ladybug2535 First the positives: I loved the fact that the film portrayed the elderly as lively and fully sexual (if frustrated) beings. The acting was decent and some of the characters were very entertaining. These are not Hollywood elderly either-which is a very refreshing change (and one of the things I prefer about British entertainment--Hollywood needs to get a clue); these characters look like regular people; "old people" which is nice--grey hair, wrinkles, saggy boobs and butts and all. Hollywood old and Hollywood "ugly" is just annoying and is so unrealistic that it is simply distracting and takes the audience out of the story. Honestly, this aspect really enhances what humor there is in this film. These actors are very obviously comfortable in their skins--as it is! and have fun with it. Unfortunately that's just about all I can say on the positive side, which is really too bad.The movie missed a golden opportunity to really explore and humanize the elderly. The moments that were truly interesting and worth expanding were barely there and then ignored. An example is the sadness experienced by one of the lead characters when his (I think) granddaughter comes by for her weekly--all too brief visit. It's mentioned in passing to explain his long face, then never brought up again. In that case, why even have it in the film at all? These kinds of subjects have been successfully treated with humor in other films. Looking at the serious side of being old doesn't have to be maudlin or depressing, but it certainly would have given the movie a depth that it currently lacks. I don't think the movie was scripted, but rather the actors seemed to mostly ad lib around a general set-up, then the clips were joined into something resembling a scene. Many of the scenes lacked any kind of bridge to tie them together, resulting in a slap dash amateurish effect. This would explain some of the continuity issues and why the pacing seemed off throughout the film and greatly lowered my rating.Many of the jokes were just irrationally juvenile; and several of the characters simply acted like naughty neglected children. This kind of treatment does the elderly a great disservice. There was also way TOO much emphasis on the men wanting to get "laid"--as they acted more like pre-pubescent boys who had never touched a boob before instead of grown men who had been married and raised children to adulthood. The women were also shown as sexual beings, but far more realistically--the uneven treatment is rather baffling.This film is not for anyone who would be offended by graphic and crude sex talk or language, though the visuals are pretty tame. Overall a sadly missed opportunity.

Beth Keel I was deeply disappointed when I rented it. I had expected it to be awesome with all the big names that were in it. Most of the movie is made up of cheap and dirty jokes. The big names advertised for this movie only have short segments in the movie and even then are lost in the blandness. The movie was so dry and awful that I only watched about 30 minutes of it before turning it off. It was not worth any more of my time. Further more I was still left feeling like I had been robbed of time. The next time that I am tempted to rent a movie based on the assumption that good actors only take roles in decent movies, I will I will be sure to do my research first. I would not recommend this movie to anyone. It was a complete waste of time and money.

ScottM2753 Wow, seriously, this film is beyond terrible. If it was possible to get a refund for seeing this film I would. Unfortunately it is not the theaters fault at all. In fact it is more or less offensive, as it seems to be making fun of some of the elders in the film in general than trying to be funny. It is POORLY written, the jokes are TERRIBLE and the acting is wooden at best. Even J.K. Simmons, whom I like in most movies, and consider a funny man is terrible in this. More than likely that was the writing more than anything. The film, as someone else stated, started out with promise, then slowly (and I do mean deathly slowly) evolved into a completely bad film. Bad jokes, bad writing, bad acting, bad pretty much all of the way around! Do yourself a favor, avoid this film! Save yourself the complete waste of time.

Planet-38 Not sure why the low scores because this is a delightful and funny movie. Maybe it is because it is a cast mostly of middle-aged and elderly. Or maybe it is because western social attitudes about older people not being as interesting as those under 30. Or people are made uncomfortable by the thought of old people "doing it". "Old" people aren't supposed to be silly, irreverent, sex obsessed or pranksters? Well, from the elderly I know in real life, they definitely can be. It's really only illness and infirmity that puts a stop to it, if you were silly, irreverent, sex obsessed or a prankster when you were younger. Perhaps not even then. (I visit and occasionally have lunch out with a lady in her 70's who likes to scope out and then point out good looking young men to me. Not because she is trying to fix me up, but according to her, because she likes looking at good looking men!)I don't think this would have been funny if this was about teenagers or twenty-somethings because it has been done to death. Using the older generation gives a tired old genre, a fresh new twist. It is filmed as if it were a documentary, and the unseen camera holder is mentioned a couple of times. But, unlike another review, I did not care for the beginning and almost stopped watching because of that Tyler Perry "filming a play for a movie" feel. Luckily, that changed after just a couple of minutes.There are also some nice cameos, including a hilarious Christopher Walken impression by Kevin Pollak. While it isn't an Oscar contender, it is definitely an entertaining film worth the watch.And I want that red "bikini".