The In-Laws Movie
Storyline
TAGLINES PLOT SUMMARY
When prospective fathers-in-law Steve Tobias and Jerry Peyser meet for the first time to celebrate their children's upcoming marriage, the cake hits the fan. Dr. Jerome Peyser is a mild-mannered podiatrist with a well-organized daily routine designed to eliminate all possible sources of stress. Meanwhile, daredevil CIA operative Steve Tobias moves through life like a heat-seeking missile. His average day consists of dodging bullets, stealing private jets and negotiating with international arms smugglers. Now he's giving potential father-of-the-bride Jerry a serious case of pre-nuptial jitters. Steve's dramatic entrances and exits, his cryptic references to a Russian runaway named Olga and his fight with a gunman in a restaurant washroom causes Jerry to see a vision of his daughter's perfectly planned wedding blowing up in his face. As far as Jerry's concerned, letting Steve into his family takes til death do us part way too literally. Before he can say the wedding is off, Jerry suddenly finds himself embroiled in the chaos that follows in Steve's wake as he is dragged kicking and screaming into a series of perilous adventures that take the mismatched in-laws-to-be halfway around the world.
| Michael Douglas | Steve Tobias |
| Michael Bodnar | Cherkasov's Bodyguard |
| Vladimir Radian | Cherkasov |
| Robin Tunney | Angela Harris |
| Albert Brooks | Jerry Peyser |
| Boyd Banks | Patient |
| Susan Aceron | Nurse |
| Lindsay Sloane | Melissa Peyser |
| Maria Ricossa | Katherine Peyser |
| Ryan Reynolds | Mark Tobias |
| Chang Tseng | Quan Le |
| Tamara Gorski | Yadira |
| Matt Birman | Agent at Restaurant |
| A. Russell Andrews | Agent Will Hutchins |
| Richard Waugh | Agent Thorn |
| Andrew Fleming |
6.50 out of 10 (9 votes)
Visitor Reviews
A Bit Too Over-The-Top Perhaps, But At Times This Is Hilarious
posted on 05 Jul 2009This is a very funny movie, featuring the usual good performance from Michael Douglas as "deep under cover" CIA agent Steve Tobias, whose son is about to marry the daughter of Chicago podiatrist Jerry Peyser (Albert Brooks, who also put on a good performance.) The movie follows but freely adapts the story from the 1979 original of the same name that starred Peter Falk and Alan Arkin. The characters have different names, this version is set mostly in the U.S. and Europe, whereas the '79 version was set mostly in Central America, and this version deals a lot more with the wedding. The main difference, though, is that this one is way more over the top than the '79 movie, which tried to take the subject a little more seriously. Comparing the two, then, which you think is better will depend on whether you like over the top comedies. I do, and I prefer this one.Tobias is a bit of a James Bond type, with lots of gadgets and a beautiful sidekick (played by Robin Tunney) to go along with them. Peyser's role as a podiatrist somehow seems funnier than the dentist character from '79. The FBI agents on their trail are more bumbling than anyone faced by the "heroes" of '79. Finally, the part of the bizarre general in '79 is replaced by a totally bizarre international arms dealer (played absolutely perfectly by David Suchet) who says that homosexuality disgusts him but then falls madly in love with Peyser. All these things add up to what I thought was a hilarious ride.Worthy of note is Candice Bergen who was strong in a limited role as Tobias's ex-wife. Some of the story was a bit too over the top. The nuclear submarine in Lake Michigan was a bit of a stretch. One wonders how this thing got through the St. Lawrence Seaway. (I would think it would have been pretty hard to hide going through the Welland Canal!) Overall though, even if it's a wee bit too over the top at times, it's still really funny. 7/10
Hilarious farce...what a romp!
posted on 05 Jun 2009A great Friday night video. We enjoyed it immensely. It was just the right thing to see after a long week in the salt mines. Pop some corn and sit back for the laughter. Douglas is over the top and Brooks is a perfect foil. This duo's work reminds me of the old Lewis and Martin films. The cast does an excellent job of not overtaking the two leads. I'm not sure how Candice Bergen reined in, but she did. The stunts are excellent, we especially enjoyed the jets whizzing away from the action scenes. The character playing Tibideaux, the smuggler, had just the right touch of humor and malice. You will want to see more of the two who played the prospective bride and groom. GO RENT IT NOW!!!
