailers have ruined slightly), but helped add to the humour.

    Except the film comes to a screeching halt just about halfway in when Jamie and Dylan come to the all too obvious realization that they may want something more. The film then becomes drastically more dramatic, a lot less sweet, and significantly more ordinary. Even the laughs suffer, landing less with a snicker and more with a groan. Everything it does to shift itself away from the romantic comedy genre feels wasted because it falls into all of the stereotypes quicker than it poked fun at them. It almost feels like they wanted to desperately feel different, and then decided to just go the safer route as opposed to sticking with its offbeat early tactics. I was really enjoying the film significantly more than I imagined, but suddenly felt bored and totally thrown off by the drastic tonal shift.

    While sketch comedy has proved to be one of his strong suits, Timberlake seems to have a lot of trouble carrying the film. We know he has the chops to command the screen and be absolutely magnetic (we have David Fincher and The Social Network to thank for that), but here he seems to be struggling with every other scene. He lands most of his jokes well, does decently with the dramatic bits and has plenty of chemistry with Kunis, but he lacks the spark I think most people will expect him to have in this role. He comes off as just okay, and more amateur than anything else. He would have been better suited in the film as a key supporting player, as opposed to the lead.

    Kunis on the other hand, is significantly stronger and proves that her turn in Forgetting Sarah Marshall may have been an early suggestion of the formidable comedic talent she may quickly become. Gluck is not able to achieve the same level of breakthrough that he got from Emma Stone in Easy A from Kunis, but she manages to carry the film almost single handedly. Even at the script's weakest moments, she grins and pushes forward, never once appearing to be struggling as much as Timberlake does. I think my only complaint against her is that she spends a good portion of the film completely nude, yet ends up wearing all too obvious pasties under a white shirt in one scene. It seems more like a complaint against a horrendously bad editing and lighting decision than against her, but it was a scene that made her seemingly-realistic character feel a whole lot less believable.

    Patricia Clarkson and Richard Jenkins both deliver good performances, but sadly feel like they are just plagiarizing from characters they have played better in the past. Jenna Elfman (who I did not realize was still acting) does a little better in a warm and significantly low-key role as Dylan's sister Annie. But it is Woody Harrelson who steals the entire show as gay sports writer Tommy. He plays the character ridiculously over-the-top, but never feels like he is encroaching on any stereotypes. He makes it his own, and is almost too good in the role. He gets all of the film's best dialogue quips, and runs circles around everyone on screen. In more than one instance, Timberlake looks legitimately shocked at some of the things Harrelson says and gets away with. I think the film could have only benefited from including more of him.

    In the end, Friends with Benefits is both surprisingly well done and unsurprisingly ordinary. It tries so hard initially to be the anti- romantic comedy, and then just ends up falling into the same predictable elements that every other film in the genre has already done countless times before. The film is genuinely hilarious when it wants to be however, and this does save it from being a total waste. But it could have been so much more.

    7/10.
  • 2011 will probably go down as the year Hollywood tells us having F* buddies is OK and encouraged, with no less than three films this year set around the premise of pure sex without strings or emotions attached, with Love and Other Drugs and No Strings Attached setting the precedence earlier with an incredibly good looking cast in all sorts of undress - Anne Hathaway, Jake Gyllenhaal, Natalie Portman and Ashton Kutcher - and added to the list will be current IT guy and girl Justin Timberlake and Mila Kunis rolling beneath the sheets in a typical love story between the emotionally unavailable and the emotionally damaged.

    Mila Kunis stars as Jamie, a headhunter in New York who persuades her target Dylan played by Justin Timberlake to ditch his young, upstart blogging team to join GQ (how's that for a little bit of subtle advertising) in revamping its website and to infuse new content ideas. A night out prior to the offer seals the LA based Dylan to relocate and take up the offer, with plenty of activities thrown in that if it's not Jamie being his only friend in a new, big city, they would serve as activities that would fit in for an awesome date night out. Before long they become firm friends, and made a pact to keep things physical since they each have their wants, and with the other party game to get down and dirty, so begins their game of tennis (though personally I prefer analogy with, and the term "bedminton" - it involves cocks after all). After all, why complicate what would be a beautiful friendship, if sex can be treated just as sex without the emotions thrown in to mess things up?

