Spread (2009) Poster

(2009)

User Reviews

Review this title
66 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
8/10
Sexy, subversive and very surprising...
appleknight28 June 2009
Spread is an unusual little film. I say 'little', as it's essentially a low budget character-driven drama that is some how being commercially packaged as a rom-com. A quick glance at the credits reveals that this isn't your average Kutcher vehicle: it's directed by Scotland's David Mackenzie of "Young Adam" and "Hallam Foe" fame.

Make no mistake, the Kutcher we see at the start of the film is very familiar: arrogant, uptight and utterly beautiful. But as the run-time flies past, we somehow warm to his character even though he's getting more sex than most of us will get in a lifetime. And here's the good news: Kutcher's performance is fairly astounding. He manages to reveal the humanity in his deeply flawed character with notable subtlety and a distinct lack of cliché. Kutcher's (many) sexual relationships portrayed in the film are brutally realistic: the modern and perhaps unromantic realities of casual sex are not dressed-up in any cheap Hollywood moralising. This is also evident in the overall tone of the film: there are many moments that could have descended into schmaltz, but a sharp edge it maintained on just about every line of dialogue.

Kutcher fans: beware. This is a real departure for the actor, but thank goodness: it's a movie with all the superficial gloss of Hollywood and all the invention of an indie flick.
190 out of 262 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
a heavy handed and patently nasty ode to 21st century values of greed and excess
gregking427 August 2009
Warning: Spoilers
An American Gigolo for the 21st century, although without the '80's morality and sense of excess. Spread is a heavy handed and patently nasty ode to 21st century values of greed and excess. Demi Moore's toy boy Ashton Kutcher is perfectly cast here as Nikki, a handsome, vacuous, arrogant but impoverished stud who seduces wealthy, lonely older women and sponges off them while giving them an enjoyable sexual experience. He is currently sharing the lavish Hollywood Hills mansion of 40ish lawyer Samantha (Anne Heche). But while she is away on business he beds a number of younger more insatiable girls. But he remains emotionally detached, and never lets anyone get too close to him. That changes when he meets Heather (Margarita Levieva), a waitress who works in a coffee shop. But Heather is the female equivalent, coasting through life and living off the largesse of wealthy older men. But Heather is even more complicated than that. When Nikki falls hard for her it is a relationship that will change his life. Spread is an undeniably handsome-looking production, but it is rather vapid and empty. We've been through that younger man/older woman vibe too many times in the past (Shampoo, Sunset Boulevard, etc) to be seduced by the rather lacklustre version of the story served up here. Working with director David MacKenzie (Young Adam, etc), first time screenwriter Jason Hill serves up a morality tale in which the narcissistic young stud eventually gets his comeuppance. Kutcher may get by on his pretty boy looks but his performance is flat and he brings little depth to a character who is pretty shallow to begin with. There are oodles of flesh on display here, but the coldly staged sex scenes fail to generate much heat.
49 out of 70 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Not a comedy?
Hardryv15 January 2011
I was surprised to find so many descriptions for this movie describing it or tagging it as a comedy... by my reckoning it's more of a light drama expressing the costs of inconsiderate over-indulgence. The players and performers all did their job as one would hope in any movie, but emptiness in the script and storyline left me wishing I'd spent my time more productively. I can't speak to any sense of realism in it, but perhaps there are worldly examples I'm simply unaware of. I did enjoy a few aspects of it, but there's little in the way of empathy that one can generate for the characters within as they're all between 'hollow & insensitive' and 'dishonest & abusive'.

My suspicion is that it will have greater appeal for younger audiences, mainly because some of the scenes portray rampant levels of decadence that they'll be more likely to appreciate than those of us in our 40s.
24 out of 33 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
"I was actually surprised with this movie"
flashtanto22 October 2009
I was hesitant at first to watch this movie. First it was the name, spread. I assumed it was going to be about fashion models and magazines or something lame like that. Second Ashton Kutcher is in it, not a selling point for me. But I was actually surprised with this movie. Ashton isn't his normal character in this film. To me it seems like he is going for a Hayden Christensen sorta thing. Most of the other characters in this film are bleak to say the most. They just kinda come and go with out any attachment, well from the viewers perspective at least. Anne Heche is super hot in this movie. I could never really feel for her though in this movie. I guess it was just the way she reacted to the situations at hand. I did love the pothead roommate though! It was hilarious hearing her cough in the distance. And the fact that she never came out of her room, I can relate with that. Well I liked this movie and it actually got better throughout the movie. Check it out if you have an hour and a half to kill.
62 out of 99 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Still Waiting To See If I Got Punk'd...
virtuall_boy14 August 2009
Warning: Spoilers
I must have missed the boat somewhere.

