MovieChat Forums > Spread (2009) Discussion > Awful Film [Spoilers]

Awful Film [Spoilers]


You've seen this done before...

Sexy guy has sexed his way into a life of privilege and can have anyone woman he wants until... he meets a woman that isn't into him and thus, this drives him crazy.

She also has a secret/reason for not being into him and then it turns into the two showing off to each other until they come to terms with the fact that you can't in fact be in love and have sex for money.

Now, SPREAD has two things that ruin this film.

For starters, had Nikki been played by a relative unknown, the film might have been interesting but seeing Ashton Kutcher [whom I don't find sexy AT ALL] talk like he has a cold/flu and tries to be charming [which comes out as smug all things considering]. Had Nikki say been a young man from Brazil it could have been interesting but considering quite a few men look like Ashton and he doesn't have charm [unless he is trying to get a laugh or is being self deprecating]. I found Margarita Levieva, whom I've never seen in anything, be WAY hotter and far more interesting and can see why she would attract attention and men in LA.

Excess. It's really hard to connect with people whom just seem to like to dine out and go to pool parties. After a while, all that plus the sex just makes it feel like a hollow and shallow film. Had it been a little less explicit and say, had two leads with more chemistry and whom we wanted to know more about, it could of work but after about 5 mins of seeing Nikki and hearing his voice over, you can see you aren't going to learn anything new or useful. This isn't a peak to a hidden world or underground world. Rich people can buy sex and poor people who look good sell sex.

I don't know if I was expecting more or felt like it could have gone places but after seeing the director's cut of 54, this film feels like its wanna-be brother.

See it only if you LOVE Ashton Kutcher or can stand his acting.

reply

[deleted]

The story sounds intriguing but I can't think of a worse choice than Ashton Kutcher.

reply

I agree - this film is freakin' awful. The makers of the movie apparently thought they were making a Shampoo, American Gigolo or Breakfast at Tiffanys for a new generation, but it that's the case, they obviously don't understand those far superior films AT ALL. In Shampoo, for instance, Warren Beatty may have been a cad and a womanizer, but at heart, he loved women, and he was also talented and ambitious. In Tiffanys, George Peppard was a sweet guy who was a talented writer but had lost his mojo. Ever Gere in Gigolo was a smart, driven guy.

In this movie, however, Kutcher's character is a lazy, narcassistic bum. All he wants to do is free-load off rich women. How is that interesting? When he gets his just desserts at the end, the audience is way ahead of him. Hollywood chews you up and spits you out - duh!!! We've also already seen this slick realization of Hollywood in everything from Valley of the Dolls to Entourage. There's nothing original here - unless you're dying to see some nudity! It may be slick, but it's completely superficial, and Kutcher does not have the chops to pull it off.

reply

It looks like COCKTAIL minus the bottles being thrown in the air.

reply

You must not be a fan of Bret Easton Ellis. I never have a problem with excess. There's usually a point being made by having it.

reply