    You know the clichéd drill by now, with things moving along fine and dandy, the hint of emotions coming into play to really turn things upside down, the narrative montage to show how frequent they mate like jackrabbits, before some large, needy episode or statements uttered that will probably reveal the true state of affairs, and the list goes on. Deny all you want, but one cannot help but to agree that the fairer sex will have things rough if pacts of this nature turn sour, and expectedly in a movie they always do, otherwise everyone will be happy without adversary, frustration and challenges to overcome and provide that change in strength of character.

    And it is this power of the cliché that absolutely calls the shots in films like these. You know what will happen, but want to see them happen anyway even though you're multiple steps ahead of every character. And it is precisely these expectations that anyone would want to see covered, and try as the filmmakers want it is the clichés that they find hard to break away from, even if characters here proclaim very early on that romance in their world shouldn't be like an unbelievable Hollywood film, but in what would be art imitating art, look who's talking to begin with. And what's with the fixation about consistently taking the shine off the captain of US Airways Flight 1549 in its emergency landing onto the Hudson River?

    Justin Timberlake is fast becoming the busy bona fide movie star since The Social Network, and continues his run with this film and In Time which will hit the screens here soon. He has that boyish charm that the camera just loves, and being a real life singer meant covering a number of songs here, from Stereophonics to Kris Kross made it look all too easy. Mila Kunis plays her role as the emotionally damaged girl with aplomb, and shares an effective chemistry with Timberlake that makes this film a delight to sit through, even if as mentioned the story's cliché and we know just about how these two nice looking people will likely get together.

    The supporting characters while one dimensional almost always threaten to steal the show, from Patricia Clarkson as Jamie's sex crazed mom extending the lifespan of a running joke involving the nationality of Jamie's unseen dad, Woody Harrelson as the gay colleague of Dylan who always have innuendos offhand to share, Jenna Elfman who plays Dylan's sister and Richard Jenkins starring as Dylan's dad who's suffering from advancing Alzheimer's disease, which is especially poignant as it deals with the subplot of how a family copes with a loved one who's behaviour develops erratically, and holding the key to a pivotal personal experience to share and turn things around.

    With Andy Samberg and Emma Stone making cameos (the latter being extremely crazy as a fanatical John Meyer fan), Friends With Benefits has its main leads to thank for in milking quite the cliché story for the masses, who are likely to make a beeline just to see those two in some down and dirty action, not that you get to see a lot to begin with anyway. Recommended, and stay tuned until after the end credits roll for more commentary when the two are sitting at a couch watching the outtakes of a DVD movie.
  • I thought the movie would have more laughs and I felt the storyline itself wasn't intriguing. The jokes were repetitive and the movie transitioned awkwardly. I'm giving it an above average rating since Kunis and Timberlake are naturally talented, and did have good chemistry. Also, the scenes of New York and LA were visually stunning. I found myself spacing out during some of the dragged out dinner table scenes or other scenes that didn't add much value to the plot. Would I recommend it? Probably not. But it wasn't a waste of time and the ending sort of summed up things fairly well.
  • I was able to see a sneak screening of this movie almost 1 month prior to it's official release. I honestly walked in simply thinking I was seeing another typical romantic comedy with my girlfriend. To my surprise it was much more.

    Timberlake plays an LA Blog Art Director who has just been recruited to work for GQ in New York by Kunis who is a headhunter. The two had great chemistry through out the movie.

    What's funny is that even though it does contain the usual Cliché scenes that most romantic adult comedies contain, it does tend to poke fun at them and have some sort of realism to the plot.

    Both Timberlake and Kunis are likable and really funny. Woody Harrelson was the best addition to support this younger cast. Harrelson plays a flamboyantly gay sports editor who goes from making sexual advances to JT, to offering him some pearls of wisdom with his love life.

    I would have to say this movie was very enjoyable and if your skeptical about seeing it in the theaters, definitely put it on your "must rent" list.
  • Kunis and Timberlake actually have good chemistry which gives this "anti" romcom a bit of charm. The storyline is basic and the premise a bit cliché. However, the characters are fun and the acting is decent. Keep expectations low and enjoy a few laughs.
  • Well not gonna lie it's far from masterpiece but if you are 16 it's perfect film to watch with your crush, and that's about all I've got to say about it. It's not funny it's not smart it's not refreshing it's just there, existing solely for people who wish they had Friends with benefits without having slightest chance with anyone.
  • I want this New York and LA life, I'm tired of North Carolina! Strange concept that seems to work or at least it seems that way. I absolutely love the soundtrack, it makes for such a feel good movie! Friends with Benefits is really funny and has a bunch of really good points throughout! Justin Timberlake and Mila Kunis are a blast as close friends.
  • So is Friends With Benefits better than No Strings Attached? Yes. And if that's all you needed to settle a bet with your friend, you can go call him up now and plan a trip to the theater July 22 to find out why.

    Justin Timberlake has proved once again that he can actually act... Pretty well, actually. And that automatically puts him lightyears ahead of Ashton Kutcher. Additionally, Justin and Mila have some excellent and convincing chemistry that really supports the film, along with a handful of jokes and hilarious cameos that make for some good laughs. But the story falls flat where it tries to parody the typical romance movie because ultimately, it adheres to the exact same chick-flick formula: Guy meets girl, they hit it off, complications arise, they fall apart, they resolve their issues, and voilà... happily ever after. And Mila's mother in the movie... where have we seen her character before? Oh that's right, literally copy+pasted from Easy A.

    I suppose you probably wouldn't expect anything more out of this movie than the run-of-the-mill romance comedy, but it's a solid one at that and worth your while if you're interested!

    7/10
  • There is a recurring adjective that is attached with Mila Kunis's character Jamie which is used by all her sex partners to their advantage i.e. she is emotionally damage. According to Justin Timberlake's character even Magnum P.I cannot solve the case of what's going through Jamie's head when she thinks relationships. What makes a person emotionally damaged is not really elaborated in the movie. She is raised by a single mother, but the quest to know who her father was, is more or less laughed off. While she breaks up with her relationship with Andy Sandberg, it seems she has enough admirers as Shaun White is shown as one of her secret admirer and she also has a passionate set of friends with whom she parties around. So what exactly is her state of being emotionally damaged related to? Or is it a statement that would help the director bring some complications with her friend that provides sexual benefits Justin Timberlake! That might be the case in this totally romantic comedy film.

    The new romantic comedy 'Friends with benefits', which does not shy away from taking a shot at mocking at every romantic comedy clichés, more or less falls into trappings of the romantic genre from the beginning. Mila Kunis (Jamie), a corporate headhunter in New York, is just out of a relationship with SNL fame Andy Sandberg, while an upcoming blogger in Los Angeles, Justin Timberlake (Dylan) is also dealing with a break up with his girlfriend played by Emma Stone. When Jamie sets up an interview for Dylan at GQ magazine, he comes up in New York and meets Jamie for the first time at the airport. Right from the beginning Jamie performs all the cute stunts a romantic comedy female lead is expected to but also balances out by mocking Hollywood's take on romance and New York. Soon after Dylan moves into NY City to take up the job, Jamie gets him into her friends circle and they both start hanging out together watching Hollywood Romantic comedies and mocking it. But they both are missing sexual intimacy in their lives and since Jamie is emotionally damaged and Dylan claims to be emotionally unavailable they both decide to have just a sexual relationship without any emotions involved.

    It's all fine and dandy till all the sex lasts for them and unfortunately for the audience as well. Once the sex dries up the movie just goes south and we are introduced to all the regular clichéd family characters. As Dylan takes Jamie to his home in Los Angeles for the 4th of July weekend, we are introduced to Dylan's good hearted elder sister Jenna Elfman (Annie) and her magic obsessed son Sam and more importantly Dylan's Alzheimer inflicted father Mr. Harper played earnestly by Richard Jenkins. The stories about Dylan's not so happy childhood is what eventually melts the heart of our emotionally damaged Jamie and they go on to have their first sexual encounter added with emotions. But these emotions are only noticed by the emotionally damaged girl, while emotionally unavailable boy clearly ignores and start off a chain reaction of complications in their friendship. So this is what is served as suspense romantic complications to our audience and since this is a pre-determined summer blockbuster the eye candy and emotionally hopeless couple have to get back together. How? Well with the usual Hollywood charm and pot full of cliché ridden sequences.

    For a movie that mocked the romantic comedy genre at regular intervals during the first half of the movie, it was quiet an irony that it had to use more or less the clichés from that same genre to bring the movie around its eventual happy ending. And for all the dissing of Katherine Heigl by Mila Kunis, she is the new Ms. Heigl for romantic comedies. Easy on eyes with magnetic screen presence Ms. Kunis has the charm to breeze through the clichés of this particular genre of films. Justin Timberlake also provides an insight of what to expect in the future in his acting career as he also elegantly passes romantic comedy test.

    As for the film, apart from the intimate relationship and scenes between Justin and Mila, it always seems to be hanging on extreme to carry some laughs. Woody Harrelson plays its Gay sports editor part with good amount of enthusiasm, but Patricia Clarkson as Mila's flirtatious sex obsessed mother just tries to be extreme and we should be thankful that few scenes from the promotional videos were edited out from the final reel. While there is another extreme moment between Justin and his wild date who tries to act as being wild in bed by licking and smelling Mr. Timberlake's armpit, which neither grosses out nor induces laughter but guarantees yawn from the audience.

    To an audience who has seen it all in this year's romantic comedy hit 'No strings attached', which was also about friends 'hooking up' just for the pleasure of the whole act; Friends with benefit has nothing new or better to offer. It glides along on the charm of its two leads, but fails to hide its flaws as a good romantic comedy entertainer.

    For more reviews visit http://cinemadose.blogspot.com/
  • Friends with Benefits is a good movie with a pretty well developed storyline and a fantastic comedic cast.I thought this would be exactly like No Strings Attached,and I really hated that movie so I wasn't going to bother watching this,but my friends told me it was much different and better,and while I didn't believe them I gave this a chance and I'm happy I did,it is much better and it isn't similar at all to No Strings Attached other than the set up of two friends having casual relations.I cared about these characters a lot and wanted them to get together,there was really great chemistry between Mila Kunis and Justin Timberlake,and there are also hilarious cameos from great comedy actors such as Woody Harrelson,Andy Samberg.Emma Stone,Rashida Jones,Jason Segel,among others.My favourite part of the movie was Richard Jenkins,he delivered a great performance and the emotional addition of him struggling with Alzheimer's was a good idea and very sweet,I cared about him more than anyone else.It isn't anything outstanding,but it's funny and certainly a better than usual romantic comedy that I would recommend to anyone looking for a good one.

    Two friends who despise romance decide to add a bit of love making to their friendship without any complications.

    Best Performance: Richard Jenkins Worst Performance: Patricia Clarkson
  • Don't waste your time on this one. A weak, predictable plot highly dependent on simulated sex scenes between the two main characters to maintain viewer interest. Of course, if you're into that kind of thing, you'd probably think this was the movie of the year. If you're looking for some depth or acting quality, you've come to the wrong film.

    And what's with Justin Timberlake? Is he gay or putting a little too much glitter on his speech to give it a gay twist? I'm not trying to be funny here because one of the running gags is that people keep asking him if he is gay. I suppose this is supposed to have us all convulsed with laughter, otherwise I don't have any idea why they are beating us to death with this angle. I suspect Mila Kunis did her best with the underdeveloped character she was given, and its the reason I rated the film so highly. Anyway, if you really want to explore the 'can men and women be friends' theme, watch the best in this genre, 'When Harry Met Sally'. At least you won't regret the time you spent watching it.
  • The movie was entirely predictable since it was, after all, a formulaic chick flick (Boy meets girl, good moments, bad moments, almost break up and then patch up leading to Happily ever after). But it was funny at times and had some poignant moments thrown in for good measure. Justin Timberlake, though he's getting typecast in fast talking smooth operator type roles, was good. Mila Kunis was better and they had pretty nice chemistry together. I like how they broke couple of stereotypes (art director, sports editor, who was probably the funniest, BTW). Her mom's character was funny as well. It won't stick with you, but it won't bore you while you're in there either. Good one to watch w/ your SO.

