Download, Watch online Little Fockers Movie.

Eric D. Snider 11 May 2012

I once saw a high school production of 'Grease' where they had some technical difficulties and had to stall for time, so the director sent the main actors onstage, in character, to improvise a scene. 'Little Fockers' feels like 100 minutes of that.

Sara Maria Vizcarrondo 11 May 2012

To say the franchise is coasting along on fumes suggests it once ran on a full tank.

copperncherrio 11 May 2012

Boring

Seeing how Meet the Parents was my first exposure to American comedy inthe movie theater, I had an open mind to this movie. And it was asexpected in the first 30 minutes and then it went downhill and tried tobe crazy, but not funny crazy… just painful.It was like an awkward teenager trying to please his peers… but failingand aware of it. This is a high sore disappointment. There was noconsistent laughter and it tried to be sentimental but at that point itwas too late. It became a pity party of a comedy with no sympatheticfriends. There was one great scene involving a penis and a syringe, butat that point the movie peaked, and like the penis it went soft.YES, the movie had penis jokes of that nature. It was boring and lostthe shock factor and the natural hilarity of the first movie. Not thatthe second was much better….Disappoint.(Jessica Alba was a delight, until she went unexplainable crazy)

shusunshine 11 May 2012

Fockers breed more comedy with Little Fockers

Plot Summary: Little Fockers proves the more things change, the morethey stay the same with the latest installment of the Focker trilogy,bringing us into the world of Pam and Greg Focker (Polo and Stiller),as they deal with everyday challenges such as home construction delays,temptations at work, ex-boyfriends, twin toddlers, money problems, andin-laws. As if Greg didn't have enough to worry about with his own over-the-topparents (played by Streisand and Hoffman), he tries to prove himselfworthy of the "Godfocker" position within the Byrnes family by steppingup his game to overprotective and paranoid father-in-law Jack Byrnes(DeNiro). Strengths: Star studded cast, Alba's physical comedy, Use of technology The already star-studded cast got bigger with the addition of veteranactors Dern, Keitel and Alba, as well as newer industry entrants KevinHart (as Greg's co-worker) and Colin Baiocchi (fraternal twin HenryFocker, whom you may recognize from Couples Retreat). Jessica Alba's home wrecking character Andi Garcia, while very muchannoying, showed a more physically comedic side to the actress, whichwas a pleasant addition to the unending tribulations of Greg Focker. Although Stiller and DeNiro show physical signs of aging in this thirdfilm, the producers made an effort to introduce modern technology andsocial media in Little Fockers, made apparent by the use of Skype, textmessaging, Google, Facebook, and YouTube. It's about time they got withthe times and used these mediums as a platform to demonstrate how thesetools can be entertaining or destructive in everyday life. Weaknesses: Not enough elder Fockers, miscast little Fockers The best part of the trilogy was the introduction of Greg's parentsBernie and Roz in Meet the Fockers. Although the updates on themanopause suffering Bernie and TV sex therapist Roz are funny, we onlyget a brief glimpse at their lives. I'd go so far as to argue that theaudience would prefer to see equally as much, if not more face timewith them as with the Byrnes family. Then there are the namesake little fockers, Greg and Pam's fraternaltwin toddlers. About to enter the cult-like private school The EarlyHuman School, Little Fockers attempts to show us that little Henry hasundoubtedly received the Focker genes, while Samantha ("Sam") has moreByrnes bloodline in her. The two, although cute, are a bit of a stretch not only as fraternaltwins, but as kin to Greg and Pam. The producers did a much better jobcasting Jorge (Ray Santiago) as Greg's suspected wedlock child in Meetthe Fockers. These kids look nothing like their parents. Summary: While in no way the best comedy ever produced, Little Fockersdid in fact entertain for the 90 or so minutes of the advancedscreening at the Pavilions in downtown Denver. Although some of thejokes and story lines are getting old, the introduction of newcharacters and Greg's foray into the world of promoting erectiledysfunction drug Sustengo kept it fresh. True to real life, the kidssay the darnedest things, such as the unforgettable, "Do girls poopfrom their vagina?" and "Andi gives Daddy his boners" spoken from themouth of little Henry Focker. It'd be great if this were the final episode in this Fockerfest, butthere are no signs of that yet. What could be next, Teenage Fockers? Atany rate, if they do make a 4th film, it would behoove them toincorporate the Bernie and Roz characters a little more. And is Jinxiethe cat still around? Cats really must have nine lives.