My Head and Throat Still Hurt From Laughing
posted on 01 Jun 2009There have been many instances where a remake is funny, but just not as funny
as the original. In the case of "The In-Laws" I made a point to watch the original
which was released on DVD. Although Alan Arkin and Peter Falk were veryfunny, the original had dull moments and amusing moments. However, thisremake with Michael Douglas and Albert Brooks was so funny I left the theater
exhausted with a headache and sore throat. There were moments that I waslaughing so loud that my wife and daughter got embarrassed. I've seen mostly all of Michael Douglas' works and enjoy watching him verymuch. But Albert Brooks absolutely steals this film away from the rest of the
cast. If you haven't seen the original, don't worry...you don't need to.
Although
the story is similar in a few ways, one won't spoil the other.
Light entertainment
posted on 06 Apr 2009I just loved this movie. It's better than I expected and funnier. Michael Douglas and Albert Brooks are so funny!!! The story is entertaining and easy to follow. The action scenes were very good too. This movie also has a great soundtrack, I especially loved the scene with 'No matter what' playing in the background, it was hilarious! Not to mention the Avril Lavigne song at the ending.My only complaint is that they should have used Candice Bergen more. She was so great, but didn't appear enough.
Funny and exciting
posted on 27 Dec 2008This is not a Woody Allen type film. It is not a satire or spoof. It is not a drama nor comical examination of American customs. It is not crude either although there are a few moments. It took awhile to be sure exactly where this film was going but then I loved it.The photos do not do it justice and the only reason I went to see it was because Michael Douglas and a few of his family were in it so I was curious.
It actually was a new take on weddings and made the wedding seem so much more fun than people who over plan and want weddings to be so perfect. By mixing the world of spys with wedding reception it makes you actually want to go to the wedding. If you see the film you will understand. The raindrop song scene makes everyone kids again and makes getting married seem like the adventure it should be rather than a stuffy event that grown ups can turn them into.This film was such a surprise. I had scene Bruce Almighty and Daddy Day Care which were both funny but not crude as comedies have recently been.
(Almighty is a classic) But In Laws was really funny reminded me of the rare film That Man from Rio. I could have seen a few actors playing the bride's father like Danny Devito but this worked. Douglas is as cool as ever. While obviously aimed at adults I actually went back to see this film again and brought my 8, 14,and 15 year daughters. I am sure few kids have seen this but parents perversely and regularly let kids see dark films like American Pie. My kids would never had seen In Laws but they loved it.
There is nothing explicit or bad in here for kids except one kind of gross kiss but no big deal. This film is ultimately uplifting and has a style all of its own. My kids danced in the aisle after the film was over. I have to take others of all ages to see it.
Better than some remakes
posted on 25 Dec 2008Hollywood is littered with bad remakes of great films. One wonders why studios even bother. The original with Peter Falk and Alan Arkin is one of the funniest films ever made. On the other hand this updated version lacks in so many ways. Albert brooks and Michael Douglas do have good chemistry but he script is not up to the challenge of reviving this classic. The first half of the movie is pretty good, slowly but surely goes downhill. There are some good moments but they are few and far between during the last half of the movie. The ending is just plain stupid. Too bad, it could have been a contender. Im glad I saw this on television instead of spending money at a movie theater. Otherwise I would be writing a more negative review.
Occasionally funny.
posted on 23 Dec 2008This is a comedy about two families coming together around a wedding.
Michael Douglas plays an undercover CIA agent whose son is getting married to Albert Brooks's daughter (he's a podiatrist).Michael Douglas is a fast-talking con artist in this movie and he's pretty funny at it. He's completely shameless as continues working his job - in this case, pursuing an international smuggler trying to buy a stealth submarine - and making wedding arrangements at the same time.Albert Brooks is the man of a thousand phobias, and it's his role to be set upon by Michael Douglas. He's the weak link in the film because I just don't find him funny. Playing the eternal victim for an hour and a half gets boring. It would have been better if he'd riffed off of Douglas' character rather than just going along and moaning about it.There are some funny scenes and Michael Douglas is pretty good at this comedic change of pace, but some of the gags are dumb. The schtick about the "big cobra" deserved a few seconds at most, not a running theme throughout the film. And the supporting cast adds nothing.Just so-so.
Watch it with your mother!
posted on 17 Dec 2008I don't enjoy comedies. And I was hard-pressed to consent to watching "The In-Laws" when my mother bought it from the discount section in Blockbuster--but, I have to say how glad I am that I finally gave in!"The In-Laws" is one of the best movies you've never seen--it's kept a surprisingly low profile in spite of how entertaining it is. The chemistry between Albert and Michael is superb, and the pacing of the entire film is very fluid, and very clever. An integral part of the movie is the soundtrack, which is amusing in itself, and how it seamlessly compliments the actions and lines of the movie."The In-Laws" is just plain fun. There's no shock value, no pretenses, and no reason not to enjoy this film!
