Ti presento i suoceri

How can a film with an amazing cast come off so wrong? The banter and wittiness you expect from Diane, William, Richard & Susan is strong but the script doesn't live up to what you know them to perform in.

Lots of strong dialogue they fills like it was meant for the theater and missed the mark with the space that is left in a film.

So many awkward scenes that have holes or dead moments that make you wonder what could have been done differently. The last 20 minutes has the best line's delivered by the cast.

The cast try's hard and have some really great scenes that made us laugh. Overall I don't regret watching it just wished it offered more.

I'm not sure why they made this a movie. It's clearly a play. The monologues are play worthy, the acting is play worthy, even the blocking is stage worthy. While the acting IS stellar, it's awkward as a movie. The main cast is fantastic, and the 4 parents definitely play opposite their usual. The couple in love have very little chemistry, and her lines border on slapstick. The thing is, I don't remember any of their names because it was SO strange to watch on screen. I would love to see this written as a play script and acted on stage with the same cast. It would read so much better if it was seen live.

I had to put on subtitles for this. For a talky romantic comedy with no explosions. Christopher Nolan this is not.

Directors: pay attention to audio. At this point, we're nearly back to silent film with how badly y'all handle this stuff. Movie watchers all watched the explainer about why movie audio is so bad these days. Did movie directors? You should. I don't care if your actors want to sound more "naturalistic" with their mumbles and their whispers. They have a job to do and they are not doing it if I can't hear the words coming out of their mouths.

Apparently my review is too short until now.

Deep sigh.... you know that sinking feeling right at the beginning of a movie WHEN you immediately recognize the movie you are watching is a STINKER, a FLOP, well there you have it...

The bad: this movie shouldnt have been made. It was made anyway AND advertised SOLELY to attract an OLDER audience who recognizes these fabulous names of Richard Gere and Diane Keaton. Even William H. Macey was (and still is) a great actors, but this is a SENIORS movie with only some young B-actors thrown in to at least try and attract SOME youngsters to go watch it. I doubt any youngsters will go watch this FLOP. And deservedly so...

I feel sorry for anyone who decided to go watch this empty vessel, this hollow surrogate of a movie.

Recommended to be AVOIDED like the plague. You have been warned....

The one thing i wanted to comment on about this movie is its dull visual style. There is almost no visual language at all. Every shot lacks almost any dynamism/movement. The color palette is fairly bland. The lighting is purely utilitarian. The weather is not used in any visually suggestive or symbolic way. There is a lot of grey, dark tones, shadows. In short, its dull visual quality only highlights the more talky and pedantic aspects of the script. It was originally a stage play and it's almost as if director Michael Jacobs-whose background is in TV-doesn't realize that a stage is at least well-lit. This is his directorial debut so I'll cut him some slack (as though he cares what I think lol), and I will admit I laughed a number of times. Macy gets all the good lines. Gere is stuffy and somnambulistic. Keaton is very good. Sarandon is okay too. I think Luke Bracey was the worst piece of acting in the film, and I imagine it's because he wasn't given enough takes, or that he didn't fully understand his character, which I would cut him some slack for because I didn't fully understand him for most of the film either. So, you can watch this movie, but I recommend stopping in the middle to get to bed and then forgetting to watch the rest.