In its opening moments, 'Spread' bills Ashton Kutcher as an object of uncontrollable lust - he quickly and effortlessly beds the affluent character portrayed by Anne Heche and then proceeds to make her his sugarmamma; in voice-over Kutcher play-by-plays the finer points of his pick-up artistry while screwing a bevy of other Los Angeles babes (many of whom he is able to bang without fear of any reprisal, inexplicably, from Heche, who is confusingly low on self esteem - more about that in a minute). I got lost quickly in terms of comprehending how or why Kutcher, who prances around throughout the film looking like a campy homosexual in suspenders and little earrings, is understood to be such a smouldering sex symbol, and moreover, that I am just going to buy into this conceit with a straight face. I doubt I was supposed to laugh out loud during several awkwardly explicit sex scenes that proudly advertise Kutcher's O-face, but I did anyway.

The victims of this bizarre Kutcher adonis appropriation are the women he encounters. All of the girls he seduces during the first half of the film, especially Heche, come off as pathetic, thoughtless tramps - if we can't buy what the flick is selling about Ashton, what does that say about the girls he nails? The first time Heche catches him 'cheating' on her, we expect the crappola to hit the fan; instead, she gets aroused and has sex with him. Seriously? Their relationship is played off at points as some kind of torrid affair, but during a scene where Heche tosses designer clothes at Kutcher and he looks on with what is (assumedly) supposed to be darkness and angst, we are pressed to wonder how many takes it took for him to do it without cracking up.

Nevermind the derivative, unimaginative story and the all-too-predictable comeuppance moralizing that happens in the second half. And I would be grateful if anyone can answer me about just what in the hell is going on with any or all of the following: a sequence where Heche has Kutcher mysteriously drive her to the hospital for an overnight stay, later revealed to have been for vaginal reconstructive surgery; an encounter Kutcher has with a former lay in a grocery store, midday, only to find out the girl is tanked and needs to pull over on the drive home to throw up; and, once again, Kutcher's wardrobe, especially one scene where his suspenders and a black-and-white striped shirt make him look like a street mime - is this 'style' considered trendy and hip in LA these days? (And if so, god help us.) When Ashton finally hits bottom and resorts to selling off his Gucci clothes at a pawnshop only to throw a hissy fit outside on the street - not sure how I was supposed to react to this (I laughed) - it really gets driven home that we are watching Kelso from That 70's Show try to 'act'... and it doesn't work.

Is all of this supposed to be taken ironically or seen as some kind of contemporary social commentary? If so, I had trouble reading it that way, and I think most of the credit for that is due to the headliner. Maybe if Ashton Kutcher himself was in any way relevant over the last few years beyond Demi Moore/douchebag jokes, coming into this film an audience might more properly be able to frame the experience. Sadly, the end result is all too tragically similar to the degrading way the girls in the film come off: utterly pathetic.
54 out of 89 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Not worth the time.
dlee-103731 August 2010
Nothing new here. A story that happens ever day to people that you won't particularly care about.

The first half is slow moving soft porn and the second half is devoted to watching shallow people live shallow lives. People doing the same thing over and over again and yet somehow expecting different results.

If you can get past that everything else was adequate.I just don't see why they would assemble all those people and all that talent to tell us a story about people that were neither bad enough nor good enough for anybody to even take notice of.

Rent something else.
22 out of 34 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
A sex comedy with plenty of sex, not enough comedy and nowhere near enough smarts
Floated220 October 2010
Warning: Spoilers
Spread is just basically a film where Ashton Kutcher gets to show-off and gets around to seeing a lot of pretty women fleshed and taking advantage of them. Its a sex comedy with enough sex and not enough comedy nor smarts to deliver. The movie sets its tone in the first few minutes with Ashton (Nikki) reading his first line while walking around. "I don't want to be arrogant, but I'm an incredibly attractive man," he informs by his dry narration – he ingratiates himself into the lives of rich older women to gain access to good clothes, fine food and luxurious living.

The film and its characters were very odd and weird. Nikki was very monotone and did what he wanted. Anne Heche (Samantha) was way generous towards Nikki, and it starts by their introduction. It seemed to fake and unrealistic. The film starts out rough in its first 30 mins then gets slightly better. The first half of the film is more of a sex-com with the adventures that Nikki takes involving Samantha. The 2nd half of the film involves Heather a waitress who Nikki eventually gets and stays with. This half becomes more of a rom-com and this is where the film goes downhill. In the second half, Samantha isn't in the film (except in the last 5 mins). The script and plot were just dumb and not great, the movie just falls apart and the film gets boring. Its a rather different Hollywood film.

