Diagonaldi Very well executed

Unlimitedia Sick Product of a Sick System

Stevecorp Don't listen to the negative reviews

AshUnow This is a small, humorous movie in some ways, but it has a huge heart. What a nice experience.

Wuchak Released in 1985 and directed by Albert Brooks from a script by Brooks & Monica Johnson, "Lost in America" is a satirical road dramedy about a yuppie couple in their 30s (Brooks and Julie Hagerty) who forsake their good jobs in Los Angeles, liquidate their assets, and endeavor to roam America in a Winnebago, like in "Easy Rider" (well, sort of; those dudes had motorcycles and little cash). This movie was a commercial success at the time, although not a blockbuster, and highly praised by critics, which is why it's ranked amongst the AFI's top 100 comedies. Incredibly, it currently has a 96% critic-rating on Rotten Tomatoes, with the audience-rating closer to reality at 76%.In light of the radical critical praise, I was wholly disappointed the first time I tried to watch "Lost in America" and ended up fast-forwarding it through the second half. Last night, though, I decided to give it the chance it deserves. The problem for me is that this is a decidedly dialog-driven dramedy rather than event-driven, which would be okay if the dialog was entertaining or funny, but that's hardly the case (for me anyway). Brooks' character has marathon-length dialogues with several people through the course of the film – his wife, his boss, a casino owner, a job counselor, a hot dog joint manager, etc. – and it's mostly pointless drivel with only a smattering of amusing moments. Another problem is that, while the title says "Lost IN America," the events in the story are limited to three basic areas: (1.) The first act occurs in Los Angeles, mostly indoors (house and offices), (2.) the second act in Las Vegas & nearby Hoover Dam, and (3.) the last act in the small town of Safford, Arizona. That's it. Only in the last seven minutes does it become a genuine road movie with brief clips of the southern portion of the USA (e.g. Las Cruces, Houston and Atlanta) and Washington DC and New York City. I wouldn't mind this if the dialog and encounters of the bulk of the movie were actually entertaining.An additional problem is that there are no females beyond Hagerty's ditzy character, even though most of the second act takes place in Vegas. Needless to say, the movie drops the ball on the female front. Furthermore, Brooks lacks the charisma to carry a film like this; it needed someone like Bill Murray. Despite my criticisms, I do like the moral of the story, which is driven home at the climax. Also, there are amusing elements throughout "Lost in America" and it works as a period piece, but its overall quality isn't anywhere near where the hype puts it. It's an okay, but pedestrian mid-80's dramedy. The film runs 91 minutes.GRADE: C

Degree7 Albert Brooks is a wonderful talent, somewhat of a Woody Allen offshoot, and his script writing is witty and has just the right amount of offbeat humour to it.The film has a great premise, and the characters are realistic and sympathetic enough to retain attention, but it moves too fast and feels underdeveloped. It starts out with Howard (Brooks) established as a moderately successful advertising executive, who with his managerial wife, plan to put a down payment on a 400k house. But the corporate lifestyle has sapped some of the excitement out of both their lives, and before divorce proceedings set in, they hilariously quit their jobs and set out on the open road to find themselves. And along the way they bring the 'nest egg'. Unfortunately, things don't go as planned, and the soul searching quickly becomes a trip through hell. With each quagmire the couple finds themselves in, Brooks' character hilariously pleads with the people he sees as obstacles to their luck. The film is built around 3 or 4 of these lengthy, seemingly improvised sketch scenes, and is what provides most of the entertainment apart from the scenario. But after the main twist and conflict happens, the film loses steam and the hijinx quickly dissipitate until the film deflates at the end. Little soul searching actually occurs, and the film has a realistic, but disappointing ending after much of the build up to their quagmire. The ending just isn't what was promised after the dark hilarity of misfortune that preceded it. The characters feel annoyingly self entitled at first, and start to grate, but the writing and short running times keeps things feeling fresh long enough to want to finish. Worth watching just for Brooks.

jacabiya Didn't see it when it first came out in the 80's, but was interested when shown on TCM a couple of nights back, thinking I had missed something not following Brook's career closer, since the little I had seen of him had shown quite an intelligent comedian. And being a sucker to abandon-modern-life-go-back-to-simpler-way-of-life stories, was actually quite excited about the premise, but then the couple mentions going to Las Vegas and I thought: No, it can't be, it would kill the story right there. Guess what! It was! What a wasted opportunity for adventure and to explore America a la Easy Rider...I can't believe this is in AFI's top 100 comedies...Also I can see now why Brooks never developed much of a career.

mcfly-31 Mild chucklefest about a bored ad exec approaching 40 who talks his wife into abandoning their jobs for life on the road. Your typical Albert Brooks offering, which of course, is not for all tastes. Some can take to his light style of humor like addicts to coke, while others will scream how mediocre this film is to be held up as an example at screen-writing classes.Most of Brooks' humor in his films come from his characters being utterly flummoxed by life or his grinny observations about everyday people. You get that usual array here, but unlike some of his other efforts, this Brooks screenplay seemed oddly malnourished. He gets caught up in this whole "Easy Rider" nonsense and places the film's more humorous and intriguing moments at the front. The business with Hagerty and the casino happens so quickly, that it a) uses the best device too fast, and b) seems too out of character for her. Brooks needed more time spent on the road meeting goofy locals and emptying his RV's chemical toilet that would eventually prompt Hagerty to do what she does early. And therein lies the film's bigger problem: they only really have one predicament. Once they hit their financial nadir, they look for jobs, work them for one day, and the film ends with a cop-out minutes later.Sorry to forward-project, but I was a GREAT admirer of Brooks' "Defending Your Life". It had his usual breezy, near lulling atmosphere on display, but with the life-after-death exploration as a great backdrop, that filmed worked better. "Lost in America" just sort of coasts along with random vignettes before breaking down at the side of the road.