|
|
 |
|
|
Mary Pols, Time: WEAK "The franchise is tired and the situations are forced... [but] as crass and dumb as it is, there are a few tidbits that work." (Read the full review...) 791 words, 12/20/10 David Germain, Associated Press: WEAK (cg) "...tasteless trash, filled with abysmally unfunny gags involving vomit, enemas, erectile dysfunction and the like as De Niro's Byrnes clan and Stiller's Focker family stumble through another mindless reunion." (Read the full review...) 652 words, 12/21/10 Thelma Adams, Us Weekly: MODERATE (cg) "While bits are occasionally funny -- like when Stiller's sex therapist mama (Barbra Streisand) talks on TV about her son's performance issues in the bedroom -- a farce that should have been light as souffle feels like it's made of cement." (Read the full review...) 142 words, 12/23/10 Lisa Schwarzbaum, Entertainment Weekly: FAIR (cg) "...when a wink-wink movie is reduced to the alleged hilarity of a little boy accidentally observing his father inject his grandpa's penis (O poor Bobby D!)... it may be time to try another household for laughs." (Read the full review...) 301 words, 12/24/10 Peter Travers, Rolling Stone: POOR (cg) "...defines uncalled for. 'Little Fockers' is upchuckingly unfunny.... Fock the Fockers." (Read the full review...) 124 words, 12/24/10 Claudia Puig, USA Today: MODERATE (cg) "...the effort is wearing thin.... There are viable flashes of comedy in the franchise. But with each movie, they grow increasingly dim." (Read the full review...) 534 words, 12/22/10 James Berardinelli, Reel Views: MODERATE (cg) "It is what it is. It's comfort food for the masses - an unthreatening comedy with familiar faces doing pretty much the same things they have done in two previous excursions." (Read the full review...) 791 words, 12/20/10
Manohla Dargis, New York Times: POOR "Apparently, because all the good jokes were used up in the first two 'Fockers' movies, the wisenheimers behind the latest installment in this unnecessary trilogy decided to bring in some spew, opening a sick toddler's mouth like a fire hydrant and letting it rip." (Read the full review...) 625 words, 12/22/10 Elizabeth Weitzman, New York Daily News: MODERATE (cg) "...the sheer amount of talent involved makes for a cheerfully forgettable experience, rather than a memorably miserable one." (Read the full review...) 246 words, 12/22/10 Betsy Sharkey, Los Angeles Times: POOR "...the comedy's gone missing, the puns are tortured... The sheer pleasure of the first film in 2000... has officially gone kaput.... a flaccid mess..." (Read the full review...) 678 words, 12/22/10 Kyle Smith, New York Post: POOR (cg) "...sprints past 'unfunny,' is still going strong when it reaches 'disaster' and easily reaches 'cautionary tale.' " (Read the full review...) 735 words, 12/22/10 Michael Phillips, Chicago Tribune: WEAK (cg) "De Niro suffers most of the head-banging indignities in 'Little Fockers.' The more he throws himself into the reaction shots and the mugging, the more you wonder if he's really having a good time with this desperate material." (Read the full review...) 410 words, 12/22/10 Rafer Guzman, New York Newsday: WEAK (cg) "...like a spoiled child, just shows up and expects you to appreciate it." (Read the full review...) 302 words, 12/22/10 Peter Howell, Toronto Star: POOR (cg) "...a complete Focking waste of time." (Read the full review...) 685 words, 12/22/10 Nick Pinkerton, Village Voice/LA Weekly: POOR "Game performances and a couple of half-laughs, sure, but this is the screen comedy equivalent of the televised Yule log." (Read the full review...) 699 words, 12/22/10 Rick Groen, Toronto Globe & Mail: WEAK (cg) "...the biggest names are the worst offenders here, all mugging to the camera and chewing any scenery in sight." (Read the full review...) 611 words, 12/22/10 Glenn Sumi, Toronto Now: WEAK (cg) "...the script is a mess. The writers set up situations that never pay off..." (Read the full review...) 171 words, 12/23/10
Sean O'Connell, Washington Post: POOR (cg) "How bad is the third installment of the 'Meet the Parents' franchise?... How is it possible that I'm more embarrassed for De Niro than he seems to be for himself?" (Read the full review...) 659 words, 12/22/10 Carrie Rickey, Philadelphia Inquirer: MODERATE (cg) "...the humor is sporadic, with Viagra jokes that don't provoke laughs so much as cringes. The situations are so broad as to make those of Wile E. Coyote and the Road Runner look realistic." (Read the full review...) 375 words, 12/22/10 Amy Biancolli, Houston Chronicle/San Francisco Chronicle: MODERATE (cg) "...a semi-painful, semi-amusing sequel that reunites the battling in-laws.... Some of it induces laughter; some of it induces squirms." (Read the full review...) 555 words, 12/22/10 Roger Moore, Orlando Sentinel: WEAK (cg) "...the whole set-up just isn't very funny.... the engine that drives these movies, the Stiller-DeNiro dynamic, sputters on the cheap gas in the tank." (Read the full review...) 539 words, 12/22/10 Colin Covert, Minneapolis Star-Tribune: POOR (cg) "...a sad, broken, defeated thing, seasonal depression on celluloid.... isn't just beating a dead horse, it's pulverizing the carcass." (Read the full review...) 504 words, 12/22/10 Christopher Kelly, Arizona Republic: POOR (cg) "...a state of desperation..." (Read the full review...) 506 words, 12/22/10 Chris Vognar, Dallas Morning News: MODERATE (cg) "...the drive-through version of comfort food, comedy by repetition and indigestion. The parents have been met; the Fockers have paid their dues. Time to let all parties retreat with what little dignity they have left." (Read the full review...) 