Geeky Randy (22 May 2012)

Geeky Randy's summary

Third installment to a series that was just hanging by a thread at theend of the second film. An unnecessary installment with Byrnes (DeNiro) questioning Greg (Stiller) as a father, and also a husband…again! The story revolves around the little Fockers (Baiocchi andTahan), but there's very little development and involvement fromeither--all we know is that they're (stereotypically) polar-opposites.Owen Wilson gets an undeserved third billing, and offers nothing new tothe story nor his character. At one point Greg asks Kevin (Wilson),"What are you even doing here, Kevin?!" Perhaps the writers should havetaken this question literally. Hoffman and Streisand are unneeded, butat least they offer some meaningful continuity. Danner and Polo aregreat as the supporting characters; perhaps that's the key, they werethe two best characters because they weren't an overdose. Alba playsthe totally unfunny Andi Garcia (like the actor; ha, ha, ha; not!) whois really there just as eye candy. Dern's appearance is sadlypointless. The film gets much funnier at the end, but still a worthlessHoliday film.** (out of four)

Matt Brunson (22 May 2012)

Enough is enough. This franchise has run its course and made its millions, but now it's time for it to fock off.

Maddis (22 May 2012)

Fock you you focking focks

Awful 1-trick pony played out over and over, hardly a smile to be hadexcept when remembering the first and the barely adequate sequel.Wanted this to be better and appreciate that many will love it simplyfor nostalgic reasons but is it too much to expect a little comedy?Stars today seem to have become lazy, phoning in performances forpaychecks, thinking that by strolling across the screen they can derivewhatever emotional response they want from their audience. Demand more.Can't argue with the box office numbers, which probably means therewill be focking more of this to come. And we thought DeNiro had stoppedslumming. At least Hoffman caught a few lines that stuck out. Yawn tothe rest. 3/10 Maddis

flickernatic (22 May 2012)

A Focking Franchise Too Far!

On New Year's Day with nothing else to do, we went to see this movie inthe hope of a few good laughs. Sadly there aren't any. The story, suchas it is, drags along at a snail's pace and even seems to stop deadfrom time to time, which gives the impression that the writers arescraping around for the next gag. The fact is that this horse had beendead a long time before the movie makers started flogging it; itrefuses to respond no matter how hard they try. Dustin Hoffman and BStreisand are pretty much wasted here and even de Niro can't work upmuch of ... well, anything really. And Ben Stiller looks even morecrazed than usual. If you're happy to snigger at a few 'erectiledysfunction' jokes and a some throwaway lines about masturbation andenemas, this movie is for you. Otherwise, stay home. The Fockerfranchise is focked!

(20 May 2012)

Pitiful

This was a complete waste of my time. I am so glad I didn't see this at the theatre! I kept asking myself when it was going to be over. Really-Really-Really painful to watch. It makes me so sad because I actually liked the other two films. What a shame.

Guilden_NL (19 May 2012)

Focking Awful!

I gave it 2 stars instead of 1 because I laughed twice. It felt likethey had several gags and threw some dialog around them, then tried topackage it into a film.Pure garbage.Owen Wilson and his character was a buzz-kill, Blythe Danner was abuzz-kill this time around, Ben Stiller stunk it up, Jessica Alba waspredictably rotten. Only Streisand and Hoffman were tolerable, but eventheir roles were stretched to the limits of getting another laugh outof them.And my man Harvey Keitel even couldn't work with the slop he was given.The more I think about it, I should have given this a single star!

lisalawley-1 (18 May 2012)

Not THAT bad

I had an open mind about this film. Not many sequels make it to numberthree successfully. If you have seen "Meet the Parents" and "Meet theFockers" you know what to expect, more of the same. The only differenceis, this one seems a little bit more serious, with hidden messages.The criticism I would have is in the title. Which to me, is nothingmore than a way of making a third movie, and not much to do with theLittle Fockers, and on that note, there really isn't much to say aboutthem, unfortunately.It's not an Oscar winner, it's not "hilarious" but does have it's funnymoments. On top of this, it seems to put the characters to bed, ties upthe loose ends, and allows for Greg to be finally accepted into theBurns clan. For example. The much praised "Dr Bob" the perfect "Kevin"were both ideals for Jack, but this film reveals their faults-something we haven't seen before. At the end of the film, it was notonly acceptance from Jack Greg got, but also Greg gaining his ownconfidence, and that's where I think the messages lay. Simply beyourself, and don't judge a book by it's cover.All in all, a pretty good movie.

