“Wanderlust”: Picture an #OWS Comedy Filled With Dick Jokes

Director David Wain’s new flick combines the funnier, sweeter elements of “Wet Hot American Summer,” “Role Models,” and an Occupy encampment.

Paul Rudd and Jennifer Aniston in "Wanderlust" (2012)<a href="http://www.wanderlustmovie.net/">Photo courtesy of Universal Pictures</a>

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

Wanderlust
Universal Pictures
98 minutes

Have you watched that snippet from the redband trailer for Wanderlust? You know, the clip of Paul Rudd walking in on Jennifer Aniston, as she lays smiling atop a heap of naked women? The four ladies, sprawled out on a queen-size mattress, are stroking each other ever so gently. A thin cotton sheet clings just barely to their bodies.

“It was so beautiful,” Aniston purrs. Rudd, still standing in the doorway of the bedroom, appears exasperated, having missed out on what was surely nothing short of pure, carnal elation.

Yeah, well, that entire scene was cut from the movie.

And as you come to terms with the confounding disappointment, please note that there are still other reasons to see this film.

Wanderlust, cowritten and directed by sketch comedy veteran David Wain, basically takes all the things that would make Andrew Breitbart go feral and puts them in a movie with a gaggle of improv-savvy actors. George and Linda (Rudd and Aniston) take a reprieve from the hustle and high stress of Manhattan life. The married couple wind up crashing at Elysium, a bed and breakfast tucked away in a secluded rural grove. And as luck would have it, Elysium is actually a commune populated by all the indolent suspects—vegans, free spirits, musicians, and burnt-out, bedraggled old hippies who have long since rejected the exploitation of the workforce grind. (Think Occupy Oakland, only funnier and without the tear gas.)

The two are quickly immersed in the heaving stereotype of a community, partaking in every activity from hallucinogenic “truth circles” to extramarital boffing. Any plot developments are just scripted excuses to deploy offbeat, uncomfortable humor. Sure, there’s a subplot thrown in about some dollar-worshipping suits trying to tear down Elysium to make way for a giant casino.

But what really shines through is the giddy immaturity, honed splendidly by the film’s ensemble cast. For instance, there are dick jokes aplenty. And, boy, what dick jokes they are. The sight gags involving Elysium’s resident nudist Wayne—played with full commitment and disquieting ease by frequent Wain collaborator Joe Lo Truglio—burn themselves into your memory (for better or for worse is anyone’s guess). And when George gives himself a pep talk in preparation for his first free-love foray with Eva (a fun and fetching Malin Åkerman), the audience gets a couple golden minutes of Paul Rudd going full-improv on his “erection selection.”

David Wain, who has staked out a career built on pop-culture pantomime and a brain-dead interpretation of Monty Python, pieces Wanderlust together from the sweeter elements of much of his previous work: There are unmistakable shades of Role Models (2008), with its harmless but charming sentimentality. The outré characters are like a less mean-spirited version of the personas in The Ten (2007). And the wacky non sequiturs are straight out of the mid-’90s MTV show The State.

So does Wain’s brand of rando burlesque result in an uneven comedy? Of course, and I would expect no less from the guy who gave us Wet Hot American Summer. But the flaws are overcome by the cast’s and crew’s steadfast dedication to the delightfully vulgar and the bluntly weird.

All told, it’s not a bad way to kill 98 minutes of your life during the generally frigid movie-month of February.

Wanderlust gets a wide release on Friday February 24. Click here for local showtimes and tickets.

Click here for more movie features from Mother Jones.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate