The In-Laws (1979) vs The In-Laws (1995) - The Match-Up

I have been trying to think of some really interesting things to say about these two movies. I'm coming up a little short. Of the movies I have watched so far, these did not illicit much of a reaction out of me. A middle-of-the-road buddy adventure tale is not something that gets you all inspired. However, there are some good and bad things to mention, and away we go.

When comparing the two versions we get the same basic storyline. There is an upcoming wedding, this necessitates the joining of two families, a tricky situation no matter who you are, but especially tricky if one of the parents is an international spy. One slight change in the family dynamic of the 1995 version was making the spy character a divorcee. This stands to reason, since the wife in the 1979 version seemed a bit clueless, how could she not know what profession he husband was in?

Also, the 1995 version changes things up a by making Michael Douglas more or less a James Bond type. This makes for more action set pieces, probably a calculated change for modern audiences who demand more action in their movies. That's not to say the original didn't have action but Peter Faulk's character was grounded a bit more in reality. I think this change was an unfortunate one. In working the script to include more over-the-top action set pieces it caused the plot to become a bit over-complicated. I couldn't really tell why the bad guys were after our main characters and I didn't care either. The focus of this type of movie should be the comedy. The 1995 version was trying to hard to be both an action movie and comedy and didn't really accomplish either. I wonder if the fact that True Lies came out in 1994 had an affect on this movie's action level. It's like the geeky little brother of True Lies.

One new element to the 1995 version was the addition of a closeted-homosexual character. I can't remember, was being gay a popular thing to have a laugh about in the 90s? I put it that way because this felt forced and seemed out of place in the movie. As if, somewhere in the process of writing the script a studio exec saw some other movie with a gay theme and said, "we need that in our movie!" I'll have to do a little research on that one.

So, which one was better? I like the original The In-Laws much more than the 1995 remake, the only problem (and not it's fault at all) you could say about the original was, when being reviewed from this perspective, it doesn't appear to be very special. But that is just a matter of many other movies using the same formula. You can't go wrong with Alan Arkin and Peter Faulk, though. And did it need a remake? This time I can definitively say, no. The 1995 remake seemed like a response to other hit films around the same time, like the aforementioned True Lies. It's a shame, because Albert Brooks is a genius and Michael Douglas is always money in the bank. Still though, if you ever consider watching a movie called The In-Laws, do yourself a favor and watch the 1979 version. You'll get a much more coherent and funny experience.