Who payed the critics

Amateur movie with Big budget

The film may be flawed, but its message is not.

Great story, amazing characters, superb action, enthralling cinematography. Yes, this is something I am glad I spent money on.

I was real disappointed after watching this movie. While it did have a few funny scenes, it sucked compared to "A Christmas Story." The humor was way too different. It was more silly and childish, unlike in the first movie, where all the funny scenes in it are all believable and can be related too, which is why that movie is so great and never gets old. For instance, a kid getting beat by his mom over the phone or getting his tongue stuck to a pole was funny but at the same time believable and done in such a way that you felt bad for him while in "It Runs In The Family," a guy getting hit in the head with a dish and not fall down or bleed is more slapstick humor and unrealistic. And what was up with the Parker's family new dog? While the dog is cute there is no way it could have understood the dad's strategy and be a decoy and trick the neighbors big hound dogs. It was so cartoony which is good for a modern kids Disney movie but didn't belong in a sequel to "A Christmas Story." Watching a "A Christmas Story" at times feels like you take a trip back in time and really gets you into the Christmas spirit while "It Runs In the Family," feels more like a silly movie meant to just make you laugh and doesn't take you in. I mean there was no tears, no real fear around the bullies, no fights, no fantasies, no passion, no drama. It was so fake and felt rushed.

Really bad. Why anyone thinks this is a good film let alone funny is a true mystery. I like comedies as much as the next man and I LOVED "A Christmas Story." The fact that it has the same director and was based on the same writer's memoirs has me completely puzzled as to why this film is such a complete failure on every level. Charles Grodin is woefully miscast as the father for starters. For another it does not seem to have the same pacing -- it just doesn't flow well. Everything seems tired and forced. The joy of life that permeated the first film is completely absent here -- you just want the movie to end. I wouldn't even recommend this movie for curiosity-seekers who enjoyed "A Christmas Story." It's that bad. 1/10.

I saw it as "It Runs in the Family".I found it very funny. Midwest Gothic humor I guess and I enjoy that and if you like Jean Shepard you'll like this. But also maybe because I didn't try to compare it with "A Christmas Story". It involves one kid's summer in Indiana, trying to outfox the local bully and dealing with the unspoken world of adults. Shepard's crystal clear descriptions of growing up with stand offs and quirky battles. The sets and settings are done perfectly, with all the humid reality of a Midwest summer. I thought Grodin and Steenbergen were great, along with one of the Caulkin kids. I missed the first part, but still enjoyed it.

I just caught this follow up on TV today and I simply found myself laughing all the way through it. A Christmas Story is a true classic flick that I watch every Xmas. I had not heard up until about a year ago that a follow up even exsisted! Obviously the film was promoted poorly. I think it's very underrated, for one reason JEAN STAPLETON. This man a true master of narrating a film, he gets us from beginning to end through the picture with pure satisfaction of re-living of childhood. I personally love Mr. Stapleton's narration in both films and his comedy & witt is just priceless to listen to. All in all "It Runs in the Family" is an enjoyable funny follow-up, but will never achieve the classic & beauty that "A Christmas Story" achieved.