Another thing with the film is that Kutcher's performance wasn't all that great and he wasn't really believable as the gigolo. Also the clothes he's showing wearing are pretty silly (colourfull clothes and suspenders) Lastly, the ending was actually pretty weird and depressing, though not much. The audience didn't really care much about him in the first place and the ending showed that. But it still have should ended better. The last few minutes ends with Nikki speaking and picking up a mouse and making his toad eat the mouse. It sets like that for the last 5 minutes until the screen went black, its pretty bizarre. But before that it showed that he didn't end up with neither girl (Heather or Samantha). The film has its moments but not many, and they should have added more comedy. It really isn't a funny film and I don't think it was really trying but the trailers showed it out to be a romantic comedy. The movie was pretty bad and could have been much better.
12 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Surprisingly Good
moossaboossa16 April 2011
After reading a few reviews, I expected this movie to be a mildly pornographic rom-com. As the credits scrolled, however, I was surprised to find that this movie was not only well made and well casted, but the story behind well thought out too. Although some aspects of the story were clearly unreal (like the glamour and ease with which Ashton Kutcher picked up women), I thought that some things portrayed in Spread were rather accurate. One idea, which Nicky (Kutcher) mentions several times, is how people run to LA to pursue their dreams- but how the reality is that nothing is quite as magic as it seems. Most movies, having been made in Hollywood, would not necessarily incorporate this into the story. But this movie daringly features not only this but other controversial issues, and is therefore quite thought provoking. On the surface I can see why people thought the scenes of sexual nature were unnecessary, but really, the sex was part of the story. It was showing what Ashton Kutcher, who plays a gigolo, did to survive. And it showed how meaningless it all way for him. Overall I really enjoyed this film, and think that it carries a much deeper meaning than one would presume.
13 out of 20 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Very satisfying and well acted; I enjoyed it
Dragoneyed36326 April 2010
While Spread certainly wasn't a popular film when it was released, it didn't fly by my eye and it caught my attention for some reason, and I had been wanting to see it for awhile. When I got to view it, I was actually pretty satisfied with what I saw. The movie itself is quite well done and though it's apathetic and dull around the edges, the main story is strong and effective. The acting from both Ashton Kutcher and Anne Heche is great and believable, in my opinion, and though all the characters certainly weren't breathtakingly astonishing, they were actually well done enough to where I enjoyed them and I thought they were interesting and likable.

The real redeeming qualities this film has are an interesting plot, and Anne Heche & Ashton Kutcher. While the plot, as I've said, is a little tiresome, it never fails at being interesting and appealing. It pulled me in from the beginning because I got into Ashton Kutcher's character and I thought it kicked off to a very interesting start. Ashton Kutcher's character Nikki while being a bit tedious at times, as were most characters, was never really badly done and his and Anne Heche's character Samantha's chemistry together was amazing and their story is likable, and her character was probably my favorite because of the actress's portrayal, which leads me to another great aspect of this film; The performances.

Anne Heche was amazing as Samantha, and I really just found her performance genuinely likable and impressively delightful. Ashton Kutcher also did a pretty good job with Nikki and Margarita Levieva did alright with Heather, too, but the performances by and especially the chemistry between Heche and Kutcher was what I really enjoyed and for that I thought the first half of the film was stronger than the second half, which became kind of rushed and, how shall I say, dry, but still effective.

Nonetheless, this movie in my opinion is entertaining, interesting, well acted and it has a very poignant script. While it's certainly no masterpiece, and could've been done better in ways, it was still very satisfying and I enjoyed it. Not the best of 2009, and not one of the most popular, but it is a secret pleasure that I hope to get more people aware of.
25 out of 44 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
the other side of L.A. glamor
paul_haakonsen12 January 2011
I thought this movie to be a comedy, as it was labeled such, so I was sort of waiting for a movie to make me laugh. The movie "Spread", however, is not really a comedy, more like a drama. But it wasn't a bad movie at all.

The story was nice, and it was a story that you easily could get yourself into and follow it. The story was going forward at a brisk pace and you wanted to see where the story would take you. I like the aspects of human behavior and how we treat other people and how it was portrayed in the movie. The director managed to hit that one straight on the head.

The cast in the movie was good. Ashton Kutcher did a good work as the lead role of Nikki. He has that boyish charm to him, and that worked well in this particular movie. But, the one carrying the movie would be Anne Heche in the role of Samantha. She did a phenomenal job in that role. I am not usually a big fan of her, but in this movie she was brilliant. And the chemistry between her and Nikki was really well acted out in a believable and good manner. And Margarita Levieva, playing Heather, was also quite good, and this is the first time I have seen any of her work.

Now, what didn't really go well with me was all the sex scenes. Well, I know it was important for the movie, but I just found it a bit too much. There was too much focus on those scenes, and I found it a tad over the top. But hey, I wonder if the movie would have been the same had they left them out. So just a little heads up for those haven't' seen the movie yet, there is a lot of adult situations in the movie.

The movie did get around a couple of interesting questions along the way. And a movie that leaves stuff for afterthought is one of the better kind of movies, entertainment and debatable at the same time. However, for me, this movie is not the type of movie that has enough value for a second viewing. It is watched once, then bagged and tagged.
10 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Boy Toy.
rmax30482324 March 2011
Warning: Spoilers
I suppose Anton Kutcher must be handsome. He's tall and dark and every woman who approaches him seems to melt into some kind of amorphous plastic object that wobbles towards the nearest bed and begs him for commands.

