Kattiera Nana I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.

Stellead Don't listen to the Hype. It's awful

Freeman This film is so real. It treats its characters with so much care and sensitivity.

Logan By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

joelnehl-96-352884 I smiled twice during the movie. Best thing I can say is, I didn't fall asleep.

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.

SmileysWorld We have all wanted to do it.At one time or another we have all wanted to flee our drab,bottomless pit lives to see and discover the world.It's a very tempting idea.Fortunately,what we learn from films like Lost in America is that Winnebagos don't run on faith.Albert Brooks and Julie Hagerty teach us this lesson well,making us laugh at them,as well as ourselves when we picture ourselves in their position.When it comes to comedies,I tend to lean more toward the slapstick side of things.It's the way I have always been,but Lost in America gives us laughs and teaches us a lesson at the same time,making it worth seeing again.