445 words, 12/22/10 Ty Burr, Boston Globe: WEAK (cg) "Is there a statute of limitations for how many good actors can be wasted in a bad movie? ...more than routinely depressing." (Read the full review...) 588 words, 12/22/10 Clint O'Connor, Cleveland Plain-Dealer: FAIR (cg) "The only thing that keeps you from running screaming from the theater is that De Niro, Stiller and Wilson still have charm to spare and manage to squeeze a few laughs out of the proceedings." (Read the full review...) 382 words, 12/22/10 Moira Macdonald, Seattle Times: WEAK (cg) "There's no point whatsoever... Streisand, at least, seems to be having a good time in her few scenes, as does Hoffman. Glad somebody was having fun." (Read the full review...) 359 words, 12/21/10 Shawn Levy, Portland Oregonian: WEAK (cg) "...takes the fun out of funny and, it is fervently prayed, brings this saga to an end." (Read the full review...) 386 words, 12/22/10 Joe Williams, St. Louis Post-Dispatch: WEAK (cg) "...more than a little disappointing.... if instead of story and characters, your movie wish list includes projectile vomiting and erection gags, this lump of coal has your name on it." (Read the full review...) 298 words, 12/22/10 Steve Persall, St. Petersburg Times: POOR (cg) "There's absolutely no reason to watch 'Little Fockers.' " (Read the full review...) 431 words, 12/23/10 Tom Long, Detroit News: MODERATE (cg) "It's all as formulaic as weak egg nog, but it goes down just as easy." (Read the full review...) 357 words, 12/22/10 Rene Rodriguez, Miami Herald: POOR (cg) "...a soul-sucking, excruciating experience.... lazy, shapeless, humor-free..." (Read the full review...) 607 words, 12/22/10
Nick Pinkerton, Village Voice/LA Weekly: POOR "Game performances and a couple of half-laughs, sure, but this is the screen comedy equivalent of the televised Yule log." (Read the full review...) 699 words, 12/22/10 Katey Rich, Cinema Blend: POOR (cg) "...feels so uninspired it's a wonder it even exists at all." (Read the full review...) 575 words, 12/22/10 Brett Michel, Boston Phoenix: POOR (cg) "Robert De Niro and Harvey Keitel are reunited after 34 years, and all we get is a lame Keitel cameo?" (Read the full review...) 163 words, 12/23/10 Scott Tobias, AV Club: POOR (cg) "...feels exhausted and sad, like a performer too popular to be allowed a graceful retirement. When the conclusion leaves the door open for still another sequel, it feels like an invitation to a living wake." (Read the full review...) 409 words, 12/21/10 Nick Schager, Slant: POOR (cg) "Lacks laughs, coherence, and a reason to exist... simply rehashes the dynamics of the original 'Meet the Parents,' except with more cock jokes." (Read the full review...) 386 words, 12/21/10 Glenn Sumi, Toronto Now: WEAK (cg) "...the script is a mess. The writers set up situations that never pay off..." (Read the full review...) 171 words, 12/23/10 Edward Adams, Atlanta Creative Loafing: GOOD (NOT GREAT) (cg) "...a perfect marriage of warmth and humor that sends a clear message about the complexities of family." (Read the full review...) 300 words, 12/22/10 MaryAnn Johanson, Flick Filosopher: POOR (cg) "...two damn hours of arbitrary assholery and unconnected melodrama masquerading as a movie." (Read the full review...) 798 words, 12/22/10
Manohla Dargis, New York Times: POOR "Apparently, because all the good jokes were used up in the first two 'Fockers' movies, the wisenheimers behind the latest installment in this unnecessary trilogy decided to bring in some spew, opening a sick toddler's mouth like a fire hydrant and letting it rip." (Read the full review...) 625 words, 12/22/10 Betsy Sharkey, Los Angeles Times: POOR "...the comedy's gone missing, the puns are tortured... The sheer pleasure of the first film in 2000... has officially gone kaput.... a flaccid mess..." (Read the full review...) 678 words, 12/22/10 Andrew O'Hehir, Salon: POOR "I suffered through 'Little Fockers,' wishing that I could have periodontal surgery instead... If they make any more of these movies, they might as well kill me." (Read the full review...) 501 words, 12/22/10
Justin Chang, Daily Variety: WEAK "...a lazy attempt to milk a few more laughs and bucks from the enormously lucrative property spawned 10 years ago... simply feels timid, unsurprising and conservative-minded in all respects..." (Read the full review...) 956 words, 12/19/10 Todd McCarthy, Hollywood Reporter: POOR "...focking dismal.... this is definitely the least and hopefully the last of a franchise that started amusingly enough a decade ago but has now officially overstayed its welcome." (Read the full review...) 727 words, 12/19/10 Betsy Sharkey, Los Angeles Times: POOR "...the comedy's gone missing, the puns are tortured... The sheer pleasure of the first film in 2000... has officially gone kaput.... a flaccid mess..." (Read the full review...) 678 words, 12/22/10 Manohla Dargis, New York Times: POOR "Apparently, because all the good jokes were used up in the first two 'Fockers' movies, the wisenheimers behind the latest installment in this unnecessary trilogy decided to bring in some spew, opening a sick toddler's mouth like a fire hydrant and letting it rip." (Read the full review...) 625 words, 12/22/10
Thank you for following MovieReviewIntelligence.com |
Opening Soon (Early Figures)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