He doesn't do a thing for me but his appearance, his pheromones, and the size of his apparatus seem to suit him well in La La Land. He puts everything he has into selling his looks and stamina to a rich lady like Anne Heche, who puts him up in her spacious modern flat overlooking the City of Angels. They sip expensive wine and nibble bonbons when they're not schtupping each other. Well, they have to do SOMETHING because the Kutcher character has the wit and sensitivity of a cucumber. He's recklessly selfish. His insights run along lines like these: "When a girl tells you you're not going to get anything, that's when you know you're going to get something." Heche returns home unexpectedly and finds him being serviced by a young blond wearing only a golden helmet while he watches Monday Night Football. I guess I ought to make it clear that although this is sometimes labeled a comedy, it's not. Heche tosses out all the fashionable clothes she's bought him, and then throws him out too.

This puts Kutcher on the street and he must hock a few of his more outrageous items from Prada in order to get along, while mooching off a male friend.

Then he runs into Margarita Levieva, a dark-eyed pretty thing who waits tables. She ignores his advances at first but he insinuates himself into her apartment, when he begins to put his usual moves on her. She insists he sleep on the couch so he doesn't get the wrong idea, but the light is no sooner out in her bedroom than he's creeping towards her in his skivvies complaining that the couch is too short, he's just going to slip in bed next to her, they're both adults, they can keep their hands off each other, and the baloney keeps grinding out, as in a factory. She agrees reluctantly. And I'm thinking, if she falls for this line, she's at least as stupid as he is. "I can feel you're smiling but I can't see it," he murmurs to her naked back. She rolls on her side and smiles openly at him. She's as stupid as he is.

Another conquest for Kutcher, whom I am, by this point, beginning not just to dislike but to hate with the kind of rubescent glow that only a hatred born of envy can generate.

I breathed a sigh of relief when Margarita turns out to have a rich fiancé back in New York. (He owns the Rangers.) She's not only as stupid as Kutcher but just as avaricious. But, now that the two poor people are in love, she flies back to New York to settle things with the wealthy fiancé who has been supporting her in Los Angeles. Kutcher finds he has trouble reaching her on the phone.

At this point, the story could have gone in one of two ways. (1) After several scenes of increasing tension, just when Kutcher is about to give up all hope, Margarita shows up, with an anxious smile, at his doorstep and they fall into each others' arms while a folk song about love swells up softly in the background. At that point, I would have walked out and sold my golden body to the nearest female bidder. OR (2) Margarita decides to stay in New York with Mister Right and Kutcher winds up sadder but wiser with a pedestrian job in Los Angeles.

The resolution lay behind Door Number Two, thank God. Yet, I still found it unsatisfactory in a way. Of course I was happy that Kutcher was able to reach Maslow's stage of self actualization. (He delivers groceries.) But real life in my experience doesn't work that way.

It's improbable that a man in his mid or late 20s who has been a shallow, self-interested sex fiend for all of his adult life is going to turn his entire character around because he's found someone as unprincipled as he is, and she's shown him what that looks like from the outside. He has a final exchange with Heche when he drops her groceries off. She asks how he's been. He smiles and says he's doing alright -- and he seems to MEAN it. It's a happy ending that sits on the film like a clown's cap on a performing seal. And as he drives his delivery truck away, there is a sappy love song on the sound track.

Kutcher's character is a dull man with no particular talent, intelligence, or sensibilities. He isn't evil. He's not even bad. He's simply empty except for his narcissism. He ought to be out there on the boardwalk in Venice, listening to rock on his Walkman, while doing capricious figures on roller skates. The best performances (and the best lines) are given to women, especially Anne Heche, who tells him in no uncertain terms where he stands on the life course. This movie could have been written by Tennessee Williams' ghost.
6 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
An egregious attempt at film-making
elyasburney5 January 2010
Warning: Spoilers
This movie was dreadful. Firstly, Ashton Kusher may be suitable to play jovial roles in tawdry sitcoms; however, he lacks the talent to assume more serious parts. The main character in Spread is a young cad named Nikki (Kusher), who narrates about the complexities of living in Los Angeles. Yet his narration is mostly a collection of meaningless quotes that make him sound like a buffoon trying to appear knowledgeable.

Nikki visits a nightclub one evening and meets Samantha (Anne Heche), a rich older lawyer with a lavish condo. The two start a relationship and the film is loaded with sex scenes of this 'cougar' and her 'boy-toy.' Nikki moves into her condo (he is a bum without a house or a car, thus he repeatedly mooches off wealthy older women). After a few days, Samantha leaves for a business trip and Nikki invites some younger girls over for some carnal escapades. Samantha comes home early from her trip and catches Nikki cheating, yells at him, but then seconds later the two start having sex.

The character development in the movie is flimsy. Heche's acting is acceptable, yet the film neglects to explain how a gorgeous and successful lawyer is drawn to an underachiever like Nikki. The director of the film, David McKenzie, is focused on skin over story. This should be his last film for the silver screen and he should apply his skills to pornography, which seems to be his preference. That may sound harsh; however, anyone who directs a movie heavy on sex, low on plot, and with bad acting is not suited to make legitimate films.