Not a Patch on the Original
posted on 01 Dec 2008Didn't work for me. Maybe the original spoiled it, but I'm not sure, because the two movies aren't that congruent. What they have in common are a couple of broad traits. The fathers of an about-to-be-married couple are very different from one another. The more adventurous of the two gets the more recessive one involved in some outrageous caper. Everything ends well. And that's about it.The fathers are different characters from those played in the original, and that's the first noticeable departure from what was a very successful comedic arrangement. If, in the earlier version, Peter Falk was a reasonable-sounding lunatic and Alan Arkin was a comfortable bourgeois, in this one Michael Douglas is an Errol-Flynn-like man of action and Albert Brooks is a neurotic mess. As in so many attempts at remakes, the winsome and amusing situations of the original are distorted for additional comic effect until they're not funny at all, just silly. Imagine a remake of "Some Like It Hot," in which the Tony Curtis figure is a no-neck steelworker and the Jack Lemon character is a genuine transexual.I'm not exaggerrating in my description of the Douglas and Brooks roles. Falk couldn't do anything right. He tries to start an airplane and the windshield wipers begin arcing. But Douglas, like Flynn, can do everything. He's perfectly competent. He even turns deadly serious once in a while. Douglas is okay at comedy, as he's shown in some other roles, his bird hunter in "Romancing the Stone" being the most relevant example, but Falk was an inspired lunatic and Douglas is simply not.Brooks is closer to the original's Alan Arkin, and his persona fits the requirements more neatly. He's really good at projecting anxiety. But again, the anxiety seems to be inbred in him, rather than arising from the increasingly demonic circumstances he finds himself in. Poor Arkin was taken by the hand, along with the audience, and led into a loony bin, whereas Brooks is there almost from the beginning. It doesn't seem to get worse for him as it goes along because it's at its zenith as soon as it starts. It's got nowhere to go.That's a weakness of the script, though, not the performances. The bizarre uphill quality of the original is at asymptote here. The two principles are set down in the lair of the villainous David Suchet (excellent) and they stay there. Most of the laughs developed out of this situation aren't as funny as they might be. What I mean is, they're kind of funny (both the podiatrist and the fetishist are, in a sense, "foot men"), but it's the kind of humor you might find in a sitcom. And the laughs don't come as quickly. The original hit you over the head with one gag after another, from the mark of Zorro to Senor Wences to black velvet paintings of tigers -- pow, pow, pow. Here we get an extended scene of Brooks and Suchet in a jacuzzi, with Brooks wearing a bikini bathing suit. It's amusing but it's just not outrageous enough.This one seems to owe too much to ordinary run-of-the-mill action flicks, of which there are thousands out there lining the shelves of Sam's Blockbuster Video shops. My advice would be to rent an action movie or a great comedy like the original, rather than a failed attempt to combine the two.
Brutally awful
posted on 27 Nov 2008Boring, done a thousand times before. Unbelievably bad. Incredibly stereotypical. Douglas is the hip-CIA agent father who never has time for his son, and Brooks is the square boring foot-doctor father who dotes on his daughter. Every single typical stereotypical attribute is given to each character....(yawn)..... Brooks is scared of heights and airplanes, he never leaves the State, he wears a fanny pack, he is boring and stodgy. Douglas of course, is the complete opposite, suave, able to beat up thugs, knows everything. And do you think there will be any moments in the film when they are both at a great height or in an airplane? And do you think that Michael Douglas will learn to be a better father, or at least figure out that he has been a bad one because he was away on missions all the time? Barf. Gag. Predictable. Don't know if that counts as a spoiler since it is so incredibly obvious.Everything is moronic about this film. The FBI agents are more incompetent than Boss Hogg, the villains are as nasty as Gumby. The plot is absolutely absurd without being the least bit funny. The movie actually started off with me thinking "This won't be that bad", but that feeling quickly faded. Everything was predictable, nothing was original, everything had already been done 6000 times before.Rent "Meet the Parents". It is infinitely better and considerably funnier. This one has nothing to praise, nothing at all. It is a remake of a moderately humourous movie from the 70s, but atrociously directed. On top of that, in 2 scenes the boom mikes practically konk Douglas on the head. Couldn't they catch that in the editing room? Fortunately, the movie is only 85 minutes long before the credits start rolling so I managed to get out before going completely insane. I don't think Hollywood is capable of making good comedies any longer. They seem intent of dumbing everything down, going for the lame tried-and-true and done 5000 times boring old dried up jokes. There was some forced laughter in the theatre at the beginning during the Vietnamese restaurant scene, but even that quickly died out. People started leaving before the movie got to the incredibly predictable wedding scene.Lame. Terrible. A complete waste of time.
