“The In-Flaws”
by Scott Mantz

“The In-Laws”
Michael Douglas, Albert Brooks
Directed by Andrew Fleming

Open Mike! Michael Douglas and Albert Brooks toast the wedding party in "The In-Laws"

There are movies that make you laugh because they’re funny, and then there are movies that make you laugh because you feel like you have to. “The In-Laws,” an update of the hilarious 1979 Peter Falk-Alan Arkin classic of the same name, is definitely one of those movies. All the elements for a gut-busting romp are certainly there; memories of the original film, an outrageous plot, an identifiable setting and free-flowing chemistry between Michael Douglas and Albert Brooks, but what the film really needs—a funny script—seems to have been missing from the filmmakers’ “to do” list.

Daredevil CIA operative Steve Tobias (Michael Douglas) breezes through life, going from one deadly mission to the next, but now he’s faced with the most dangerous mission of his career—meeting his future in-laws. The bride’s father, Jerome Peyser (Albert Brooks), is a mild-mannered foot doctor with a fetish for fanny packs and a daily routine designed to eliminate stress from his life. Jerome is suspicious about Steve from the start, but when he is unwittingly dragged halfway across the world to help Steve in a covert operation, he realizes that Steve is taking the term “’til death do us part” just a little too seriously.

Weddings have always been the perfect setting for comedies—“Father of the Bride,” “Sixteen Candles,” and “My Best Friend’s Wedding” are just a few that spring to mind—but what’s truly amazing about “The In-Laws” is how much it squanders the opportunity. After a James Bond-inspired opening sequence (complete with Paul McCartney’s “Live and Let Die” to overstate the obvious), the film degenerates into a collection of lame jokes, contrived plot points and ineffective attempts to tug at the heartstrings. Having said that, the film does have its moments, particularly when the uptight Jerome is forced to wear a speedo while sharing a hot tub with the flamboyant crime lord (David Suchet) who has the hots for him.

After playing his share of sleazy businessmen and adulterous womanizers, it’s nice to see Michael Douglas kick back and ham it up with a more lighthearted role. It’s quite obvious that he’s enjoying his carefree, salesman-like approach to Peter Falk’s original role, which is why it’s a shame that the rest of the material isn’t up to snuff. That said, he does have great chemistry with Albert Brooks, who’s just as neurotic and unhappy as he is in all of his films. He’s pretty much playing himself, and if you find that appealing, then you’ll find that he’s the best part of the movie.

Despite a noble attempt to give the film more depth than the original had, the rest of the cast doesn’t fare so well. After charming his way through “National Lampoon’s Van Wilder” (in my opinion, one of the funniest movies of 2002), Ryan Reynolds is surprisingly reserved, while Candice Bergen seems wasted as Douglas’ new-age obsessed ex-wife. In addition, Robin Tunney pops up from time-to-time as Douglas’ ass-kicking partner with a predictable agenda of hew own, and David Suchet makes a lame attempt at outrageous humor as the unstable crime lord.

Perhaps “The In-Laws” might have been a better affair if “The Wedding Planner’s” Jennifer Lopez prepared it or if “The Wedding Singer’s” Adam Sandler performed the music. As it is, it’s a forgettable reception that pales in comparison to the film that inspired it, and any need to feel like you should laugh because you have to will be quickly replaced by the need to divorce yourself from the proceedings.

Back to Scott's New Movie Reviews

Review Archives