As the story progresses, Nikki later genuinely falls in love with an attractive waitress named Heather (Margarita Levieva). But she is a hustler who abandons him for a rich businessman in New York. A dejected Nikki returns to L.A. where he gets a job delivering groceries.

This is 98 minutes of my life that I will never get back. None of the characters are worth caring for and the acting, aside from Heche, is lousy. The only reason I am not giving this movie a 1 rating is because my 2010 New Year's Resolution is be a nicer person and voting 2 out of 10 constitutes an act of generosity.
24 out of 44 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
One word: Horrid.
carling_forbes16 January 2010
Warning: Spoilers
I watched this movie with my boyfriend, thinking it might be OK. We were so very wrong. Everything from the plot to the acting was just awful. I am usually a fan of Ashton, but this was just crap. I can never look at suspenders the same way again---why did he have to wear them in EVERY single scene? In terms of the plot, it was so predictable once you understood what was going on. Watching Ashton live out of a garbage bag and whore himself out to Anne Heche was certainly not something we had prepared ourselves for on date night. I also like Anne Heche, but I really did not need to see her naked. Not too mention, the whole vaginal-reconstruction thing was a bit much for us.If you consider yourself even slightly intelligent, do not watch this movie.
20 out of 37 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
A film of lust and love and the difference
click_199321 January 2010
Warning: Spoilers
I enter the film without too higher expectations. I though it would not be worth my while. Yet it became clear quickly the acting and attraction of the film was a lot better that I had original anticipated. I am proud to say that by the end I was truly impressed and moved; particularly by the ending and Ashton Kutcher acting as Nikki. Spread is a film with a story not dissimilar to other erotic thrillers. The character of Nikki is not unlike the character of Daniel Day-Lewis in The Unbearable Lightness of Being. Yet in spite of the film seeming simplicity, Spread has a lot more to offer than at first glance. Nikki, (Ashton Kutcher) is a character who is very dependant on other people. He almost feed of the women he meets as if he is a parasite. Although from an external point of view Nikki is a heartless creature, through out the film one is pulled into him whether willing or not.

The other actors in the film give a strong a convincing part as they help or hinder Nikki through his life. Although the acting is by no means bad, Kutcher does slightly push the others into a shadow. His performance is a superb one. He does not use a lot of drastic movements or shouting to move is characters emotions. Indeed it is the stillness and quietness of Kutcher which gives Nikki his edge. Kutcher strength is in his voice. He has a very sexy and convincing voice, but that is not all that he uses it for. The happiness, lust, greed, love, sadness and despair which Nikki feels are conveyed wonderfully through Kutcher voice.

The film takes place in LA: A city connected with dreams and heartbreaking. LA is often seen as a place where misery lives and this is referenced at the end of the film yet the city is portrayed as a desirable place to live. Part of this is through Nikki's eyes with the sense that everything in his life is perfect. Yet even after it all begins to go wrong, the city still remains beautiful. This reminds the view that we are not watching a film about LA, we are watching a film about a promiscuous young man. Also on a deeper note it could be to convey the fact that love can be found right in front of your eyes even if you can't see it.

The erotic senses in the film are seen as very casual. They happen in frequent bursts. These scenes seem to just copy one another almost, as if every girl is the same to Nikki. Yet once he leaves Samantha and re-meets Heather the scenes change in feel. They become longer and gentler; more beautiful and loving.

Eventually Nikki falls in love with Heather. We know from the start that there is something different for she is the one girl he has a true difficulty seducing. Usually it is Nikki who plays and uses the women he takes, but Heather almost reverses this and seems to be playing with him. Nikki's mind changes and he does begin to feel a true sense of love rather than just lust. Although Heather does "break" Nikki's heart it does show the audience that Nikki does have a heart and he is just as human as the next man. Heather has an extra intelligence which the other women don't and this along with a combination of other things brings out the heart in Nikki.