Worst movie in a long time
posted on 07 Nov 2008This is the worst movie I have seen in a long time.Albert Brooks was the only good thing in it.Michael Douglas needs another good movie like "The Wonder Boys"It was a big waste of time. The actors that played bride and groom were boring ,no chemistry at all.
It's THE ODD COUPLE meets TRUE LIES.
posted on 22 Oct 2008The best comedy all year. Even funnier then Bruce Almighty, at least the jokes never seem to wear out in this movie. The film is about Jerry Peyser(Albert Brooks) an uptight foot doctor, preparing for his daughter Melissa's(Lindsay Sloane, big red from Bring It On) wedding. He finally meets the grooms father named Steve Tobias( Michael Douglas). But things really get crazy when Jerry discovers that Steve is actually a secret agent, and he gets dragged in on one of his missions. Michael Douglas and Albert Brooks are laugh out loud funny team. You can really tell they were having a ball. It has great action and great laughs.
Never trust the FBI and don't believe the CIA
posted on 31 Aug 2008Don't ask me how they manage to bring a Soviet submarine in Lake Michigan just across from Chicago. When you start asking silly question you destroy the comedy and the Home Security Department is landing on your balcony, air borne and under-cover if not underwater. Because it is a comedy and nothing else. A silly comedy with spies from all over the world, planes that are hijacked, wrecked, or plain – funny for a plane – sacrificed. That's what happens when your father is a CIA agent at a third level of under-coverage, a triple under-cover-agent in one word. Just add to that a father in law who is a foot doctor who does not exactly like things slightly out of the ordinary because it is too exotic for his taste, like flying in a plane, taking a lift to a very high elevation, finding himself on the top panoramic floor of the highest skyscraper in Chicago, if not on the roof, getting down from up there with a parachute, making some noise to attract the attention of a torpedo while strutting around on Lake Michigan with a water scooter, a pedalo without pedals in a word but with a nice engine. But in spite of all the hullabaloo it is fun to have such a father and your bride is going to like every moment of it, especially when it goes with a lot of millions. And guess who is going to perform the wedding? Certainly not the Buddhist monk, the Jewish rabbi, or the Christian preacher whose denomination is not even mentioned. But you'll have to go check in the film itself because I am not going to say. One thing is important anyway for you and you better remember it: a father is unique and you have to take it the way it is, the way it comes, the way HE makes himself available because no one can change a father.Dr Jacques COULARDEAU, University Paris Dauphine, University Paris 1 Pantheon Sorbonne & University Versailles Saint Quentin en Yvelines
Halfway decent, but should have been better
posted on 24 Jul 2008The movie had potential, but clearly it didn't
come together. While I liked the concept and I
liked Albert Brooks and Michael Douglas, this
movie had far too many pratfalls in direction and
writing to be called a winner. If the jokes had
managed to create some laughs, this would have
been a rather entertaining movie. Instead, it will
have to be listed in the `mildly entertaining category.'It's hard to put down the performances, because
I felt they were all pretty good, but it just felt likethe writers didn't try hard enough. This is one of
those films that could have certainly been better.
Couldn't stop laughing!
posted on 20 Jul 2008I've never seen the original, but I must say this is a funny funny movie! I hardly spent a minute without laughing! Michael Douglas and Albert Brooks make a great unlikely team. Like you'd expect, Brooks bangs out hilarious one-liners left and right ("I think my food is still eating"). The soundtrack is filled with cool songs like "Live and Let Die," "Get Down Tonight," etc. You can argue that some of the gags are cheap and scatological, but they still work. The film has a fast pace and some exciting action sequences to boot. My only minor criticism is the casting of Ryan Reynolds, who should be fired from the movies altogether. He is a completely one-note actor, whose dry sarcasm gets incredibly annoying.