Simon Miraudo (17 May 2012)

It's the holidays, and the third instalment of the Meet the Parents saga has arrived - not unlike the Ghost of Christmas Future - to provide us with a terrifying glimpse at a journey taken down the wrong path.

FlashCallahan (13 May 2012)

The Godfocker????

Time for another Meet the Parents movie then. The first was amazing,and struck fear in to most people who were about to meet their In-Laws.The second movie was lazy and not very funny, but watchable.The third is pretty much in the same vein as the second, not funny, nostand out set pieces (the erection scene, is pretty limp) but it hasthe advantage/disadvantage of De Niro delivering his most OTTperformance since Hide and seek. And why not? With the lines he hasbeen given to say, he should ham it up, and ham it up a lot, because itmakes the film all that more watchable, and he leaves the rest of thecast at the start line.Stiller, usually so vibrant and funny, looks fed up and bored with thewhole thing. A look as if to say 'when will my Zoolander 2 script getgreen-lighted'. Streisand and Hoffman are okay, but add nothing to themelting pot and Polo and Danner are reduced to onlookers to the wholething.Owen Wilson is by far the worse thing in it, and his character shouldnot have even been involved in the second movie, let alone this one.whenever he is in the film, it turns cringe-worthy, and now hischaracter is getting even creepier, it just doesn't fit the mood of thefilm.Alba is good, and appears to be overexcited to bee in a film that willmake over 100 mil for sure, but at least she puts some life into herperformance, which cannot be said for many of the other cast.And Harvey Keitel is in it? So if you like to see De Niro realise whata piece of junk he is in and over act because he's getting a nice bigfat pay cheque, check it out, you may get something from it.To Stiller and the rest of the original cast, why didn't you ham it uptoo? the film could have been so much more.Bet Jay Roach is feeling smug.

(13 May 2012)

That's 90 Minutes I'm not getting back of my life

This review is from: Little Fockers (Amazon Instant Video) It was the daily special for 99 cents, so I figured I'd try watching this movie. Wow, I can't believe this all star cast would bother with a third movie that was this unfunny and unoriginal. At least I didn't pay movie theater prices to see this junk.

(06 May 2012)

A classic example...

...of going to the well one too many times. The first 2 in the series were genuinely funny. This one seemed completely forced. There were a few chuckles, but no real laughs. The plot was thin, the storyline predictible, the acting sub-par -- an amazing thing when you have actors of this caliber in most key roles. Watch it on cable.

davideo-2 (06 May 2012)

Appalling third instalment

STAR RATING: ***** Saturday Night **** Friday Night *** Friday Morning** Sunday Night * Monday Morning Ten years on from the first film, put upon male nurse Greg Focker (BenStiller) and his wife have finally managed to have children, buttightly wound father in law Jack (Robert De Niro) is still sticking hishoare in, but has recently been suffering from heart problems and, muchto his chagrin, looks to Greg to step in his shoes when and if he goes.But he's going to be as tough and unbearable as ever, and if thiswasn't enough for Greg, he has to contend with his own parents,including mother Roz (Barbara Streisand) discussing the sex problems ofhim and people he knows on her new talk show, while dad Bernie (DustinHoffman) tries to learn flamenco.The first film in the Meet the... series was amiable enough comedy fun,the second wasn't very good but this third part is abysmal, a laughfree waste of time for everyone involved. The title promises plenty oflaughs and titillation from the new kids of the main couple, but theyare hardly ever featured, and instead we are left to saunter through anapathetic, barely existent plot without any of the comic inspiration ofthe first, or even the second, film. All involved seem to have donetheir act to death, from Stiller's put upon, agitated man in themiddle, to De Niro's (flat as ever) grumpy, over the top father in law,and with nothing to surprise or inspire, it's no surprise to findeverything falls as flat as it does.Three's usually the magic number, but with this offering it's reallyquite a curse. *

Armond White (02 May 2012)

A pretext to continue one of the lamest franchises in contemporary Hollywood history.

David Edwards (01 May 2012)

Little Fockers is a film light on plot, bereft of laughs and featuring a cast who look as if they want to kill themselves.

sbwords (29 April 2012)

How the Mighty have fallen!

