I’m a city-dweller. I’m not married to my city, but I have long known that I could never live somewhere that I can’t hide in. That’s not to say that I don’t enjoy spending time outside the city. Quite the contrary – I love it! Smaller towns, country settings, peace & quiet…it’s all very nice. The thing is that I know eventually I’ll want to go home to the city. Non-city life is nice to spend time in, but I’d never want to live there.

I’ve never been to one, but I’d wager that communes would be the same: Nice to visit, but I’d never want to live there.

George (Paul Rudd) and Linda (Jennifer Aniston) are married New Yorkers who begin the film by buying a micro-loft (read: bachelor) in Manhattan. Unfortunately in short order the couple find themselves in a jam when the financial firm George works at is closed for corruption, and Linda’s documentary gets passed over by HBO. They can’t afford the apartment anymore and need to sell, however it’s not a seller’s market. After selling the place for a loss, they decide to leave New York to live with George’s brother Rick in Atlanta.

On the drive there, the couple decides to pull off the road for the night and stumbles upon what their GPS lists as Elysium Bed & Breakfast. As they drive up, they get spooked by a naked man walking on the road and manage to roll the car. As it turns out, Elysium is also a hippie commune – which doesn’t help the couple get any sleep, but proves intriguing. They spend the night meeting the group and having fun, but in the morning continue to Atlanta towards Geroge’s brother.

Once there though, they start thinking the trip was a mistake. Being at Rick’s house and around his family makes them long for the easy-going nature of the commune. So they waste precious little time in going back to Elysium and learning the groups ways. At first they both seem equally curious by the group’s leanings towards sharing property, non-violence, vegetarianism and free love. However, during a Truth Circle Linda suddenly “gets it” (a few drugs help pave the way).

As the solemnity of Elysium is threatened, and George clings to the hope of finding a job, the couple begin to fracture…helped in no small part by the neverending oddities surrounding hem.

The good thing about trying to measure whether or not a comedy works as a film is that there you have the laughter measuring stick to help you. Did it make you laugh more than once? Yes? Then the film did what is set out to do and “works” on the whole. The only thing you need to ask yourself is how well it works. That’s where I start to get a little tangled up in my poncho.

There’s no denying that as a series of bits, WANDERLUST really had me grinnin’ and gigglin’. It got me both by drawing from a situational well that is always funny (awkward nudity), and by letting some of its great improv actors riff long enough to create some random bits of silliness. What helps it all succeed is the way the film doesn’t feel terribly cliché. Some of the standard bits of hippy humour are there, but by focusing more on how the commune lifestyle affects George and Linda’s relationship, it gives provides a centre for all of those familiar tropes to orbit around.

What I liked most about WANDERLUST wasn’t so much the humour as it was George & Linda searching for their place in the world. When we meet them, they are living in New York and for the most part they are happy there. However, we can see that George has some reservations about his job, that Linda is a little bit aimless (her attempt at being a documentarian is a new angle for her), and they’re both nervous about being homeowners. Lord help them if they ever decide to have kids. Arriving at Elysium takes all of those insecurities and points them towards a whole new set of choices: Can they live without possession? Can they make drastic lifestyle choices? is it all just one big mistake that should be erased quickly by running back to New York?

Lots of couples continually question themselves, and sometimes like George & Linda, it leads to an imbalance – one takes a step forward and the other wonders if they can take the step too. Every five minutes during those first few days at the commune, they look at each other as if to say “Can we do this?…I don’t know if we can do this…well, if you don’t want to do this, I don’t want to do this…ah screw it, let’s do this”. They are every bit as unsettled as they were back in New York, only now they get to hear didgeridoos and partake in hallucinogens.

Oddly though, that wandering and uncertainty was what lost me where the plot was concerned. There’s a subplot involving Elysium being threatened by developers which seems wedged into the story to create a crisis. Not only did the device feel forced, but the decisions it leads some of the characters to make felt false. Part of me thinks that the writers didn’t like it that much either, since it only comes and goes when it’s convenient, and gets swept up pretty quickly late in the film.

There’s a scene late in WANDERLUST between Alan Alda and Jennifer Aniston that sums up what I like about it most. It has tender humour, some real honesty, and wraps itself around two people talking out their insecurities. Throw in a Spin Doctors track and you have a great afternoon at the movies. Unfortunately WANDERLUST isn’t content to stick with that and spends too much time in some very odd places. Like our leading couple, it seems to be searching for itself…maybe it should do a hit in the Truth Circle.

Matineescore: ★ ★ 1/2 out of ★ ★ ★ ★
What did you think? Please leave comments with your thoughts and reactions on WANDERLUST.

9 Replies to “WANDERLUST

  1. Whoa dude…I think I must be trippin’ on those Truth Circle drugs – we’re like in total agreement man! Far out!

    I think I even said the same thing you did about the film (and director David Wain) doing too much of its own wandering about and missing the ability to focus on its strong points. I did really like the characters (though Theroux’s ends up being a bit too typical) and my favourite line was easily “Mushrooms!…It’s a textural thing for me…”

    There were a few beats missed, though, with some scenes dragging and stretching their point of being funny – Rudd at the mirror for example just didn’t do anything for me (I like most of what he does here and in general quite like him).

    So a bit of a disappointment for me (since I like Wain’s other films better), but still enjoyable. Not sure why it was getting trashed by early reports though…

    1. If I had to guess it’s because of the back-to-nature storyline. It is used frequently and not always on a positive note.

    2. I’ll have more to say about it on the podcast which will be up in the next day or so.

      However, in classic form we do disagree since George at the mirror had me in stitches! Rick was a little much for me – I too couldn’t wait for George and Linda to get out of suburban Atlanta.

      For me it wasn’t a disappointment so much as it was as middle-of-the-road as I anticipated it being…back when we were first talking about it…and you told me I should go see it…

      …making you…what’s that word again?

  2. I have to agree with most of what you said in the review. Like all of David Wain’s work, it’s more of a bunch sketch comedy than an actual film itself. The comedy is funny, but you kind of feel like Wain doesn’t really care about certain plot points, the land develop thing has to be there because it feels like you need something to cheer against. The ending is so rushed that you wonder why did he even bother having one…

    Having said all that, I did laugh, and laugh quite a bit. Yes, they did hammer a lot of jokes into the ground, but I can’t say I didn’t enjoy most of the 98 minutes.

    1. I think at this stage, Wain needs to think about writing a good story for his projects. Clearly he and his usual band of brothers will make it funny, no matter what the story is. If he can focus on creating a narrative that feels less secondary, I think his projects can take that next step and have a bit more of a lasting effect.

  3. I drank half of the Kool Aid .. then proceeded to regret it. I’d give the film the same rating – it’s in constant search of an identity.

  4. I admit I primarily want to see this out of love and loyalty for David Wain, Ken Marino, and their comrades from The State who make appearances in the film. I’m glad to hear it’s enjoyable enough, even if it’s too meandering.

Comments are closed.