The film as a whole is an interesting story and well acted with a good script and ideas. The ending its self is a very good ending for the story and has a very final conclusion to it. The film manages to convey what it is trying to say and in a way that is not boring or repetitive. The film is an adult film in both content and idea, however, it is a film definitely worth watching and I would recommend it to any adult with a interest in good film drama.
17 out of 31 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Very enjoyable
BernardoLima21 October 2009
Warning: Spoilers
I've been meaning to watch this film for quite some time and I finally got a chance to do so.First,I'm a fan of Ashton Kutcher, I think he's a very charismatic actor who does fairly enjoyable movies. Secondly, I'm a sucker for films about love,sex and relationships in general,I'm also fascinated by L.A. and its lifestyle and fourth,this seemed to have an Alfie(2004) kind of vibe to it.I wasn't disappointed.Kutcher plays Nikki, and right in the beginning of the movie the character says that he came to L.A. with the dream of having an easy life,sleep with as many beautiful girls as possible and basically to have the time of his life and that most of this did,in fact, came truth.This is Nikki, a young and attractive guy who sleeps his way into the life of privilege he wants.His routine is fairly simple,he seduces someone with money and then stays around continually charming the person and earning their trust and eventually the person allows Nikki to stay in their house and most of the time they actually pamper him with free stuff. Nikki then uses this amazing houses or fancy clothes to impress someone else.Needless to say that he juggles several woman at once.At some point Nikki becomes attracted to a waiter but much to his shock this girl unlike most of the woman he sleeps with,does not fall for his little games or succumb to his tricks(which by the way he narrates to the audience trough the movie).Maybe because she's the one girl he apparently can't have or for some other reason(although the first seems accurate to me)Nikki falls in love with this girl. In the meantime Nikki is living in Samantha's house, a 30'something business woman he seduced.He ends up being caught cheating (with someone other then the waiter) and after a few fights the relationship ends.Broke and without a place to stay Nikki resorts to Heather,the waiter and moves in with her.He falls even more in love with her but he also finds out that she's playing the same cards as him,she is too whoring himself out to the highest bidder in order to have a lifestyle she couldn't possible afford. Nikki tries to make a commitment with Heather but in the end she chooses her own Sugar Daddy over him.Defeated Nikki gives up the lifestyle he had been leading and in the end he comes back to Samantha's house but as a delivery guy and we see that Samantha already replaced him with another young guy. There's no happy ending here which makes the movie so much better and realistic.This film is being misinterpreted as a romantic comedy,but it couldn't be more far from it. The film ends with a sad and depressing tone but isn't life like that at times? Also, the soundtrack is quite interesting and mainly compose by indie bands. Overall, a good movie, very enjoyable with lots of eye candy and a good performance by Kutcher.

On a side note, I've seen some people complain about the character's style saying that he looked gay and saying that the character wasn't believable as a womanizer...nonsense. His look can't be pulled off by everyone but its definitely a look and I think Kutcher played Nikki brilliantly, he managed to reveal the humanity in his character in a very subtle yet efficient way.

7/10
12 out of 22 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Unexpectedly Good
gleben1829 May 2014
when i first read the plot summary, i was expecting a fairly bland, generic movie. this is not what i saw. I enjoyed this movie and it was not something you'd expect from Ashton Kutcher. the original story plot and strong characters made this movie far better than a low budget, 1 star movie ever should be. the versatility of Kutcher is shown as he plays a character that isn't anything like is normal. i thought the movie was entertaining due to the new, fresh plot line. Despite the fact there was a fair amount of 'adult' content within, it managed to keep your mind of of this and use it in an almost tasteful way, and use it to build the root of the characters even stronger. this is definitely a film i recommend, the only reason i give it a 7 is because of the fact this could have been made far better with a higher budget. going on plot alone, this is a solid 9. if you have 1hr and a half, watch it.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Not a romantic comedy at all
dmitrythewind11 August 2009
Warning: Spoilers
I really enjoyed the movie despite the fact that it was advertised as "romantic comedy" with the title translated to Russian as "Babnik" (Womanizer). Yes, there are so much sex and "glamour" in the beginning; nevertheless, the real story begins afterwards – the one that is worth to see, and that is NOT a romantic comedy. The story of the closed doors. The story of selling the expensive staff for nothing. The story of the beginning and the end of love. "You are a dreamer, and it is scaring me", says the girl to Nicky, and this is so true. Nicky is the man without a plan, without friends, he survives because of the attractive appearance, that will not remain over time. That's why "Spread" is the real drama of dreamer's collision with the reality that he tried to ignore so far.

The ending is not about happiness or tragedy – it's about bitterness, shame and folded 5-dollar note in the hand… And Nicky will return to the house where he used to enjoy the life, but in the different role now, proving that the history is always repeating itself.

8 out of 10
14 out of 27 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Acting is fine, storyline is weak
intelearts26 October 2009
Spread tries to be hollow, vacuous, shallow, and then tries to be more and cannot make the spread.

The story of the gigolo who wants more than possessions when he meets a girl who doesn't fall for his routine might be OK but the arc is seriously lacking in places and what we get is a jump start stop of a movie that takes us on a road to nothing.

Ashton's performance is fine but he cannot compete against the weak storyline: the dialog is actually passable but the plotting is kind of weak.

Yes this is a movie where woman have the power and about how times have changed for guys. And yes it's true, good looks alone won't cut it, but it is just passable as film.