Jim Judy 10 May 2012

Simply put, it feels like everyone in front of and behind the camera is phoning in their work while awaiting a handsome paycheck for their 'efforts.' (Parental Review also Available)

Chilly Willy 09 May 2012

not something you would like to see again but still a decent comedy

Yeah it was worst than the previous two and also it was a bitembarrassing seeing so many veterans and good actors playing in a poorscripted, highly uninspired movie. As a comedy it still had some funmoments, mostly because the actors had the right skills to make themthat way. Except from another line of events it didn't brought anythingfresh into the scene, so I believe it would be more than enough to seethe first two movies and see this one also only if you have a lot oftime to spare.Compared to most hollywoodian so called comedies that rely only onsexuality, without having even a bit of humor, this one at least makesyou smile from times to times. Great cast, the acting wasn't bad assome insinuated around here, is just that everything else beside thishad nothing interesting or entertaining, except for one or two actuallyfun moments, scattered here or there.

bradrock 06 May 2012

Just avoid this film.

I've been a long time fan of the site. Finally, I've joined so I canwrite a review. I wonder if all first reviews are negative ones? Sohere is my review...Where do I start without spoiling the whole thing? I haven't heard somany lame jokes about genitalia in a while. After watching the film Iknew I had to write a review about this sad excuse for a motionpicture. I loved 'Meet the Parents' but this was much worse than 'Meetthe Fockers' and anything else I've seen lately, for that matter. The all star cast should have thought twice about making this one.There are no redeeming qualities and the films resolution is lackingaltogether. It was a miracle that I didn't stop the movie after thefirst fifteen minutes. Just avoid this film. I could go on and on about how unfunny it is. ButI won't. Fail.

Kam Williams 05 May 2012

A lackluster effort and a preposterous plot which add up to a flagging franchise that just 'jumped the shark.'

medellinrob 04 May 2012

Not bad as many think, just don't expect great!

If it was a movie with intentions of being forever remembered andawarded with Oscars I would rate it 2/10 of course, but knowing it hasbeen made for laughing, then it's a 7. I did laugh quite a bit, butit's not an 8 or 9 because some jokes are not my kind of humor or it'sthe same jokes as the previous movies in the series (with the last nameand so on). Also, the plot is dull, like always, things don't work outfor Greg and blah blah.The positive: Some fresh jokes, Good acting, Laughs are guaranteed.The negative: DeNiro while showing great character adaptation, I misshim 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 tobe a great movie. PS. Jessica Alba looks great in the movie, but the character istedious.

03 May 2012

Toilet Humor

What started as a funny movie story in Part I, became a terrible trilogy by the time producers got to the third iteration of this collection of sex and toilet jokes. The second one was somewhat funny but started the relentless low-brow sexual and potty jokes. Exploitation of a 2 year old involved in scenes depicting "poop" and "boobs" was embarrasing and that top rated actors participated in this farce was embarrasing for their careers. When we thought we had reached the lowest common denominator we mistakenly watched the third sequel to this tastless series.A child playing a 5 year old got some choice lines in his major motion picture appearance with 4 famous and Academy Award winning actors, a line that should have been cut by any decent writer or director: "Do girls poop from their vaginas?" Was that funny? Was it appropriate to give this line to a child actor? Does it contribute to equality among the sexes? Did it add anyting to the story? No to all. Was it abusive exploitation of a child, which should be prosecuted? Yes!If you respect Robert Diniro as an actor or Barbara Streisand as a talented singer and actor, do not watch this show.Besides being crassly, borderline pornographic and abusive of children it just was not funny. It turned out to be a boring rehash of the overt bad taste from the title to the premise of the story. Shame on all these fine actors for stooping into the sewer to retrieve a few more dollars in their otherwise magnificent careers. Three of the actors are well into their 60's and 70's and while they can't stay young forever, seem to have entered a state of dementia in their desperate search for any role in Hollywood.This is a stinker and should be relegated to its rightful place in the septic tank of Hollywood.

