Vi presento i nostri

Quality comedies -- if they go beyond one sequel -- never come in threes. In the case of "Little Fockers," three's a Focking mess. But we asked for it; "Meet the Fockers" ranks as the highest-grossing live-action comedy in the U.S., so regardless of quality, we were going to get whatever studios served us. And sure enough, "Little Fockers" cooks up tired modern gags, basically forgetting that the last decade of comedy (including its two predecessors) ever existed and that we could be won over by open mentions of sex (ooh!) and recycled dick drug gags. It's several years later and Greg and Pam Focker (Ben Stiller and Teri Polo) live in Chicago with their twins, Henry and Samantha. Grandpa Jack Byrnes (De Niro) has grown concerned over the Byrnes family legacy as he's been having some heart issues lately and his first son-in- law, Dr. Bob, has failed him after having an affair and getting a divorce. As such, before he and wife Dina (Blythe Danner) arrive for the twins' birthday, he tells Greg that he's ready to pass the torch to Greg, who's eager but still scared about winning Jack's full approval and becoming "The Godfocker." The film focuses on Jack and Greg again, as expected, so among other faults, the title "Little Fockers" is misleading. The kids are hardly in the picture expect for cheap jokes and they're neither cute nor talented. In a family dinner scene where Greg (with "Godfather" music in the background) commands that Henry eat his lasagna, Henry succumbs but then spews vomit all over his father. Whenever the film seems to breeze about with a bit more of a sense of humor, a tasteless joke shoots in that prompts us to do the same. Contrivances and predictable story lines litter "Fockers" and damper the occasional moments of humor. The familiarity we have with Greg and Jack helps create that humor and some clever jokes actually do exist, but the script leans on typical "misunderstanding" plot devices, most of which were ironically used most effectively in "Meet the Parents" and "Meet the Fockers." The whole idea of "if they worked once they'll work again" does not apply. The "twists" of this film are set up so conspicuously that as they unfold, it's like you know what happens because you've seen it before. And you likely have, because there was probably something similar in it from a previous "Focker" film. Outside of Jack spying on Greg, who tries to keep it a secret that he's trying to make extra cash by pushing a new erectile dysfunction drug for a gorgeous drug rep (Jessica Alba), all the side characters and plots are garbage. Owen Wilson returns as Kevin and the running joke other than him being some rich worldly hippie is that he's in love with Pam, which never amounts to anything. Alba over-ditzifies her part, which should have been played by a nameless attractive woman, proving she has no idea how to shake her type. Even Bernie and Roz Focker (Hoffman and Streisand) are out of place, squeezed in to appease the audience who expects them to show up. It's actually unfortunate, because neither of them totally overdo their part or annoy us with the fact that despite the same thing happening for the third film in a row now, no one's learned their lesson. Greg actually catches Jack spying on him on the train and after eight years of knowing each other, Greg doesn't confront him. Sure this was for the sake of keeping the tension up, but at some point you can't keep milking the same goat, or cow, or cat. Yes, Jinxie returns, also with a convenient line of dialogue from Wilson who says "I had her brought in town for you when I heard about your heart," just to set up another pet mischief joke that's completely out of place at the end of the film. Basically, we're Focking tired. "Little Fockers" is simply another example of a movie concept that's run its course and should have never gone beyond two films and only did because of the money. In a sense, there should be no surprises here. Then again, attempted jokes such as young Henry randomly asking if girls poop from their vaginas at the dinner table, could have been replaced with something more thoughtful -- and tasteful. ~Steven C

"Little Fockers" pretty much follows in the footsteps of the previous two movies about the Byrnes and the Fockers. So if you enjoyed those two, then you will definitely enjoy this one as well.

The story is pretty straight forward and easy to follow. Greg and Pam now have twins and are dealing with family life. Then throw in a pair of suspicious in-laws and over-sexed in-laws, mix it up with a foxy temptress (played by Jessica Alba) and you have your movie right there. There were lots of funny moments in the movie, but somehow the previous two movies stands more out in my memory. There were just something more hilarious about those.

With the impressive cast list, the movie is hard to ignore. Robert De Niro playing Jack Byrnes, did a good job - but of course, he always does a good job acting. Ben Stiller, again putting on the role of Gaylord Focker, and doing the same as in the previous two movies - fighting with his father-in-law. Despite having relatively small roles, then Dustin Hoffman (playing Bernie Focker) and Barbra Streisand (playing Roz Focker) were marvelous as the parents of Gaylord Focker. The chemistry between Hoffman and Streisand is magnificent. I didn't really care much for Owen Wilson's character, nor was his performance that memorable. And throw in Harvey Keitel and Laura Dern for some small supporting roles, and they were great.

I found this third installment to the Focker series to be a tad below the standards of the previous two. But all in all, it is still an alright comedy.

If it was a movie with intentions of being forever remembered and awarded with Oscars I would rate it 2/10 of course, but knowing it has been made for laughing, then it's a 7. I did laugh quite a bit, but it's not an 8 or 9 because some jokes are not my kind of humor or it's the same jokes as the previous movies in the series (with the last name and so on). Also, the plot is dull, like always, things don't work out for Greg and blah blah.

The positive: Some fresh jokes, Good acting, Laughs are guaranteed.

The negative: DeNiro while showing great character adaptation, I miss him in more serious movies. Some jokes are old, Same formula.

So, to sum it up: Just go see it if you want to laugh, don't expect to be a great movie.

PS. Jessica Alba looks great in the movie, but the character is tedious.

Though 'Little Fockers (2010)' is clearly the worst in its series, it certainly isn't as bad as it seems most people perceive it to be (one reviewer even signalled it as a "depressing experience" that evokes an "overpowering sense of sadness"). Sure, it's contrived and derivative. However, it's also relatively fun. It's an easy-going comedy that provides a cast of charismatic characters, a heap of misunderstandings and a handful of chuckles. There may not all that much to say about the feature, but that doesn't mean it's bad. It's enjoyable and well-paced, an amiable way to pass the time. Fans of the previous two films ought to be entertained, even if it is a step down. 6/10

I watched this in a theater and I didn't regret it. Before that, I saw the ratings here and read some critics, and it was bad. I went to see it anyway, expecting nothing of it. If I could stand watching 2 hours long The Limits of control, I can surely stand the Little Fockers. And guess what, I liked it! I had a few laughs, the theater was full and everyone was laughing, so, I'm a little puzzled by all this negativity on IMDb. If you liked the first two movies, you will like the third one also. You know what you can expect of the Fockers, right? The same old story. I would recommend to everyone to just watch it (if you liked the others) and then make a judgment. This ratings on IMDb are so misleading, and makes you watch bad films, or not watch the good or the perfectly watchable.