Official RAZZIE® Forum Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > 31st Annual RAZZIE® Award Nominees & "WINNERS" > LITTLE FOCKERS
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed: Just How FOCKing Awful IZ It?!?!?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Calendar   Register Register  Login Login

Just How FOCKing Awful IZ It?!?!?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 345
Author
Message
Vits View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: February 01 2010
Location: Chile
Online Status: Online
Posts: 6993
Post Options Post Options   Quote Vits Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Just How FOCKing Awful IZ It?!?!?
    Posted: July 04 2011 at 10:57am
THAT'S WHAT THEY ARE FOR THINKING IT'S SPELLED WITH AN "O" INSTEAD OF A "U"(**/*****).


Starring:Ben Stiller as the father of the LITTLE FOCKERS,and Robert DeNiro as the grandfather of the LITTLE FOCKERS.


The 1st one was the perfect example on how to make a comedy.The 2nd one did repeat a lot of the jokes,but it was still funny,and it opened the door to having fans.But even the fans won't like this one.

So what is the problem with this movie?Simple:after knowing each other for so many years,JACK still doesn't trust GREG?!And how many more times will they make up,only to start all over again?!I'm not an expert in family relationships,but when two in-laws meet and don't like each other,and years later they have an actual fight...well,after that either they like each other or not,but there's no way they can go back to just putting up with the other's presence,which will be the case if they make a 4th movie.

Since they couldn't go any further with the "His name is FOCKER" joke,this time they use "The God-FOCKER".It's barely funny the first time,and they repeat that word 5 times in 30 seconds.And when your "Presentation card" joke fails,the rest of the jokes are destined to fail.It feels as if they just wrote a bunch of gags and pasted them together trying to create the plot,which is twice as predictable as before,and this time you can't overlook that.

There are many types of comedy,and this movie fails mainly because the comedy is different from the other 2 movies.I know that someone backing up a truck and getting people covered in poop seems the same as throwing up on someone,and that a dog humping a cat seems the same as injecting a needle on someone else's penis.Well,it's not.

Like in a lot of modern comedies,there are plot holes through out the movie you only spot if you're trying to look for them(like how bad was JACK at following GREG despite being a former CIA agent),and then when it's about to finish they increase(like the fact that no one seems to care that GREG and JACK are fighting)to the point that even the character's reactions make no sense whatsoever(like ROZ smiling when BERNIE caught her with KEVIN),and it's just painful to watch.

Among the easiest things to write in a comedy is having children acting like adults and/or cursing.We have both of those in this movie,and even they are only mildly amusing in a movie that generates mostly forced laughs.

Stiller sleepwalks through this movie.The only time he changes his face expression and actually tries it's when he pretends to be a hamster,which obviously isn't funny.I know stars prefer to do that to grab a quick buck,specially in sequels,but I didn't expect it from him.He didn't change his face in NIGHT AT THE MUSEUM 2,but he was doing deadpan comedy(there's a difference),and he was funny in that one.Aside from him,there aren't bad performances.It's just that the characters have become such cartoons(specially JACK and ROZ FOCKER)that there's no way to play them without being over-the-top.


Grades: D- in the U.S. and 3,0 in Chile.
You can follow me @Vits_Chile
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 345

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down