'Little Fokkers' proves how the mighty have fallen, persuaded todescend from their lofty perch by the offer of easy money. Why thisfilm was even made is beyond me. The same old jokes, family conflictsand story line are rehashed with several added sub-plots that gonowhere. Attempting to hold this together are some of the outstandingactors of the modern era. De Nero, who gave us startling performancesin 'Taxi Driver,' 'Raging Bull,' and 'The Godfather II,' is clearly ina hole and has forgotten the cardinal rule of holes. Stopping digging.There were signs in 'Meet the Fokkers' that the franchise was runningout of steam. Signs that De Nero ignored.Hoffman once stood in the same pantheon with edgy performances in 'TheGraduate' and 'Midnight Cowboy'. In this movie he is just plain kooky.Harvey Keitel's cameo as a builder is good enough, although likeseveral of the sub-plots it goes nowhere. And why is Jessica Alba'sincessantly hitting on the Ben Stiller's character, this is neitherexplained nor grounded in any way. Clearly, the scriptwriters justthrew it in there to help along a sagging plot. As for Owen Wilson, hewas mildly entertaining playing his usual spaced out, flower-childtype, but by the end of the movie he was just annoying. You expect this sort of rubbish from Stiller, who has only hit the markin recent years with 'Tropic Thunder,' but the others involved in thisproject need to seriously reflect on their position. Please no moresequels.

Brett Michel (29 April 2012)

Hoffman actually does phone in his performance in what is a money grab for everyone, new director Paul Weitz included.

nick_kewl505 (28 April 2012)

Lousy and pathetic

When I walked into Little Fockers I couldn't wait to see the newinstallment of a generally hilarious franchise. When I walked out, Ifelt like someone had stolen my wallet and shot me, in the face. Thisdoesn't really feel like a sequel, more like a half-assed video-gamespin off. First off, the title is a complete lie. You want to see amovie about little Fockers? Me neither--but its cast will make it funnyanyway right? Wrong. The two children are only in this film for 20minutes and coast their way through with mediocrity. Ben Stiller wasbland and unfunny, Robert DeNiro is a douche, and the rest have justlet themselves go. Oh, and oh my goodness you guys! Jessica Alba is inthis! Possibly the most annoying character to hit the big screens ever,she is aptly named 'Andi Garcia'. They of course as a joke mix her upwith the untalented comedian Andy Garcia, which was surprisingly funny(it wasn't). The naming of her character was obviously to make onejoke, but no one seems to care about her anyway as she is left in themiddle of nowhere, as her 'story' finishes but the rest continues. Theplot and storyline are forgettable and the final result is extremelynauseating at best. There is an 'unpredictable' and 'interesting' twistat the end (everyone is Jewish) and the film finishes with questionsfor a sequel. Please do not make one. One out of ten, AVOID.

alex (27 April 2012)

Focking awful

What a jolly jape making another movie with Focker in the titlebecause, hilarity upon hilarity, Focker sounds like something rude sowe must laugh. Except we don't really as this series of films hasdredged the barrel bottom clean for a second unfunny sequel tocomplement something that was not that funny first time round. Thegangs all here again to perform a series of unfunny sketches unfunnilyand leave the audience paralysed with laughter. Well paralysed at leastif they don't get up and do something more interesting like repointtheir sewage system. Robert DeNiro used to be one of the finest actorsever to hit the screen and that's all you need to know about this pileof putrid puss. As long as people troop in and titter at the Benny Hillstyle double entendre of people called Focker then there will be nodoubt be a fourth probably called 'something something mother Fockersomething' which will send us apoplectic with mirth.......or not mostlikely. The silliest Fockers of all have to be the audience for thistripe. Luckily I saw it for free and I thought I was robbed. They maynot make films like they used to but they still churn out utter garbagelike this year in year out so prepare for more Focking Fockers in thenear future. Makes you Focking weep!

Rick Groen (24 April 2012)

Carving knife + severed artery = tons of bloody fun.

(23 April 2012)

Not great, not as bad as all that.

This review is from: Little Fockers (Amazon Instant Video) I was nervous about watching this with all the negative reviews but I enjoyed the previous movies so gave it a try. The story is fairly predictable and some of the characters are not very deep. This is especially true of Jessica Alba's character (she did a good job, there was just nothing to work with for her character). She plays a very one dimensional drug rep who coaxes Ben Stiller's character into promoting a new ED drug. Overall, I think they stuck with the formula that worked for the first movies but it is getting a little over done. I did laugh several times in the film but mostly you smile at some of hte scenes. In the middle it does drag out a bit and again, is fairly predictable. However, that said it is overall a solid comedy and worth a rental-not so much on the buying in my opinion.