Marshall Fine 25 April 2012

The law of diminishing returns is a law for a reason...as lazy a comedy as Adam Sandler's Grown Ups.

Kristi H. 25 April 2012

Not as bad as some have said

If you've seen the other two films in this series, you should know whatto expect by now, and this film was just what I would have expected hadI not read so many negative reviews of it beforehand.The Circle of Trust is back again and is in danger of being brokenagain. Jinxy is back. Owen Wilson returns with a lot more screen time!There is nothing new in the plot...but I really didn't expect there tobe. These actors have grown comfortable with each other, just as theaudience has grown comfortable with their characters.The biggest problems I have with this film are that Jessica Alba'scharacter is way under written and there is not enough Dustin Hoffmanin it (he makes me want to Flamenco!).There is a little homage to the movie Jaws that was my favorite funnymoment in the film. When all is said and done, there are enoughmindless laughs in the third Focker film for me to recommend it to thepeople who liked the first two.

Michael O'Keefe 23 April 2012

Life is never easy for the Fockers.

This third installment finds Greg Focker(Ben Stiller), cash strappedmale nurse, being talked into endorsing a new erectile dysfunctionproduct by a sexy drug rep(Jessica Alba). Now that Greg and wifePam(Teri Polo)have two children; can life get any more tense? Youbet...Greg's father-in-law, retired CIA agent Jack Byrnes(Robert DeNiro), taking a mild heart attack serious, is wanting to pass the torchas the family's next patriarch. But can Greg pass Jack's scrutiny anddeserve his trust? Intimidation and covert snooping comes natural. Sois falling into compromising situations. Crude and sexual humor bringson the wink and nod laughter. De Niro again steals the show. Ms. Albacouldn't get much hotter! Ensemble cast also includes: Dustin Hoffman,Blythe Danner, Laura Dern, Harvey Keitel, Barbra Streisand and OwenWilson. The cute "little Fockers" are Colin Balocchi and Daisy Tahan.

tom1111 23 April 2012

Not bad, little slow, but engaging

This movie is solid 7 for me. When I walked into the movie, I wasexpecting pretty bad, and comically weak movie but it was surprisinglytense and engaging at the same time. All the main characters are therewith their quirks and ideas. All of the characters were actually quitedeveloped with their unique attitudes and awkward moments and phrases.De Niro, Stiller and the others are 100% there with their charactersand everything.On the other hand, the movie is little slow, but it is definitely afunny movie. Streisand and Dustin Hoffman are also there with theirunique funny moments.It is little slow, but the movie was on point. It was worth it for me.I laughed a great deal too. I'm expecting Fockers 4 to be made. Thisversion 3 of the movie didn't really kill the possibility of Fockers 4since this movie kept the car in the same gear, but little slower, butthe Focker family keeps making people laugh a great deal.

Stephen Whitty 22 April 2012

By now you would think the concept had run its course. You'd be right, too.

Julie Rigg 21 April 2012

I enjoyed it hugely. It's nicely paced by a new director, Paul Weitz, but I reckon the key is in the writing.

Joe Williams 19 April 2012

It's about squeezing the last few dollars from a gullible public like milk from a cat.