Luckily, he's not in the film long enough to ruin it. But I do like Michael Douglas and Albert Brooks, and they're great in the film. Even Candace Bergen has a funny little supporting role. If you're in the mood to laugh, laugh and laugh some more--go see "The In-Laws"!My score: 8 (out of 10)
Intelligent, Wacky Fun
posted on 08 Jun 2008Premiering the same weekend as Bruce Almighty, this more cerebral and intelligent comedy maintains its own wacky pacing and outlandish plot with over the top antics that rely more on true comedic humor, especially from Albert Brooks along with the physical/dry humor of Michael Douglas. This feel-good, spy/irony comedy makes for the perfect summer getaway outing without any lavish romantic plot dominating the screen. Candice Bergman gets to play her latest incarnation of weird but loveable matron. The laughs are as belly roaring and satisfying as Bruce Almighty but in a more deeply moving way making more use of unused brain cells. Though a bit extreme in some of its hard-edged scenes and out of this world plot moments, this pre-summer still is a lot of fun. Eight out of ten stars.
A new "odd couple" is born with a new spy-film twist.
posted on 02 Jun 2008A new "odd couple" is born with a new spy-film twist.Michael Douglas is Stephen Tobias, a rugged deep-cover CIA agent, who focuses more on his work that his life with his son, Mark (Ryan Reynolds) or his now ex-wife, Judy (Candice Bergen).It turns out that Mark is about to get married to beautiful Melissa (Lindsay Sloane) but has yet to meet Mark's parents. Mark assures her that is a good thing. But Melissa's parents, Jerry (Albert Brooks) and Katherine (Maria Ricossa) insist on meeting at least Mark's father.During the first meeting between Mark's father and Melissa's parents, mild-mannered foot-doctor Jerry stumbles in on one of Stephen's spy plans and finds himself swept up in Stephen's mess on the eve of his daughter's nuptials. How will this revelation effect the up-coming marriage and will the two fathers live long enough to get back to the wedding?"The In-Laws" is one of the biggest surprises I have seen this year. I never thought in a million years that this film would be as funny as it is. The odd pairing of Brooks and Douglas pays off tenfold. Their odd pairing and hilarious antics made me think some of the classic film, "The Odd Couple". The film also reminded me a little of the 80s comedy, "Real Men" because of its off-beat way of bringing the audience into the story.Brooks hasn't been this funny in years. His neurotic schtick, which is probably more famous when played by Woody Allen, gives his character such innocence. There were so many priceless moments involving Brooks and how he relates to the spy-world.Douglas seems to have journeyed back to his Jack Colton character, which he played in "Romancing the Stone". There is definitely some of Colton in Tobias. You can really see it when Douglas allows Tobias to put his guard down. That was always the funniest part of Colton and it is the same for Tobias.Another great thing about this film is the caliber of people who are in the cast. You have some great upcoming comedy actors like Reynolds and Sloane and on the other side veterans like Bergen and Brooks. I wanted to see more of Reynolds since he is such a great comedic find. I have high expectations for that guy. I also really enjoyed Sloane when she was in the short-lived WB series, "Grosse Pointe". I so miss that series. She to has a great potential to be more if given the chance in comedy.This film knows where its strengths are and it continues the laughs over and over. I just wish we could have had more time with the supporting cast.The film also has some interesting uses of music in its soundtrack. For instance the opening scenes involving Michael Douglas escaping from one of his spy missions involves a great car chase and a gun battle but the whole scene's overture is accented by Paul McCartney's infamous James Bond theme, "Live & Let Die". It is a great addition as it seems to help build the spy feeling of the scene. Throughout the film there are interesting musical additions, which help put interesting slants and accents on the various scenes."The In-Laws" was such a surprise and is by far the funniest movie I have seen this year, thus far. (4 out of 5) So Says the Soothsayer.
Everyone Had Fun Acting
posted on 27 Jul 2009This is a great Comedy film with some funny/bad criminals and some off the wall FBI agents and a CIA Deep Cover Agent. Michael Douglas, (Steve Tobias), "It Runs in the Family", '03, plays a very distant father to his family and especially to his son, who is about to be married to a very sweet loving gal. The bride to be has a father,Albert Brooks, (Jerry Peyser), "My First Mister", '01, who is a foot doctor and is very off the wall about everything in life, 'Can't Do This or Do That' symptom. Jerry Peyser discovers Steve Tobias in a bathroom stall with a very hot sexy gal, both almost sitting on the same stool together. Poor Jerry wonders what kind of family his daughter is going to marry into and the entire picture goes around in complete circles in the Hancock Building in Chicago. Michael Douglas plays the straight guy and of course, Albert Brooks simply makes you laugh constantly. Enjoy!