It's a chick flick, so there you go, I said it right up front.  And, What's Your Number? is very predictable, so there you go again.  AND it's 27 Dresses with a bit more sex and without Katherine Heigl.  Actually, I almost liked the film up until two scenes that show the moral decay of American cinema.
 
The story follows Ally Darling (Anna Faris) who has tipped the scale in sex partners for a woman's lifetime according to a national ladies magazine. In fact according to the article, at 20 men her clock has stopped and if Ally doesn't marry one of the men she already slept with, she'll end up missing her true love.  Cornered with seeming no way out she decides to look up each of her previous lovers in an attempt to find one with which she could spend the rest of her life.  When Colin (Chris Evans) her across the hall neighbor comes into the picture to help her, the plan starts to get a very murky.
 
I'm sure director Mark Mylod (Showtime's ‘Shameless') had full reign with his actors and the script.  Faris, who also produced What's Your Number?, known for her bawdy roles in films like The Hot Chick and House Bunny was easily molded into her character as the promiscuous Ally Darling leaving very little for Mylod to achieve with his actors.  That is except for Evans (Captain America) who took on the role of Colin.  Mylod uses Evans recent success as the super hero to show him off as lady eye candy guaranteeing a strong female word of mouth following for his film.
 
If there is an upside to the film it's hard to find as What's Your Number gets very predictable, cheesy and familiar.  Much like 27 Dresses the elusive ‘special one' gets hard to bag, even if he's right in front of your nose.  I will admit, however that some of the sight gags and toilet humor provided some laughs and some of Ally's old beaus draw a humorous guffaw now and then.   
 
Now I know it's just a movie, but the shock of seeing 8 year olds swearing at a wedding reception turned me off to the film.  I'm not a prude and throughout even laughed at the extensive use of off color language by adults.  It's obvious the filmmaker inserted the kiddie's remarks to ice the chances of getting an R rating because the rest of the film borders on a PG-13.  Even the nudity is from the rear (pardon my pun) and the sex doesn't show a whole lot of flesh.  My point? These are youngsters using the F word in unison, three males and a female, followed by a final run through using the F word combined with another word for breasts.  If there's a moral to this film, it's ‘amoral.'

FINAL ANALYSIS: Not much here that's been done already.