MEET THE FOCKERS (2004)
Reviewed by Jerry Saravia
Original review from 2005
I wish I had kind words for the Jay Roach-directed comedy sequel "Meet the Fockers," but after watching it, I felt most unkind.
I enjoyed the original "Meet the Parents," a wickedly funny comedy based on the premise of seeing Ben Stiller as the fiance who dreads meeting his fiancee's parents who are most unkind and cruel towards him. The reasons were that Stiller's character, Greg Focker, was a male
nurse and had that dreaded last name that everyone mocked, and he inadvertently starts one disaster after another (I recall some gag about spilled ashes). This time, Greg is going to have his future in-laws meet his parents, the Fockers (played by Dustin Hoffman and Barbra Streisand), a liberal, happy couple who speak openly about sex. Naturally, Jack (Robert De Niro), a former CIA agent and the father of Pam (Teri Polo), Greg's fiancee, is skeptical of Greg's parents and feels uncomfortable, especially when taking a shower while Dustin Hoffman sits in the toilet.
But instead of focusing on the chaos of the situation, the movie inundates us with sexual references, sexual hijinks, sexual innuendos, and a cringe-inducing moment that even the Farrelly Brothers would have considered tasteless. Bad taste can be funny but here, it is simply excruciating because of the assumption that sex is funny (I don't think so). And watching De Niro carrying a prosthetic boob and getting a massage from Streisand are simply setpieces that lead nowhere because there's no payoff. A joke about sodium pentothal and a kid who bears a striking resemblance to Greg seem forced and cruelly unfunny (and I won't get into how many times the name Focker was repeated). And poor Blythe Danner, reprising her role as Jack's desperate wife, has such a thankless role that you'll be hard-pressed to remember her in the movie at all.
"Meet the Fockers" is not funny at all, and not even slyly amusing. I sat watching this forced, artificial construct of a sequel imagining how De Niro thought this was a good idea at all (he was executive producer). De Niro, Stiller and company may just want to settle into repeating roles without even trying, but why should we settle for less?





