Last weekend I saw 'Friends with Benefits' with Justin Timberlake and Milia Kunis, this weekend I just finished 'No Strings Attached' starring Ashton Kutcher and Natalie Portman. The premis of both movies are essential the same, 2 people who are friends that only want to use each other for sex. It's basically a mutual use for both parties. Even though both movies has the same plot they tackle the subjects differently. FWB has more of a witty sense of humor compared to NSA going the more vulgar route. I really enjoyed both, but found NSA a little more to my liking. I laughed out loud more during FWB but I think it was Natalie Portman and her character that didn't draw my attention near enough as Milia Kunis'.
I think it's strange that both movies came out right around the same time in theaters and on DVD. Audiences basically would pick which actor actress combo was more to their liking. From the previews both movies have funny one liners so you can't tell the chemistry that is developed during the movie. FWB did $55.8M domestically, $149.8M world wide while NSA did $70.6M domestically and $149.2M world wide. NSA was released a few months prior so maybe the US audience had their take on the theory and skipped FWB, but world wide FWB out gained NSA but they are about the same (in theater dollars).
Since the dollars don't seem to tell the story my take is the witty comedy, FWB, was done just a little better than NSA. NSA had a lot of humor that seems dumb down for anyone that reads or puts forth much thought in behavior and events. Natalie Portman's character has the traditional man stance of wanting to keep it platonic while Ashton's character wants things to take a more traditional role. I know people like this in my personal life so this was definitely a believable written role. The things I didn't care for were everything that was written around Ashton's character's father. The entire dialog and actions didn't seem at all on par with reality. The other character were consistently in the background but didn't add anything really too the story. Ludacris' character and Jake Johnson's character the friends had some humerus lines as did Mindy Kaling's character, but nothing really stuck out and their parts seemed more filler than anything. Lake Bell, who usually cracks me up was an odd, socially awkward boss that didn't have any funny lines. From her previous performance's (most notably What Happens in Vegas) when paired with great writers she can deliver the funny moments very well.
While I enjoyed NSA, I just thought that FWB was better written. There was more depth to the characters while the writting and non-verbal communication between the stars was received better by the audience. Or at least me. the co-stars played more of a role giving a stronger, more "full" feel to lives of the characters. Woody Harelson and Jenna Elfman's characters both had a strong presence with sound advice and very funny lines.
Both were humerus and tackle subjects that make anyone above our generation cringe but happen regularly in the world we live in. If you have to pick one I saw go with FWB, but don't shoot down NSA- from the opening scene you'll be laughing in have the raunchy sense of humor that I do.
I think it's strange that both movies came out right around the same time in theaters and on DVD. Audiences basically would pick which actor actress combo was more to their liking. From the previews both movies have funny one liners so you can't tell the chemistry that is developed during the movie. FWB did $55.8M domestically, $149.8M world wide while NSA did $70.6M domestically and $149.2M world wide. NSA was released a few months prior so maybe the US audience had their take on the theory and skipped FWB, but world wide FWB out gained NSA but they are about the same (in theater dollars).
Since the dollars don't seem to tell the story my take is the witty comedy, FWB, was done just a little better than NSA. NSA had a lot of humor that seems dumb down for anyone that reads or puts forth much thought in behavior and events. Natalie Portman's character has the traditional man stance of wanting to keep it platonic while Ashton's character wants things to take a more traditional role. I know people like this in my personal life so this was definitely a believable written role. The things I didn't care for were everything that was written around Ashton's character's father. The entire dialog and actions didn't seem at all on par with reality. The other character were consistently in the background but didn't add anything really too the story. Ludacris' character and Jake Johnson's character the friends had some humerus lines as did Mindy Kaling's character, but nothing really stuck out and their parts seemed more filler than anything. Lake Bell, who usually cracks me up was an odd, socially awkward boss that didn't have any funny lines. From her previous performance's (most notably What Happens in Vegas) when paired with great writers she can deliver the funny moments very well.
While I enjoyed NSA, I just thought that FWB was better written. There was more depth to the characters while the writting and non-verbal communication between the stars was received better by the audience. Or at least me. the co-stars played more of a role giving a stronger, more "full" feel to lives of the characters. Woody Harelson and Jenna Elfman's characters both had a strong presence with sound advice and very funny lines.
Both were humerus and tackle subjects that make anyone above our generation cringe but happen regularly in the world we live in. If you have to pick one I saw go with FWB, but don't shoot down NSA- from the opening scene you'll be laughing in have the raunchy sense of humor that I do.
No comments:
Post a Comment