19 April 2012

quality film

Just to give everyone a heads up- I'm not allowed to say the name of this movie I suppose because, well you know... the second word in the title almost resembles the king of all bad words. As a result I had to change my wording around. Sorry about this but it's not my decision.At first I was totally shocked to see the numerous amount of 1-star reviews for this film here on amazon, however after watching it, now I can see exactly WHY the movie is considered such an overwhelming disappointment- it's much worse than the previous ones in the series. As far as writing goes... what the heck is this? There's really nothing clever about the jokes or the dialogue whatsoever. In fact the entire script has a "been there, done that" feeling (because it's basically a watered down version of the first one in the series) especially everything that Barbara Streisand participates in. Speaking of which... Barbara was barely even in the movie. She had a few lines in the beginning and a slightly bigger role near the end but that's about it.The writing is just extremely weak compared to the much superior previous two. For a sequel it really feels like it was created strictly for a profit and no other reason. Now because I admire this particular style of comedy, I confess- I can't bring myself to give it a lower rating than a 4 out of 5. That's the weak, vulnerable side of me right there, folks- the series has me firmly in its grip so I'd feel guilty ripping the movie to shreds knowing full well that I actually laughed quite a bit. Still, the first in the series in EASILY superior in every single way. It's not even debatable!I suppose what confused me a little bit is how the movie got its title. I assumed it would focus on the children (Ben Stillar's daughter and son) however it just barely touched upon either character at all with the exception of a few segments here and there. It gives me the feeling the movie wasn't given enough time in the writing department.With that said, one of my favorite moments was the sneaky lizard at the dinner table resulting in a turkey accident, and without a doubt the ball pen "shark attack" segment near the end is absolutely hilarious and definitely signs of fantastic writing, so the movie is not a complete loss by ANY means. Of course the communication between Robert De Niro and Ben Stillar is almost as hilarious as it was in the past- there's obviously tension between the two resulting in a quite a few humorous parts. Again, Robert De Niro doesn't think Ben Stillar's character is acceptable for Robert's daughter. Again though -and sorry for repeatedly pointing this out- the first in this series (Meet the... you know) has MUCH better writing, storytelling and jokes. If you can overlook the incomplete and rushed writing that takes up most of the film however, it can be pretty funny. Funny enough to make up for *most* of the obvious disappointment, at least.

flickernatic 16 April 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!

Hellmant 15 April 2012

More of the same but still funny!

'LITTLE FOCKERS': Three and a Half Stars (Out of Five) The second sequel to the 2000 blockbuster hit 'MEET THE PARENTS', whichwas a remake of an earlier 1992 film adapted by the two writers. BenStiller, Robert De Niro, Teri Polo, Blythe Danner and Owen Wilson areall back from the original two films as well as Barbara Streisand andDustin Hoffman from the second, 'MEET THE FOCKERS' (although Hoffmanhad rejected the project and was renegotiated into coming back for sixshort scenes after the film had originally completed filming). JessicaAlba, Laura Dern and Harvey Keitel have all joined the cast this timearound as well. The director of the first two films, Jay Roach, is notback though. He's been replaced this time around by Paul Weitz, who'sactually a better director. Weitz is responsible for such memorablefilms as 'AMERICAN PIE' (co-directing with his brother Chirs) , 'ABOUTA BOY' (co-directing and co-writing with his brother) and 'IN GOODCOMPANY' (writing and directing).The film is once again set at Christmas time and revolves around afamily visit from Jack and Dina Byrnes (De Niro and Danner) to theirdaughter Pam (Polo) and son-in-law Greg Focker (Stiller). The Byrneshave just suffered the unsettling news that their other daughter'shusband Dr. Bob (Thomas McCarthy) has left her for another woman whomhe has been having an affair with. Jack has also just recentlyexperienced a near death heart attack and is looking to find asuccessor to replace him as head of the family (for some reason hedoesn't trust his own son Denny who is not mentioned and has beenforgotten since the first film). Greg has recently been tempted withextramarital affairs by a new work partner, a gorgeous drugrepresentative by the name of Andi Garcia (Alba), and Jack is on tohim. To complicate things Pam's successful ex-lover Kevin (Wilson)recently had his heart broken and is in town visiting while obviouslystill having feelings for Pam. Of course lots of mishaps andmisunderstandings ensue. Despite the name the film has little to dowith the Fockers two children, who only play a minor part in thestoryline (dealing with them getting into a new school).If you've seen the first two films you know what to expect, except Gregis much more skilled at dealing with Jack's attacks and criticisms thistime around. So the film is not nearly as frustrating and painful towatch (although it is a little more crude and hard to watch in otherways). The jokes and awkward situations all feel like they've been donebefore (in the first two films) but despite what the critics saythey're still funny. Thanks in large part to the great cast and qualitydirecting. Although it's just more of the same the film is wellexecuted for a second sequel and if you like the characters it doeshave that family reunion quality to it. It depreciates in value asexpected for a third film in a comedy series but given what the castand crew had to work with they did an adequate job. Worth seeing ifyou're a fan of the first two films, definitely a skip if you're not.Watch our movie review show 'MOVIE TALK' at:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5YDpWRaEnYQ