If you like the actors or the theme you may enjoy this; we found it hovered uneasily between the disillusionment of the American dream and a redemption tale - which it ain't....
24 out of 52 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Wow. Ashton is more than Keanu 2.0!
kiitah13 August 2009
Warning: Spoilers
Within the first 5 minutes of opening, I thought Ashton really chose poorly in accepting this role; he chose a role too close to what he is perceived as in real life. First and foremost in my mind, he's an ex model hottie. Secondly, he has never seemed like the sharpest tool in the shed based on the roles he's played. Thirdly, I wonder would he be where he "is" today without Demi? He saunters in, first scene, looking like a cross between a gay hairdresser and a wanna be edgy member of Green Day. He's talking smack about how beautiful he is, and how he's ridden on the coat tails of his charm and appearance and sexed his way around LA. Boy, I thought, I'm glad these tickets were free...

In the end, I was surprised that I was able to suspend disbelief and actually believe what his character was feeling, saying and doing, and NO, it wasn't because the role wasn't a stretch for him. He actually *acted*, so much so that I forgot who he was and that I wasn't supposed to think he was doing a good job! The story line has some extraneous characters that muddle and muck up the story, and some are not as developed as could be, but all in all, for what it's intended for, it's a good escape. It shouldn't be classified as a romantic comedy though, there is nothing romantic about it. It's about a man who moves from Sugar Momma to Sugar Momma, whoring himself out to the highest bidder. In the end, he doesn't find love- appropriately his unrequited love chooses her own Sugar Daddy over him. If it were a true romantic comedy, the two poor but in love people would forsake their desire to live a lavish lifestyle with OPM and move into a refrigerator box together, but alas, no, she turns him down.

In the end, I found it a little depressing, actually, but isn't that how life really is? No happy ending here, and that made it actually better than it would have been with a nice, tight, Hollywood as usual movie wrapped up with a shiny, red bow.

As an aside, there's lot of eye candy for your viewing pleasure, not just of Ashton romping around in bed naked, but plenty of hot women, too.
13 out of 26 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
very true story of high society L.A. and how it is a Male driven environment
ebdawinner20 June 2010
This film is a great example of what the L.A. social life is really like... drivin' by male a dominated mind frame where you can have whatever you want as long as you play the rules of the land. If you got it you "got it" if not the you don't, its that simple. this movie really made me feel the superficialness of how Los Angeles really is. I loved how they played on the idea of a playboy womanizer who can have whatever he wants, then broke the dudes' back like a ton of bricks. life in the fast lane is really like that where you can feel so high and so low the next minute in a "town" like Hollywood. Kutcher played a great role in the story with his lack-a-daisical sense of being in all aspects of the current character. This is a very true story of how Hollywood "can" pick u up and spit u out in the same breath as easy as a gasp of air, no matter how "big" u feel. Its really when u step back and look at the story when you see the big picture, where u see the irony and the brilliance of the role of kutcher. It's almost sad how the end is, even though u know it is coming sooner than later. The end is fitting for the picture seeing that Hollywood is really like that, An Open Book, never closed cause there is still hope in the system of which Hollywood consists of. Forget your "friends" and be a "Dreamer" like how the Hollywood fancy is really like. Great Film in my opinion. Shot with great views of the city, with beautiful people, and a story that doesn't stay still, it's just the inevitable ending that makes this story sort of cliché.
8 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
better than a poke in the eye....
ptb-811 July 2010
For 75 years we have seen talkies about young handsome and pretty hopefuls who come to Hollywood and lick their way to the top of something only to find they shoulda stayed home. This film isn't a talkie so much as a screwy. From DAY OF THE LOCUST and A STAR IS BORN and others, notably American GIGOLO we cinema-goers have sought the sight of these pretty prostitutes doing their thing..... and this time we have Ashton Kutcher (and Anne Heche) fully nude for your viewing pleasure. Exactly how much of a pleasure is doubtful, but this film SPREAD which he co produced is mostly all for and about him. Other viewers might be hard on this film (unlike Ashton, I am sure) and the material is familiar, but the production values and his unflinching willingness to get his gear off a lot is clearly to refresh the tired storyline and the awful personalities of the parasitic behavior on screen. Kutcher is quite good as the toy boy involved, and Heche is the hot momma host and their interaction (so to speak) works. There is a lot of nude on screen sex in this film all photographed lushly in semi tropic patio heaven. It's fun and trashy and well made and you get to see bits of everyone not normally in the sunlight. SPREAD, like Kutcher is nice to look at and quite familiar but ultimately empty. There is a better version yet to be made of this idea that these 20 something nightclub people who are good looking realise they are just delivery staff. As they say, be nice to those who you meet on the way up....
8 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Those with morals and want to avoid wasting your brain space: AVOID.
modland5 July 2010
I lost a whole lot of respect for Ashton, and this movie and everyone in it and who likes it, within the first 10 minutes the movie started rolling. I'm a big Ashton fan, and this movie was the finale to an Ashton movie marathon, and boy was it a huge letdown. Not only was his acting pretty terrible (there may have been some salvation of his acting if it weren't for the lifetime- drug-addict voice he had throughout the movie), but there's zero point to this movie. The first 40 minutes are basically porn. I don't know about everyone else, but a pseudo-love story about two prostitutes falling in love is pretty pathetic, not to mention pretty morally gross. It was also entirely offensive to women, as well as men who have some sort of moral depth. The last half is the only decent half (hence the rating of 2), as it's not all raunchy sex, cocky men, and Ashton in his dumb suspenders.
8 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Horrible, Ghastly Movie
freepsavage16 November 2009
Warning: Spoilers
This movie ranks in my top five worst movies I have ever seen. I assume the producers thought the movie would sell on the basis of graphic sex and nudity. That being said, I should have watched a porn movie (as the acting would have been better).

