It's ironic that Albert Brooks made the remake, because I think this film and Brooks's "Lost in America" are two very funny films that seem to be one act or 15-20 minutes too short.
Maybe it's just because I've seen "The In-Laws" so many times that it just SEEMS short to me.
Does anyone else think this film needs another act or at least some more running time?
I think the running time for this movie is just right. What more could they really do? But I will definitely agree with you that LOST IN AMERICA is too short and ends much too abruptly. It could have used a few more scenes.
shareI agree that this movie seems way too short. There was so much potential in the storyline and the actor combo. It seemed like act one was New York which was very funny and then act two was central america which wasn't that funny like that stupid general. I was expecting an act three at the wedding where everything goes horribly wrong. The movie just kind of ended without any real payoff. It would have been hilarious if they both just died at the end. It would have been more realistic if Peter Falk was actually ex CIA gone insane and had no backup plan.
share