Stylish but barely mediocre overall

This movie tries so hard to be funny, yet it falls flat every time. Just another example of recycled ideas repackaged with women in an attempt to appeal to a certain audience.

A great movie, one of the best of this year. There was a bit of confusion at one point in the plot, but nothing serious.

The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

A black comedy that commits the cardinal sin. It isn't even mildly humorous. The plot is preposterous. Winona Ryder has come down to this??? If it's a choice of watching this "film" or getting open heart surgery, select the latter. I could go on and on, but you get the idea. I happen to like Simon Baker a lot, but his considerable charm is stretched to the limit. I guess I am masochistic and I wanted to force myself to stick around until the (very) bitter end, but at the 75 minute mark I just couldn't take much more and I ripped through the balance at 2x and 4x speed. I slowed down to standard speed for the big finish which is so stupid, I wanted to take out the DVD and fry it in the microwave. If I didn't get my point across, this picture is partially rotten with scattered patches of terribleness.

A quirky little study of the modern mating game which might have been unwatchable if it hadn't been graced with a sly and insightful wit...and the presence of an ideal leading man. Simon Pegg hasn't generated the big career building buzz that has elevated so many other actors from down under....his performance here is charming and polished enough to make one wonder why (somebody wrangle this guy a blockbuster!).The lead role in this inspired concoction would be a mine field for an actor without genuine charisma, magnetism, and sensitivity. Many lucky enough to possess the stunning looks which the part calls for would have been content to strut and smirk through the film. Pegg seems to dig deeper...and the grace and genuine warmth that shine from behind his beautiful facade bring to mind the class of another gorgeous actor who was never content to hide behind his pretty face...the great Cary Grant.The deft script also stirs up memories of droll "golden era" comedies that managed to bring in a bit of magic and mystery to spice up what could have been rather crass and ordinary plot lines. A story about a golden boy Lothario who's life is turned upside down by a mysterious e-mail concerning his future love-life could very easily have been lame, tired, and dim...(like so many Hollywood comedies seem to be nowadays). It was a joy to find that the ending has the same sly and unexpectedly insightful sheen as the opening scenes.It is also wonderful to see the delicious Winona Ryder finally getting another role that comes close to deserving her decadently desirable charms. This mix of danger and dreamy dark eyed dramatics fits her to perfection...and how she does shine!

This film listed Winona Ryder as a main characterand by the middle of the movie she yet had to appear. You see I never made it that far to the movie to see if she really had a role. Thats how bad this film was. It has an absolute silly plot and consequently bad acting and direction. I am really wonderihg how come it gets a rating of 6 or more here on IMDb? is one of the worst movies i ever saw. An absolute waste of money and time. Thank god i ve only spent the money on renting the DVD. i haven't seen it on the cinema. Did i yet finished my 10 lines, i cant really write more than that about this stupid film. Well obviously not, i still have to write more. I hated this film. Hated this film! Indeed hated this film.

Continuing with the thought that sometimes movies may honor its title, and that may save them from being bad or make them even more terrible than they are, I present to you the latter of the examples. Like "Boys", where Winona Ryder also plays a part, "Sex and Death 101" makes true justice to its title. The thing is that with a title like "Boys" there are interesting things to be said, but "Sex and Death 101"…That's all there is: sex and death.If I want those things, I can easily find them in a lame erotic film. For those who think that sex can be justified in a film and so on, I tell you that I agree; but there's nothing justifiable about the use of sex or even death in this film. "Sex and Death 101" tells the story of Roderick Blank (Simon Baker), an entrepreneur who's about getting married and receives an email with a list of every women he's had sex with and will have sex with. Any guesses? Right! They're 101 women. From that moment on, and I'm sorry if I spoil the ride for you (but all of this and more is in the unappealing trailer, if you've watched it), Roderick leaves his soon to be wife in a ridiculous scene and starts doing what probably any man would do; except that he does it in every scene and the only scenes that are not about it are about their friends (a fat, lesbian secretary and a bunch of married guys) trying to stop him with whatever excuse they find. At one point, writer/director Daniel Waters (I hope he has nothing to do with Mark) runs out of these excuses and the need for a closure takes his film to the utter bottom. But that's not everything Waters' made of as a writer. There's a woman called Miranda (the charming Leslie Bibb) who's apparently on the list but touches Roderick's heart; which leads Waters to create a joke that consists on everyone asking: "Have you f***ed her yet?". Another thing that's supposed to be funny is when his secretary makes Roderick check if her name is on the list.Oh, and there's "The Machine"! How could I forget such original invention and the origin of Roderick's problems? It's an empty space with a strong white background, and it has a crack in the wall. From that crack, it spits cards that apparently know anything anyone would like to know. The guy who controls the Machine, a possible Morpheus without glasses, says it may be an oracle but he's not sure. If you thought I had forgotten that the Great Winona Ryder plays a part, I hadn't. How could I when she's second-billed and she's not even a supporting character but a mere excuse to finalize the movie? She appears in only one scene, and gives (as convincingly as she can; it's not her fault that the script is so poor) a speech that pretends to justify the time we've wasted and fails.And Simon Baker can do better. Better than a simple smile and a cocky narration. A narration that pretends to know everything about sidestepping clichés but in the end narrates us the most convenient ending. I hate that.