Friends with Benefits (2/10)
by Tony Medley
Run time 109 minutes.
Not for children.
When I was in Las Vegas
recently I had dinner with a friend who works there. She told me that
the nightclub XS at the Encore was the hottest night club in the
world. She said that they paid people like Justin Timberlake $100,000
just to show up for one night.
Having just seen Justin in
Friends with Benefits, he would be well-advised to keep that Vegas
night job.
The movie is an unfunny,
unromantic trifle about two people, Dylan (Timberlake) and Jamie (Mila
Kunis) who, after a short first meeting, decide to have a purely sexual
relationship with no emotional involvement. Part of that is believable
because neither conveys even the slightest ability to create any kind of
emotional involvement with the other. They take "lack of chemistry" to
another level. The problem is that neither conveys even an iota of sex
appeal. One will rarely see more boring bedroom scenes, most of which
seem to concentrate on each giving the other oral sex under the sheets.
Another problem with the film
is that it's a film about sex but it's unable to deal with the fact that
today a movie about sex should contain some nudity. Both stars are
almost completely covered up when they are apparently naked in bed, and
there are lots of shots of them naked in bed. As was said in a classic
Seinfeld episode, sex starts occurring when the nipple makes an
appearance. There are no visible nipples in this.
There are lots of reasons why
this doesn't cut the mustard. The first is that there were so many
writers that they are too many to mention. That's always trouble and the
script reflects it. The second is that the lead actors just aren't ready
for prime time. Neither Timberlake nor Kunis is ready to make people
forget Rock Hudson and Doris Day as actors who can portray chemistry in
a romantic comedy when there is clearly no actual physical chemistry
between the two (how could there have been considering Hudson's sexual
preference?). That takes acting talent and Timberlake and Kunis fall far
short. Kunis is especially ineffective. Her phony ebullience was so grating
after the first couple of minutes that I was ready to dash for the exit.
The supporting cast isn't much
help except for Richard Jenkins who gives his usual sterling performance
and the beautiful and talented Emma Stone, whose appearance barely
qualifies as a cameo.
|