    6/10
  • While the movie is aware of the clichés that are thrown into the mix when making (or watching) a romantic comedy and they also play with them at the beginning (with a kind of harsh comment concerning a Miss Heigl), it does fall back on the same "mistakes" it criticizes. And while it does so with a wink (and a great "number" towards the end, which in itself is a great payoff), it does feel a bit like a cheat. The movie should have stuck to its guns.

    But with Mila Kunis and Justin Timberlake it has a great cast, that almost make you forget about those little mishaps. Even a sub-story with Richard Jenkins though, feels a bit forced. There are quite a few funny moments and there is no doubt where this will lead, but it could have been a real good stab at romantic comedies. As it is, it's just another one of them ...
  • No matter how many of such stories are seen we all do enjoy the new dialogues a little different, self ego later realizing oh the right guy missed ! That too for self beloved stgmatic beliefs and missing compromise situations in self esteem un necessary not me first let him, simple fights leading to breakups and newer style ending with all happy.....Still flow routine waves felt.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    Both Timberlake and Kunis have recently broken up with their partner. Kunis plays a recruiter for GQ magazine, and Timberlake is someone she "stalked" to head up their Art department. Timberlake's ex-gf is Emma Stone. What is interesting is that Kunis' character is the laid back type of person we would expect Emma Stone to play, while Stone (what little we see of her) plays an emotional character we would expect Kunis to play. I don't know if the producers did this by design, or they just lucked into it, but knowing this made the movie funny on a different level. Kunis is savvy enough to realize she has been ruined by romantic movies as she awaits her Prince to sweep her off her feet. You know at the end of the movie, come running to her as she is about to leave, and pour his heart out to her.

    Kunis gives Timberlake a fast paced tour of NY, perhaps one of the best sells for Manhattan I have seen in a long time. The movie verbally condemns Hollywood's romantic comedies while ironically creating one identical to it. With some quick character build up, the film goes to a scene where Timberlake and Kunis decide that they will have sex without the emotional baggage while swearing on a Bible app. No complications, just sex. Guess how that turns out?

    Woody Harrelson plays a gay sports editor who is not shy about being gay. Woody gives Timberlake love advice, "It's not who you want to spend Friday night with, but who you want to spend all day Saturday with."

    The sex scenes between Kunis and Timberlake are more comical than romantic. Timberlake likes to keep his socks on and sneezes after an orgasm, and Kunis is a screamer. Patricia Clarkson plays Kunis' super hip mother, who has never really told her daughter who her father was. In her first few minutes he was Greek, Puerto Rican, or Russian...she is sure he was Eurasian.

    The dialogue is fast and witty. Kunis did a background check on a guy she dated.

    Timberlake responds: "Did you do a background check on me?"

    Kunis:"How could you possibly max out an Old Navy card?"

    Timberlake: "I was just out of college and really into cargo pants."

    In spite of the adult themes, the movie has a lighthearted chick flick Disney quality to it. The acting was good. The movie was very clever. If you liked "No Strings Attached" you might find this one on par or slightly better.

    F-bomb,sex, brief nudity, deals with Alzheimer's
  • It's super formulaic and doesn't offer anything exceptionally original but everything it does is done perfectly. I laughed more and was interested in the story and characters a lot more than I thought I would. Great chemistry between Kunis and Timberlake helps a lot too.
  • holyspiritdriven16 January 2012
    Warning: Spoilers
    I don't know what I expected from this packaged pre-frabricated Hollywood blockbuster so why did I feel like I wasted my $1.29 at Redbox (actually twice that for accidentally keeping the movie 2 nights). From the beginning, the dialogue was so full of quips and witty banter that the characters were never believable. The plot is basically the writer living out a fantasy of "no strings attached" sex which is a joke in real life because it's not how humans are made. In the movie, instead of learning that "no love sex" is impossible, the characters just decide they really do like each other (I'm not even going dilute the word "love" by using it here). The movie then proceeds to predictably fall into the romantic comedy trap that it made fun of in the beginning. Beside many personal annoyances (like Hollywood producers & writers always making movies about or based in New York or L.A. because they are ignorant as to any kind of life outside of those cities), I am beyond sick of movies diluting the beauty of sex by pushing the boundaries and tiptoeing on the line of pornography. This movie offers nothing more than the eye candy of Mila Kunis. If I were you I would not waste a Redbox dollar on it.
  • Friends With Benefits is exactly like No Strings Attached. Except it isn't. The plot is the same, but the movie dynamics are totally different.

