User reviews

There isn't a plot really, the story is really predictable, even though it's different. But in fact, I did not really lose interest and rather felt my time passed by pretty well. The supporting stuff have given some wonderful performances, Edward Burns as the perfect man/potential-husband, and Megan Fox as the perfect girlfriend. But the lead pair could have done better.

One thing that is horrible about the movie is the ending. One of the most horrible endings there could have been, the director tries to be unconventional but fails miserably. MISERABLY. If only the scene went differently I would actually be recommending this movie to those tired of old stuff.

Pickings are slim for grown-up movies and that's what this is. So bought my ticket and was not disappointed. It's a movie for grown-ups, sharp and funny. The thing is, there's barely a whisper of romance or spark of chemistry in the whole set-up. Much focus is on women's bodies, their breasts, their pelvic muscles, their kegel exercises. This kind of frankness is extended to the marital experience of the shared bathroom, frustration of shared chores, mom's post-pregnancy body and baby poo. Funny? Actually, yes. Light or romantic, not for a moment.

The story didn't head in the direction I expected, given the title. It's not a sly comedy or satire of parenthood or how the experience changes a person or a couple. It's more like a story of Friends with Benefits. But the cast is great and it's not formulaic. On the whole, worthwhile. A number of scenes are quite good.

Friends with Kids is about choosing an alternative lifestyle while conforming with society. It doesn't work. The premise of the movie is a great idea, and the story has a funny drama-like feel to it which is entertaining.

However, the scenario takes a dive after the ski weekend, because we go right back to the pre-chewed romantic drivel that most Hollywood chick flick try to sell us. The very end particularly could have come from any brainwashed hack of a writer. Very disappointing.

If they could have come up with a good third act, it would have been an amazing movie because the cast is outrageous, the dialogs are good, and the film is well put together.

This was my girlfriend's choice of film but, while not a film I would have chosen, I didn't mind seeing it due to the long list of likable names in the cast. The plot opens with an "anti-couple" couple who talk intimately and openly as a longterm couple would, but do so without any connection and while pursuing other relationships. When all their friends start having children, Julie decides she also wants one but without all the damage it does to the relationship – so she decided to have a kid with Jason, so that there is no relationship to go sour. The rest of the film pretty much goes where you know it will.

The best thing to say about the film is that it does have a real pace to its dialogue and I liked some of the snappy delivery and tone of it, some of it being funny but just generally it had a good rhythm to it. This, I liked. Problem is that the rest of the film really doesn't do much that works particularly well. For me it wasn't "bad" just weak, but this was because I didn't hate the characters quit as much as I can imagine that some will. They are hard to like and it doesn't help that the plot is built around a device that requires them to be narcissistic, selfish and spoilt for the vast majority of the running time. They have some changes in their characters late in the game (the changes you know the anti-couple will have from the moment the first scene finishes) but by the time these changes occur, you've probably given up caring about these spoilt unlikeable people.

The cast keep that at bay for a while – although I was a bit behind from the start because I found both Scott and Westfeldt to be the least of the cast – a problem considering they are the leads. Hamm, Wiig, Rudolph have the charisma to carry some of the busier scenes but I have no idea why they had O'Dowd doing an American accent that is terrible (when he keeps it up long enough to notice). Fox, Burns and a few others add starry names but not too much else.

Friend with Kids has some energy to it and at times the snap of the dialogue is entertaining but the film can never get away from its main problem which is that the core plot and characters are both predictable and hard to like. These two things combine to limit how interested the viewer is in the film and with fewer laughs than there should be, there isn't much beyond the famous faces and snappy delivery to hold the interest.

It doesn't surprise me that this low-key dramedy has flown under the cinematic radar. Its parental premise – that having children changes your life and the relationship with your partner, not always for the best – isn't the sort of material that gets noticed by a lot of the movie-going public. It's a shame though as FWK garners more laughs than a large chunk of the so-called comedies that grace (I use the term loosely) our multiplexes. Writer-director Jennifer Westfeldt is uncannily accurate in her presentation of family life – good times and bad in equal measure – which not only generates the funny-because-it's-true humour but also lends a poignancy to the proceedings that makes the predictable finale easier to swallow. As the central duo, Westfeldt (obviously multi-talented) and Adam Scott share a natural chemistry and are thankfully well-rounded, but Maya Rudolph and Chris O'Dowd steal the show as their kiddie-focused best mates who are both relatable and downright hilarious.

I did NOT dislike Friends With Kids but I did not love it either. It is a finely-made/put-together film but I'll stress that there isn't anything overly special here (other than the cast). The most notable thing about it is that it (almost) features the entire (already-mentioned) cast of Bridesmaids! Equally comedic and dramatic, this is the latest writing effort from Jennifer Westfeldt (Kissing Jessica Stein, Ira & Abby ... and the longtime girlfriend of John Hamm) who decides to step behind the camera for the first-time with this one. Westfeldt also takes the lead female role and she is "okay" although I think it is fair to say she is a better filmMAKER than actress (I would have preferred seeing Maya Rudolph in the role).

The film brings to the surface the question of what happens to friends when their other long-time friends begin having children -- it is a MOST valid question as any of those friends "left behind" can attest to. People seem to seek-out people of similar tastes and interests. Once a child is born the child -- for good reason -- becomes the primary interest/focus of their lives ... although the childless are most often sacrificed for not having that NEW one common-bond any longer.

This film observes and ponders this "predicament" when two of its central characters decide to have a child together after witnessing what their childless existence has done to their relationship with their best friends. What is different with this scenario is that this pair are best-of-friends and they do not intend on staying together as lovers/parents. They just know their friend would make for an ideal "other" parent. Westfeldt (Kissing Jessica Stein, "Notes from the Underbelly") and Adam Scott ("Parks and Recreation", The Aviator, Leap Year) play the adults believably -- their questions and concerns of what they are and/or are not doing are common and never unbelievable.

Their friends all come from relationships of varying degrees of happiness and success -- Kristen Wiig ("SNL", Bridesmaids, Whip It), Jon Hamm (Bridesmaids, "Mad Men", The Town), Maya Rudolph (Bridesmaids, "SNL", MacGruber), Chris O'Dowd (Bridesmaids, Pirate Radio) and the non-Bridesmaids-actors such as the surprisingly-decent Megan Fox (Transformers, Jennifer's Body, Jonah Hex) and Edward Burns (The Brothers McMullen, Saving Private Ryan, 27 Dresses) -- which stir-up even more questions of what a relationship is supposed to be.

There is nothing wrong with Friends with Kids ... it is just rather forgettable and not that memorable (I'm "just saying" that a few months down-the-road this film will not be easily recalled -- NOT disliked, just not clearly remembered is all). Hamm plays "jerk" nicely, Fox doesn't embarrass herself and everyone else gives a reliable/dependable performance although I would have preferred (as mentioned) Westfeldt and Rudolph switching roles.

I did have problems with the film's conclusion; but I won't get into it here as I don't want anything to be spoiled. This is a film about friends, friends and friends and it most-oftentimes succeeds at what it is wanting to say. Some critics might say it glosses over the pressures of parenthood and what it takes/means to be one; but I don't think that is the case when we see movies from Adam Sandler (etc) tackle the same theme with nary a complaint. There are some honest depictions here and Westfeldt knows what she is wanting to say ... it is just that the audience might not pick-up everything that she is wanting to say.

I was already thinking of how I'd review it, if I was going to. Maybe that speaks to its inefficiency, but maybe it just means there was room in the film for me to think rather than watch mindlessly. I give this a 7, because it's purely enjoyable, but it's not perfect. As far as films go, it could have been better.

However, I'm not sure if it being a better film would really improve what it was saying, because that was rather clear. And it's not some anti- marriage sentiment, it's actually rather warming. I enjoyed the movie, and rather than go through it piece by piece, I'll just let that be enough. It was enjoyable. It had something worth saying. If you need a serious movie, then no. If you want to watch a flick, good movie for it.

Comedies are supposed to be funny. Not a laugh in this one. The scene with the friends trying to have sex is downright creepy. Why watch this? It's neither amusing, funny, sexy, warm hearted or revealing of anything humanly real other than someone trying oh so hard to be provocatively clever. Innately funny and talented actors wasted in scenes which are cringing in their phoniness. I'm forty, but can't remember a time in my young adulthood when I or my friends were so obsessed with making crude, juvenile wise cracks about sex every time we met for dinner or spoke on the phone. Is this supposed to be a pander to young audiences, as if young people are really that shallow and that easily entertained? I forced myself to watch this rank mediocrity to the end, curious to see just how bad it could get. It didn't disappoint me.

As with any film, we bring to it as much as we take away, so I'm guessing this is why I thought Friends with Kids was a beautifully written and executed tale of modern love, friendship and family, whereas many people (it seems), thought otherwise. To set the scene of my particular disposition, I'm in my late 30's, female, I don't want children, have many friends with them and see only stress and unhappiness when I'm around them. So the opening 45 minutes was pretty must grist to my particular mill. And then, three lovely moments were subtly conveyed in the remainder of the film, there were no fanfares, or big shiny signposts, which made it all the better. I'm not going to say what they are, dare you to find them for yourselves. All I can say is, for me, the film got love just right and actually made me slightly (very very slightly) broody. This is the kind of film which I think is rarely done well, and whilst there's always room for Sci-fi, thriller and horror (in my world at least), a well observed, funny and moving commentary on the human state that you can relate to is what I think filmmakers should be most proud to do. It makes you think, it makes you feel part of something more.

Of course similar themed movies have been made, but this tries to stay as real as possible. The two main characters are amazingly played and written. You may feel that the movie loses a bit of its drive at some point or another, but it never feels like the actors are not being at their A-game at any time. Dialog is really crucial too and it really works fine. Humor is a bit rude (the ending especially is, let's call it a new twist, on what you expect to happen all along), but it works, if you're not offended by it.

For the movie to work, you have to be believable on some aspects. It's those aspects that let the movie almost drift into cliché territory. But it's only an almost slip, because it never completely happens. Still those scenes, without which a movie like this does not seem to be working have to be made. It's up to you, to decide if you're up for the "morality" of the tale ...

We all have them, "kids". O wait, no we don't. But we definitely all have "Friends with Kids". So why not develop a movie on how it is to have friends with kids? Innovative? MMM, not so much. Disastrous? I would not go that far. Writer-Director Jennifer Westfeldt's brainchild cinematic creation "Friends with Kids" does have some witty moments, but then it falls into the trap of providing a formulaic romantic-comedy finale. The movie stars Westfeldt and Adam Scott as Julie and Jason, longtime best friends who surround themselves with married friends that have (are you ready for this) KIDS!; what do you know! Julie and Jason decide to want an offspring of their own, but with no romantic strings attached. So they hit the hay, and get it made. Their "strings attached" married friends think what they are doing is ludicrous, and that it will turn out to be a nightmare for them. But it actually turns out to work after all for Julie and Jason that is until the heartstrings start playing with Julie's affection towards Jason. Westfeldt does a credible job with the whole balance of the interlocking themes of marriage, friendship, and kids in the picture. And for the most part, Jennifer does inseminate a trendy-like screenplay to "Friends with Kids". But then "out of Westfeldt", she pains the movie with a very predictable ending. Westfeldt's acting as Julie was solid, but it was Adam Scott that really gave this friendly picture its biggest asset with his scene- stealing performance as Jason. Scott is consistently turning out standout performances in the last few years. The supporting cast of "Friends with Kids" is comprised of recognizable actors who are all formidable, but it seemed as if they were primarily doing the movie more to hang out with thespian friends with kids or no kids, than for the work itself. Jon Hamm (Westfield's real life partner) and Kristen Wiig portray Ben & Missy, who go from a nymphomaniac married couple to a bickering one after the kids come in the picture. Chris O'Dowd and Maya Rudolph play Leslie and Alex, another married couple that go from loving moments to stressful ones after they have their little ones. Edward Burns and Megan Fox also drop in on the "Friends with Kids" as lovers of Julie and Jason, respectively that is; whatever that means. "Friends with Kids" is not a kiddy rom-com picture that should be totally ignored, but I would not go out of my way to take my friends or my kids (wherever they are, kidding) to give it a view. *** Average

By looking at the cast right away you would think.... OMG I loved Bridesmaids. Well it's nothing like bridesmaids. Basically if you were, like me, married with children you would realize that this movie doesn't take you away from your somewhat boring lifestyle. It just reminds you that your life basically sucks and most likely you are with your husband or wife because of the kids and the kids are the only relationship you guys basically have together. If you are looking for a realistic movie of what it would be like if you up and had a child with your best friend, then this movie is for you. Looking for a laugh then go watch something else because it has its moments but extremely weak.

AND Megan Fox isn't that great in this either.

In 2011, we were faced with two films asking whether or not it was possible for two people to casually have sex and unintentionally fall in love with one another. In 2012, we are presented with, from what I can see, one film that asks a more debatable and better question; is it possible for two people that are vaguely attracted to one another to have a baby, and while raising it, make efforts to meet and see other people? I'll be completely honest and say I could not and would not ever want to do this, although the idea, when put on the table, immediately sparked my interest. Not only does the idea of having kids disinterest me completely at this point in time, but I find that plan sort of selfish and unfair on both the parents and the child. If the parents seek out relationships with other people, the inevitability of it all will be that one or both of the parents will become so caught up in the new relationship that they will dump the baby on the other person. And unfair for the child, because every baby deserves a prominent mom and dad figure in their life.

Friends With Kids asks this question, using two couples and two very close friends as the subjects. The two friends are Jason (Adam Scott) and Julie (Jennifer Westfeldt, who serves as the writer, one of the six producers, and director), who have been the kind of people who are truly meant for each other, but neither one will wake up and realize it. Their friends are the collective Alex and Leslie (Chris O'Dowd and Maya Rudolph) and the intimate sex-hounds Ben and Missy (Jon Hamm and Kristen Wiig, all four are Bridesmaids alumni). The film opens with them childless, happy, and even more ecstatic once Leslie announces that she will be having a baby at dinner at a luxurious New York restaurant.

Four years later, the two couples have children and their marriages lack the intimacy and cheeriness they once bubbled with. The only two that still seem remotely happy are Jason and Julie, who both remain single and childless. After a disastrous party for Jason, the two talk over the idea of having children, something Julie has wanted for a while seeing as she is older than Jason. Jason and Julie figure that if they have a baby together and then proceed to move forward by dating other people, yet still taking care of the kid, their relationship as friends will not suffer.

They decide to do this on a whim and out of convenience, and nine months later, they have a child. Now here comes the inevitable part; they must support it yet are trying to seek out new people to date as well. Jason falls lust at first sight when he meets the offbeat and attractive Megan Fox's Mary Jane, and Julie can't seem to take her eyes off the rather cliché everyman, Kurt (Edward Burns).

Their friends are concerned for their behavior, mainly because they believe the having-a-child-without-plans-to-marry setup was an impulsive and foolish decision on their part. One area Friends With Kids absolutely wins at is its ability to have believable, real-life conversations that are projected through a mature, human scope. One of the most heartbreaking scenes involves Jason, a rather self-absorbed, egotistical character, confessing to Julie why they could never be together. This scene doesn't pull any punches. It genuinely makes its audience wince. No sight gags or one-liners involved.

Another perfect scene involved Jon Hamm's Ben lecturing Jason on why having a kid was a stupid idea on his part, and how the kid may grow up to be confused and troubled by not having two firm parental figures in his life. These are the scenes that create great humanity and drama between the characters, in an non-contrived, believable manner.

Friends With Kids feels like an exercise in Woody Allen-esque filmmaking, right down to the intellectual characters and the subtle character the state of New York plays. It's charming, often quite poignant, and perhaps offers some keen insights about the idea of raising children that is often forgone in many modern romantic comedies. It's endearing and reassuring to see a picture so true to its "romantic comedy" title.

Starring: Adam Scott, Jennifer Westfeldt, Chris O'Dowd, Maya Rudolph, Kristen Wiig, and Jon Hamm. Directed by: Jennifer Westfeldt.

Despite a few flaws and perhaps a somewhat quick ending, I think this was a decent film overall. There were quite a few moments where I had to hit pause because I was laughing so hard as well as a few other moments where it was very cute and touching.

The first big mistake in the film was that it needed an opening montage that better set up the leads. As shown, we get dumped into what I feel like is the middle of the story so we don't quite understand their bond.

The second issue is the somewhat abrupt ending that doesn't allow us to fully process what happened. It really just needed one more future scene to tidy things up.

I hate when comedies try to be "real". For some reason a writer will feel that they know the secret to human beings that will totally connect with audiences and make them say, "Finally, someone gets it." Of course this never works and it always comes off as artificial and forced from the actors. Thankfully this doesn't happen so much here with Jennifer Westfeldt's directorial debut (she also wrote it). There are a few moments where this can slightly creep in, but for the most part it actually tackles things in a refreshing, honest way and I was surprised by that.

Of course the premise (two thirtysomething best friends decide to stop waiting and have a kid together) is straight from the rom-com horsecrap handbook, but there are some turns along the way that I thought were surprisingly dark and genuine for something with such a cheap, hokey idea. There are some scenes that key into the stupidity of it all and I was impressed with how Westfeldt's script delved into that. Then again the film does end up being a pretty standard rom-com at the end of it all, so it kind of takes a jab at itself in the end.

Westfeldt assembled a nice group of her actor friends to play out the parts, but unfortunately she didn't have the smarts to cast someone other than herself in the lead. Her co-lead Adam Scott and the supporting cast are all fantastic here, in particular Jon Hamm who steals the entire movie as far as I'm concerned, but the director herself is a very cold and robotic actor. It was hard to feel anything for her or her dynamic with Scott when I couldn't even buy her as a real person. Overall though, this is a solid film of it's type with slightly better writing, a great cast for the most part and unfortunately one god awful ending.