Review: Friends With Benefits

Justin Timberlake plays a graphic designer who is sought out by head-hunter Mila Kunis to take a job at GQ magazine in New York. She also shows him the local sights to entice him, and before long, the two have become fast friends. Oh, and he takes the job. One night watching a shitty romcom they come to the realisation that their relationships have been unfulfilling, and before you know it, both are agreeing to an arrangement of casual sex with no other complications. It works for him because he’s not looking for commitment whilst he’s ascending in his career, and it works for her because she’s sick of being messed around by douchy guys. No romance, no emotional support, just gettin’ jiggy wit’ each other. Y’know, kinda like what Jerry and Elaine tried on “Seinfeld”. Needless to say, they’re clearly attracted to one another, but unfortunately, they’re hell-bent on ruining any potential happiness they might have together and deny there’s anything more than ‘friends with benefits’ going on. Woody Harrelson is Timberlake’s openly gay boss, for whom the phrase ‘TMI’ was probably created (It’s an archaic role, but Harrelson is having fun with it). Richard Jenkins is Timberlake’s Alzheimer’s afflicted dad, Jenna Elfman (who has finally learned to stop with all the annoying facial twitching and goofy looks) is his worried sister, and Patricia Clarkson is Kunis’ aging hippie mother who can never remember which one of her one-night stands was Kunis’ father.

 

Of the three films released between 2010-2011 essentially taking the notion of casual sex and applying it to a romance movie formula, 2010’s “Love and Other Drugs” stands out as the only truly successful film of the trio. It’s also the one that is least like the other two, though the drug company subplot was actually the weakest part of the film, original or not. 2011’s “No Strings Attached”, meanwhile, was largely a failure, screwing up everything that the earlier film got right. Now comes this 2011 film from director/co-writer Will Gluck (the overrated “Easy A”), which is alarmingly similar to “No Strings Attached” in particular (Comparisons between the three, but especially these two, are unavoidable). Except that this time, it comes extremely close to working. At any rate, it’s certainly better than “No Strings Attached”, if not on the level of “Love and Other Drugs”. It’s relatively smart, often funny, and most importantly of all, the leads had enough chemistry (even if it was just a real-life friendship kinda chemistry) and the characters are likeable enough, that the transition from ‘fuck buddies’ (which is what “No Strings Attached” was originally going to be called, apparently) to romantic love interests was relatively palatable. If one were to compare it to “No Strings Attached”, Justin Timberlake is much more likeable and palatable as a romantic lead than Ashton Kutcher, and Mila Kunis is a lot less hardened, self-absorbed, and aloof than Natalie Portman. Hell, she’s got this combination of dead sexy and sweet adorability that is almost put to as good use as in “Forgetting Sarah Marshall”.

 

I really appreciated that the leads here were much more aware of the situation they were getting themselves into, but also, because the audience could sense genuine chemistry between them, it made the transition from ‘fuck buddies’ to romantic partners far more seamless. Part of that is because Gluck and his co-writers make sure to build a friendship between Kunis and Timberlake whilst also not neglecting to show that there is an obvious attraction between them fairly early on. There was a coldness and selfishness to the relationship between Kutcher and Portman, I never got much of a sense of their friendship, nor any sense of a genuine romantic attraction on Portman’s side (Kutcher was clearly attracted to her, though, and was therefore a complete tool). It just seemed like a cold, sexual relationship. Here the two are true ‘friends with benefits’ with the emphasis on friends from very early on, and it’s obvious that their further attraction is mutual.

 

The only thing it really lacked for me was freshness, and it does prevent the film from being anything more than watchable. The idea of ‘fuck buddies’ is really the only fresh element to the film, let’s face it. Otherwise it’s just a standard romantic comedy, and when you add to that the alarming similarities to “No Strings Attached”, the film didn’t end up being all that original after all. It improves upon the earlier film, but still isn’t all that different from it. Given that there’s a scene where Kunis and Timberlake criticise a faux romantic comedy (starring Jason Segel and Rashida Jones) for all its clichés, you’d think Gluck and co-writers Keith Merryman and David A. Newman would’ve been self-aware enough to spot the clichés in their own story. Then again, Gluck is the same guy who wasn’t self-aware enough to realise his lead character in “Easy A” unnecessarily brought many of her problems onto herself.

 

I also have to criticise the characters of the parents in this film. Patricia Clarkson in particular offers up a performance that is somewhere in between Kevin Kline’s douchy dad in “No Strings Attached” (the best thing in the film) and Clarkson’s own slutty mum character in Gluck’s previous “Easy A”. It’s damn-near the same bloody performance, actually. I didn’t like it then, and I don’t like it now. It’s not funny, it’s creepy and TMI. Richard Jenkins offers up a terrific performance as Timberlake’s Alzheimer’s afflicted dad, but the character as written never seems to know whether it is to be taken seriously or not, and ends up a bit uncomfortable as a result. The characters of the ex-partners played by Andy Samberg (and overplayed by) Emma Stone (and creepy her gremlin face) are also overdone in my view, though thankfully they disappear very early on. Shaun White’s cameo as an aggressive, douchebag version of himself is a bit better, though American filmmakers ought to take into consideration international audiences who may not have any clue who the fuck Shaun White is (I’ve heard of him, but wasn’t sure what sport he was famous for. I know it’s something of an extreme sport or some such. Or maybe skateboarding?).

 

I also think the film had a bit too much juvenile humour for a supposedly romantic movie. I like juvenile humour, but not when I’m in the mood for romance, thanks.

 

Overall, this is a well-cast, mostly well-acted romcom that despite my concerns about using casual sex in a romcom formula, works a lot better than it could have. It’s nothing new, but it comes pretty close to pulling off the tricky balance of casual sex and romantic comedy.

 

Rating: C+