2.5/4  Failure to Launch
*Warning: Spoilers*




I just saw "Failure to Launch" and i thought it was just ok. There were a few things i did like, and a few things i did NOT like.


The things that i DID like about the movie were...

1. Matthew McConaughe... (read full)

2/4  Fails to Launch
Lightweight, overly-predictable, would-be romantic comedy; the script obviously thinks limitless scenes of animal attacks are hilarious, as characters get bit by a chipmunk, a dolphin, a lizard and a mockingbird. Zooey Deschanel escapes ... (read full)

1/4  Oh Lord.
The worst. I mean this joins the sewagey ranks of most other recent super-stereotyped male and female "romantic comedy" uglies.

This is one of those bottom of the barrell - "what the hell is going on?!"- kind of movies.

The frighteni... (read full)

2/5 This film fails at just about everything...
  by Andrew Ellington (Mulholland Drive)
If ever a films title should persuade you to walk in the other direction, `Failure to Launch' is truly telling. I am so tempted to give this an `F' and be done with it, but I find that there is at least one redeeming factor in this big pile of unrealistic, clichéd garbage; the stars. Yes, no matter how ridiculous and unintelligible and utterly preposterous this lazy mess of a film really is, each and every actor involved does all they can to make it watchable.

So, for you Zooey, Matthew, Kathy and Jessica; I give this horrible film a D.

The film revolves around Paula, a professional motivator who is hired by Al and Sue, parents of man-child Tripp. Tripp is approaching his middle-age years and he has yet to move out of the house; causing his parents to resort to Paula as a way to get him out the door. Of course, as you probably could have guessed, Paula falls in love with Tripp, Tripp finds out that she is scamming him and breaks things off, everyone's life falls apart and then they make up and things are happy again. The issue I have with the film isn't the formula, because it's become apparent that there really is no other formula available to screenwriters today. My issue is the reckless abandon with which the screenwriters chose to formulate the formula. It's just very mediocre, and when it tries to be original (there are far too many animals here) it winds up being so preposterous that it is almost insulting to the audience.

Thank God Almighty for the charm and comedic timing of Zooey Deschanel and Sarah Jessica Parker. Yeah, yeah, yeah, Matthew McConaughey does his usual schtick and looks `super hot' (according to my wife) and so bonus points for him or whatever, but really this movie is not about him. No, if it wasn't for Parker's undeniable charm and comedic chemistry or Deschanel's flawless timing and sensual draw this movie would have been a complete waste for me.

Kathy Bates is generally good in everything, so bonus points for that.

In the end though, I hate to say that I cannot recommend this movie to anyone. In fact, when anyone I know that has seen this finds out that I've seen it they roll their eyes and ask why I didn't turn it off before it started; it is that bad. There is nothing new, nothing remotely memorable and nothing that warrants repeated viewing at all. I love you Zooey, and you really worked your cute little buns off to make me enjoy every moment you were on screen; but even your quirky charm cannot save this disgrace from my trash bin.

Seeing her made me realize that I NEED to get to the movies and see `(500) Days of Summer' though!

3/5 Nothing Special
  by Jena Brazda (Rohnert Park, Ca)
I don't think this movie really had much I mean it was just okay. There was nothing really special about it, I thought that it was going to be a romantic comedy and it really was either. I saw it and now that's it. Nothing to refer a friend or family member to.

3/5 Blah
  by D. Mikels (Skunk Holler)
Imagine that: A rom-com starring Matthew McConaughey and Sarah Jessica Parker. Why, knock me over with a feather! McConaughey gets to prance around with an open shirt, and Sarah gets to flutter those pretty peepers. And that about sums up FAILURE TO LAUNCH, a syrupy, sticky blech-fest (with some really bizarre, yet lame, animal attack scenes thrown in for good measure) that was plucked from two-stardom by some pretty solid performances by several supporters, including Zooey Deschanel, Justin Bartha, and Terry Bradshaw (who knows no decency).

A "consultant" hired by McConaughey's parents (Bradshaw and Kathy Bates) to trick (by feigning a relationship) their thirtysomething, fun-loving son Tripp to move out, Parker's character suddenly finds herself harboring romantic feelings. Wow, like we never saw that coming. And of course the metaphorical cat gets out of the bag, the ruse is exposed, Tripp gets ticked, and everyone else plots how to get these two stubborn lovebirds back together. Deschanel, playing Parker's quirky roommate, is so odd she's very, very good, and Bradshaw will stop at nothing to be the center of attention. His birthday suit scene has me starting therapy next week, yet at least made FAILURE TO LAUNCH immodestly entertaining.
--D. Mikels, Author, The Reckoning

2/5 Failure to think outside the rom-com box.
  by kaduzy (Ithaca, NY)
This flick follows in the footsteps of so many romantic comedies with complex premises that in no way mirror real life. The male lead still lives at home, and all of his friends are also grown men who won't leave the nest. His parents say they hate him living there but continue to spoil and indulge him -- and all of their friends are parents of kids who won't leave the nest. Are you sensing a pattern here?

Instead of evicting their home-bound son, the parents overcompensate by hiring a woman to do their job for them. This part is played by Sarah Jessica Parker, starring as Carrie Bradshaw/Paula -- in one scene, Matthew McConaughey even compliments her shoes. The token black character also doubles as the obligatory precocious child. The male characters talk like only male characters in movies talk. Then there's a strange subplot involving McConaughey's character getting bit by a bunch of random animals, and a totally ridiculous subplot involving a mockingbird.

But what does any of that matter, really. When you watch a movie like this you pretty much know what you're getting into, and when it stars Matthew McConaughey, who pretty much makes his entire living these days starring in fluff-n-fold movies where he spends most of his time shirtless, you definitely can't expect anything more. His days of making actual quality films are obviously way behind him. The extras on the disc are mostly forgettable, but there is a rather interesting feature on "The Failure to Launch Contest" that amused me. You always hear about random contests a movie runs as a cheap way to gin up free publicity, but it's rare for any of them to have a human face, or visible results. This contest involved two actors from the film actually picking a person to award with six months of free rent, which is a VERY good prize, and they seemed to pick a deserving winner.

If only the same could be said of the movie. It's not a winner, nor is it deserving of any accolades, but it's watchable and it kills the time.

1/5 Mindless, immature fluff
  by Niki M. (Alexandria, VA)
Wow. I am now 30 minutes into watching this "masterpiece" and I can barely stand it. The humor is juvenile; scenes are a random, disjointed mess; acting is flat. Horrid. This is a perfect example of a movie that has no substance trying to distract viewers with cutesy scenes. Thank god, I am watching it for free.