User Score
5.7

Mixed or average reviews- based on 98 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 61 out of 98
  2. Negative: 20 out of 98

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Aug 13, 2012
    3
    Neither funny or charming enough to impress, even with a great cast. I give this movie 34%.
  2. Feb 25, 2012
    0
    Unbearable. The insipid and lackluster plot is almost as bad as the complete lack of a single character worth giving a **** about. I don't understand how this crap-on-a-reel made it out of production. Not remotely funny.
  3. Feb 24, 2012
    2
    The stupidity and gross-out humor outweighs the wit and social commentary so heavily, that it becomes one of those movies that seems incredibly fun to film, but a bore to watch. Too bad, I really like both Jennifer Aniston and Paul Rudd, and I also had high expectations for Justin Theroux, who out-shined both the leads.
  4. Feb 24, 2012
    1
    Stabbing my eyes with rusty nails would be more fun then sitting through this. Love Paul Rudd but, hated Anniston. Avoid this movie if you can. If you must go bring a pillow for a nap
  5. Mar 5, 2012
    2
    This was a horrible movie. Both my husband and I are fans of Rudd and Aniston, however this movie was a disappointment. We contemplated leaving and asking for our money back but gave the movie the benefit of the doubt. Not worth seeing at all.
  6. Apr 1, 2012
    3
    This movie is both predictable and unfunny. Although I had one or two laughs while watching it, I watched the majority of this movie with a raised eyebrow. It misses the mark on almost every occasion. Also worth noting: The trailer already spoils the best jokes, and due to trailer editing, the jokes are even better when seen in the trailer.
  7. Mar 25, 2012
    4
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Seated at a table in the wee hours of some Las Vegas casino coffee shop, David Howard bemoans the fact that his wife has just lost their "nest egg", comparing the situation to a Twilight Zone episode, a hypothetical one where Linda gambles away their life savings on 22, the number she bets compulsively on at the roulette wheel. Now their life is really like Easy Rider, Winnebago notwithstanding, because the yuppies are flat broke. The once-consummate power couple, who dropped out of society to find themselves, can't find any hippies, let alone, a commune, in Lost in America, but instead, resides at a trailer park inhabited by aging pensioners. Linda informs David that while combing Safford Court, she discovered a "sweet little creek" at road's end, and if it was 1967(and not 1986), that creek would have been teeming with skinny-dipping "flower children", and as for the "garden three doors down", nothing stronger than carrots, nothing with medicinal or recreational purposes, probably rules that patch, as David overhears an elderly gent outside their trailer home worrying about the sight in his right eye. In vain, Linda tries to play the part of the free spirit, but the husband, better than his wife, realizes that their time to be bohemians has passed. Ironically, the only Easy Rider fan that they encounter is an antithetical one; a motorcycle cop. Loosely folowing the template laid down by the Albert Brooks film, George and Linda, in Wanderlust, go underground, but their foray into oblivion isn't premeditated as was the Howards. Like The Twlight Zone, the NYC couple's excursion into uncharted territory occurs through the luck of sheer happenstance, when the weary travelers, en route to Atlanta where George's obnoxious brother lives(due to the double whammy of HBO passing on Linda's penguin snuff film and the feds raiding the office that employed her husband), stop at a bed and breakfast which turns out to be a hippie commune. Movie references abound at Elysium, in particular, "Together", the 2000 Swedish film about a likeminded collective, with the main difference being the time appropriateness of such a utopia, just barely though, since the film takes place in Stockholm circa 1975, a transitional period for most idealists, stateside, that is, but David, to his great consternation, missed out on the counterculture, whining to his boss, "I used to make fun of my friends in college who went out to find themselves," choosing instead the business route. Eight years later, eight lost years, in David's estimation, would place his hiring at the company he's just been fired from, around the mid-seventies. Easy Rider(1969), the film that inspires David's male menopausal-inspired journey, perhaps, made its trans-Atlantic debut late, hitting the Swedish moviehouse circuit at a time when the rebel film about resisting authority had already gestated in the minds of many young Americans, who were by that time, embracing free enterprise, not free love. Unlike the Howards, George and Linda can't afford a $450,000 house; they can't even afford to make the payments on a recently purchased micro-loft, which is commentary in itself, through the juxtaposition of the booming eighties with our current recessionary times. Wanderlust is a luxury for the Howards; for George and Linda, wanderlust is a matter of survival. As if mirroring their accidental lives, the car overturns, putting the stranded