Subject: I have found a DVD that I think you would enjoy
|The In-Laws |
Actors: Albert Brooks, Michael Douglas, Ryan Reynolds, Lindsay Sloane, Michael Bodnar
Director: Andrew Fleming
Genres: Action & Adventure, Comedy, Mystery & Suspense
Family matters. Laughing matters. They're all a matter of laugh or death as Michael Douglas and Albert Brooks play opposites thrust together by their children's wedding and by CIA agent Douglas' involvement in an arms-smug... more »
Similarly Requested DVDs
Member Movie Reviews
Sharon F. from HIALEAH, FL
Reviewed on 5/4/2019...
Great cast, great theme, well worth your time. I laughed and laughed at the In-Laws. It just goes to show you that you really do marry into the family.
Quality remake.... of "Meet the Parents"
Jason A. Miller | New York, New York USA | 05/13/2003
(2 out of 5 stars)
"Why? Why why why?Well, there are positives to get out of the way first. Albert Brooks is an inspired choice to recreate Alan Arkin's role from the original "In-Laws". He brings to every movie a fully-formed nebbish ready to let loose 6 or 7 really memorable zingers, and this was no exception. Michael Douglas has played a very wide range of stock characters, if not necessarily deep. And the original "In-Laws" certainly wasn't technically perfect: it suffered from atrocious film editing. Why not spruce it up with some CGI submarines, more expansive stunt sequences, and a Paul McCartney soundtrack?Most of the changes in the remake, however, don't make sense. Brooks is playing a Chicago podiatrist, not a Manhattan dentist. Michael Douglas has been saddled with a female sidekick, the likes of which Peter Falk didn't need. There's considerable more emphasis placed on Brooks's daughter and Douglas's son... so they can argue at length about his pre-marital flings. Candice Bergen has a strenuously unfunny cameo as Douglas's ex-wife (Falk was happily married in the original, albeit to a wife who had no idea what he did for a living).Most noticeably, the witty humor of the original is all but gone, save for a few Brooks gags. That's all been replaced by a wide variety of warmed-over sex and toilet jokes, which have been funny in a hundred other movies since "The In-Laws" came out, and which are so familiar here that you'll laugh at the joke before it's even finished. Indeed, with the main character being a nebbishy Jewish medical professional from Chicago, and his co-star an over-the-top CIA agent, you'll quickly realize that this is a remake of "Meet the Parents" more than anything else.The accomplished David Suchet shows up for a pointless role only faintly evocative of Richard Libertini's in the original. I'm sure that blatant gags about repressed gay terrorists are still funny somewhere, but it is possible to do a movie without them. Right?I wasn't expecting a carbon copy of the original "In-Laws". However, I was expecting something lively and original. And this movie isn't it."
Movies don't all have to have "lessons" or deep meanings!
Lynne P. Caldwell | Dadeville, AL USA | 10/19/2003
(5 out of 5 stars)
"A good movie is a like a good book, a means to escape. The older I get, the more I enjoy watching something that is just plain funny. I don't want to be sad, I don't want to have to concentrate on a movie with a lot of metaphors and hidden meanings. I don't want murders, rapes, heart breaks or pain and suffering. Sometimes it's fun to watch a movie that is just pure entertainment and THE IN-LAWS fits the bill. Michael Douglas and Albert Brooks play the fathers of a couple who are about to be married. The only problem is that the dull, neurotic, germ obsessed, fanny pack wearing foot doctor becomes involved with CIA agent Douglas's secret life. Here begin laughs that don't stop until the movie is over. In fact, I laughed until I cried and trust me, it is wonderful to be that happy! What an escape!"
Andy Orrock | 02/29/2004
(1 out of 5 stars)
"Remakes have it tough; everyone who's a fan of the original will be hypercritical of any shortcoming. Lots of other reviewers on this site have blasted this remake as falling far short of the hysterical 1979 Alan Arkin-Peter Falk film, and I, for one, am willing to take the 15 yards for piling on. Really, if you liked the original, stay the heck away from this ill-begotten travesty. Brooks is funny at times, Douglas isn't, and the magic just isn't there. Sorry, Hollywood, you blew it on this one. What's next--a remake of 'Casablanca' with Matthew Perry and Jennifer Aniston?"