    FWB was one of the funniest romantic comedies in years. No formula, no b.s., just good comedy.There were a lot of satirical elements in the movie that were surprisingly witty.

    I'm not sure Woody Harrelson's character was actually needed to progress the story,but I'd equate it to Melissa McCarthy's character in Bridesmaids. Just really, really funny every time he's on screen.

    The chemistry between the two main characters was very real most of the time. Both Timberlake and Kunis played off each other fairly well. And the rated R is what the adult viewer really wants. And trust me, FWB delivers.

    Another thing FWB had that No Strings Attached didn't was a lot of heart. Very real emotions were often displayed in the movie.

    There were some great cameos in the movie, like Jason Segel, Andy Samberg, Emma Stone, and Shaun White playing Shaun White.

    Good for Will Gluck for making a good follow-up movie to Easy A. I think he's really starting to find his niche in Hollywood.
  • RobTheWatcher4 July 2022
    A really solid and decent rom com. Bad acting at times but sweet enough to be worth the watch. I enjoyed it overall and it had its moments. Kind of cliche.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    Spoilers ahead!

    So when I first heard of this movie I got REALLY confused. Because a movie JUST LIKE THIS was JUST released it was called No Strings Attached. Wow it's official: Hollywood HAS RUN OUT OF IDEAS! They are so shameless about it now even. They don't even try to space them apart anymore to try and trick people! Like the Hulk reboots. At least they had YEARS separation. And people found THAT outrageous! These movies came out back to back! Here let me list the similarities between these two movies:

    Both have the same plot: a male and female agree to be "fu(& buddies"

    Both end up the same way: the male and female end up wanting more

    Both have an actress that was in Black Swan; NSA: Natalie Portman FwB: Mila Kunis

    Both have the male lead that was more famous in the 90's; NSA: Ashton Kutcher (That 70's Show actor) FwB: Justin Timberlake (N*sync singer)

    Both have outrageous, BETTER, more interesting supporting actors/characters; NSA: the girl with the glasses FwB: Justin's gay friend.

    Both have these people be at the top of their game and rich! NSA: the girl is a doctor and the guy I forgot but he was pretty well off FwB: The girl has a cushy job, and the guy is getting money thrown at him!

    This last similarity brings me to my next point; the movie was unrealistic. This movie is taking place in a post-recession world. There are flash mobs, new technology, references to current things. YET in this movie companies are BEGGING people to work for them!? WTF!? THERE ARE NO JOBS! This was the MOST INSULTING DISGUSTING THING about this piece of (r@p movie! They will hire some #0re to FLY to LA to CONVINCE a guy WITH HIS OWN company to work for them. Doesn't that mean that they have to pay him more? It's for GQ magazine sure, but a mag has THAT much money!? And for what!? This guy does not even do his job! Knows nothing as proved by his gay friends question's like "What font did you use?" This guys 'brilliant' response; "I don't know. Times new roman?" Most of the time he is fooling around with the girl and doing other random $#!t!!!! It disgusts me that Hollywood does not get it! Life is not a fairy tale! People don't and CAN'T live these lives. That apartment Justin's character can supposedly afford (IN NEW YORK NO LESS!) even the rich struggle to get! WOW!

    The only difference between these movies is the person that wants their relationship to mean more. In NSA it's the guy that wants more and the girl that doesn't "get it." In FwB it's the girl that wants more and the guy does not "get it."

    Also I hated how this movie tried to be so hipster. Like it was trying to be so "cool." As if they were "better than" these movies they were making fun of. At this point pretty much ANY other romantic comedy is better than this piece of crap! Even NSA had the girl with the glasses - so funny! While this movie's stand out character; the gay friend, was barely even in the movie! Also the ending was a cop out they did not admit that they were wrong! Cynical to the end! Wow what idiots, what a pointless movie!
An error has occured. Please try again.