couple in contact with Kathy, the desk clerk, who knows how to say, "Good evening," in Swedish, and makes a dated Beatles joke in relation to George's name("...where're John, Paul and Ringo?"), thereby creating an estrangement effect, in which not only time gets manipulated, but moreover, place, since this direct reference to the Lukas Moodyson film transforms the commune(alluded to as an "intentional community" beforehand) into an intentional Sweden. Despite the lack of a theoretical framework that explicitly spells out the political rhetoric of this nonconformist society, it's not hard to image a celebration breaking out when Ronald Reagan died, similar to the one in Together, when Goran, Tillsammans founder, learns about Francisco Franco's passing over the radio, setting off pandemonium in the tiny household after he relays the good news. After all, Reagan once was quoted as saying that "fascism was really the basis for the new deal" in 1976. While George plays "Two Princes" at an impromptu front porch hootenanny, the moviegoer can interpret The Spin Doctors as a code for the rhythm guitarist's conservatism. Seth, representing socialism, outduels George, putting capitalism in its place. But Seth's virtuosoship lays bare his fraudulence. He doesn't share the spotlight; he hogs it, in which the guitar solo acts as a power metaphor. Seth is phallocentric, as most hippies are, whereas Goran seems more middle-class than a late-sixties refugee. He demands monogamy out of Lena. Expand
  8. Mar 4, 2012
    2
    Did you see the previews? Yes? Then you saw the funny parts. I didn't know who I was supposed to care about during the movie. And then about, 3/4 of the way through, they seemed to remember that movies generally have an antagonist and wrote that in. Not one of the characters had any depth, and most of them were so unbelievable (even for a comedy like this) that I could never lose myself in the moments. Collapse
  9. Nov 29, 2012
    1
    Wanderlust is hands down one of the worst movies I've ever seen in my entire life. I'm a huge Paul Rudd fan but not even he could save this crapfest. And honestly, how does Jennifer Aniston get movie roles? If there is a more overrated actress out there, I can't think of one.
  10. Mar 2, 2012
    0
    Bad humor, bad acting, bad plot. I imagine the laughing that people heard was from the audience laughing at how bad the jokes were. You know that laugh you laugh because something is just so unbelievably dumb.
  11. Feb 3, 2013
    4
    Wanderlust is a film with no meaning. It is a film that has 1 or 2 scenes of true satire and the rest is a bunch of hippies running around naked smoking pot. Too dumb to even laugh at sometimes.
  12. Aug 22, 2012
    4
    Wanderlust has moments where it works and is actually very funny, but those moments come inconsistently and, for most of the film, the rest of the bits fall short. The gag reel near the end is by far the best part of the movie (aside from a scene involving a stampede of nudists in slow-motion) and I can't help wishing the preceding hour-and-a-half had been similar. All of the actors seem to be trying to sell zaniness for the sake of being zany rather than achieving genuine pathos and character development with a blend of raunch. Justin Theroux is surprisingly funny, but the rest of the characters and their bits don't feel funny enough to warrant their time in the movie. All-in-all, Wanderlust is just a casual comedy that has some good gags but on the whole is far from a comedy classic. Expand
  13. Sep 29, 2012
    0
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This movie was simply the worst possible scenario that could be envisioned for human existence. Absolutely the most immoral film I have ever seen. Sad to think that there are actually people who think things such as that are acceptable. Expand
  14. Nov 5, 2012
    3
    I was expecting good things from this movie with so many good people behind it and with Rudd and Aniston starring, but it left me wanting more. A lot more. Wanderlust had potential, but it didn't bother trying to collect.
  15. Jan 13, 2013
    1
    Personally, I believe that Hollywood have run out of ideas with this movie. From what I gather it is a pointless excuse to show a bit of nudity. The claim of comedy is laughable within itself, since I didn't find it to be remotely funny. The only saving grace of this movie for me is Jennifer Aniston, being that I find her acting to be good, even if her choice of projects isn't.
Metascore
53

Mixed or average reviews - based on 34 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 15 out of 34
  2. Negative: 3 out of 34
  1. Reviewed by: Kimberley Jones
    Feb 29, 2012
    50
    Wanderlust is flawed, too, but for its exploration of financial ruin and alternative lifestyles, it shows once again that Aniston, at the very least, knows which way the wind is blowing.
  2. Reviewed by: J.R. Jones
    Feb 27, 2012
    70
    Being taken under Apatow's wing may have been a big career break for writer-director David Wain, but this lacks the sharp personality of some of his earlier movies.
  3. Reviewed by: David Denby
    Feb 27, 2012
    70
    As broad and obvious as Wanderlust is, it's often very funny. [5 March 2012, p. 87]