With the exception of Anne Heche's performance (and she looked amazing), the acting was completely stiff and devoid of any emotion. Then there is the story. Spoiler Alert***** Hollywood gigolo finds great meal ticket, but throws it all away to pursue true love.

I kept waiting for more to develop, but it didn't. To make matters worse, I felt no connection with the main character, so I didn't care at all when bad things happened to him.

All in all a complete waste of time. My guess is that anyone who has seen this movie has been Punk'd!
8 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
No genre.
ruffinelli_ro13 July 2010
This film is about a guy who seduces women in order to live from them. He was a parasite who didn't even had a job in his whole life. I think that the producers didn't take advantage of ideas like these (Even if there was too little to take advantage in the first place).

A friend of mine rented it and told me that this was a comedy. Even in this site is advertised as a "sex comedy". The result was the most insipid movie in the history of film making. But even if it was a drama, it would have been awful too. It wasn't focused, there weren't any concrete ideas in this film and painfully lacks direction. I was bored to tears right pass the middle. The movie went nowhere and it's a shame because it had potential to be a decent comedy, but the directors and producers didn't have a clue of what they were trying to make.

The acting was bad, but the awful script and direction were the real trouble here, so I will be a little less hard about the actors and actresses. What is intolerable is the way they portrayed women. This was the most sexist movie I've ever seen by far. It was actually far worse than Iron Man, which I think had the first place in objectifying women before I saw this one. Some of the characters were successful women with good jobs, lots of money, pretty houses, etc. and you might think that they are strong, independent and self confident enough to be smart when it comes to relationships. The fact is that this movie shows us those women as miserable persons that had such a low self esteem and self respect to fall for the (unlikeable) protagonist of this film. They support Kutcher's character beyond reason, even if he violated their thrust. I know that there dumb people in the world, but this was too much.

This film would receive a lot more attention for its offensive style towards women if it wasn't incredibly boring. The fact that it is almost unwatchable is enough to make it a disposable film. The final "redemption" was poor too. Overall, this film led to one question: why would a normal person wear suspenders all the time?. Stay away at all cost.
11 out of 26 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Warning: I am spreading the puns here for my review of "Spread"
meeza12 April 2010
The city of Los Angeles plays a prominent character in "Spread", a movie that certainly spreads the word that Los Angeles is not exactly angelic for everybody; even though it can be if you got the right plan of action, as least for a while it can. That leads us to the protagonist of "Spread", the homeless & carless Nikki portrayed by Ashton Kutcher. Nikki uses his physical good-looks to prey on the wealthy single women of L.A. so he can spread his orgasmic juices inside them, then in turn they can spread their home & car over to him. My hero! Kidding! One of Nikki's premier so-called victims would be the cougar-honey Samantha, who after meeting Nikki at a club, takes him to her gorgeous Hollywood Hills home and seduces the hill I mean hell out of him. Before you can say "I Slammed Sam", Nikki stays in her home for days and even drives her dazzling Mercedes Benz. Nikki still keeps hustling to the sexual tussling even though he temporarily lives in Samantha's home. He even throws a party when she is out of town so he can escalate the female body count. So for the first half of the "Spread", the aforementioned was the film's appealing portion. I expected a shift in the narration of the film, nothing great last forever for any main protagonist of a movie. But this could of have been done so much better! Cause all of a sudden, Director David MacKenzie spreads "Spread" into a feeble romantic narrative. That is when Nikki meets Heather, a coffee shop waitress who derails Nikki unexpectedly, and does have some secrets of her own; secrets that were so quite obvious that it spread like wildfire what they were as I was watching the movie. Ha? Hey, leave me alone! I am spreading it thick, pun style. I do credit MacKenzie for his vision of exhibiting the story of a serial womanizer in Los Angeles, and using the city as a central focus in that architecture. But again when Heather enters the spread, the film becomes an obtuse romance that you can care less how it develops and concludes. Jason Dean Hall's screenplay was rich in style during the first act of the film, but then when the Nikki & Heather romance was introduced the scribe was converted into a silly romantic contrivance. That Asthon acting show was not half-bad in his starring performance here compared to his past acting, but that is not a spread stretch. What the Heche? Anne Heche is back! She was exquisite as the sexually-driven Samantha. However, her counterpart female lead in the film Margarita Levieva was atrocious as the staid Heather. OK, I am tired of spreading my viewpoints of "Spread". Please spread the news on the mediocrity of "Spread". *** Average
6 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed