Little Fockers

  • Review Date: December 19, 2010
  • PG-13
  • Genre: Comedy
  • 2010
 Review

Common Sense Media says

Battling in-laws face off in formulaic comedy.
greenON: Content is age-appropriate for kids this age.
yellowPAUSE: Know your child; some content
may not be right for some kids.
redOFF: Not age-appropriate for kids this age.
not for kidsNOT FOR KIDS: Not appropriate for kids any age.

Find out more

Quality
 
Sometimes media can be age appropriate but a real waste of time. Our star rating assesses the media's overall quality.

Find out more

Parents say

Kids say

What parents need to know

Parents need to know that the third comedy in the "Fockers" series (which started with Meet the Parents and continued in Meet the Fockers) mines the same material as the previous two installments: the conflict-filled relationship between a father-in-law and his son-in-law. A few new tweaks -- such as a woman hitting on a man who's clearly married and devoted to his family, as well as discussion about both erectile dysfunction and over-function (there's an apparent erection in one character's pants) -- may be too mature for younger viewers. Also, the animosity between the two main characters verges on disturbing. There's less sexual humor here than in Meet the Fockers, but you can expect some jokes/talk and a scene in which a character gets drunk and strips down to her underwear. There's also some swearing (including "s--t" and plays on the name "Focker") and episodes in which two grown men attack each other.

  • Although the movie makes it very clear that family is important and fidelity is a priority, there are some confusing messages about in-law relationships. Sometimes it seems like some abuse -- verbal or physical -- is OK. It’s all played for laughs, but it’s still confusing.
  • A father is protective (actually overprotective) of his daughter, which is admirable, in a way. But he has no boundaries -- for example, he interrogates his son-in-law about whether he’s still attracted to his daughter despite her having had two kids. A woman flirts openly with a married man.
  • Father-in-law and son-in-law tussle at a child’s birthday, taking swipes at each other while in a ball pit. They also have heated, verbally abusive exchanges. A man accidentally cuts himself, and his blood spurts everywhere at the dinner table.
  • Some discussion about infidelity. A man’s private parts appear to be erect in his pants. A woman role-plays with her husband and pretends to be another person to add spice to their relationship. A woman prances around in her underwear. One character is a sex therapist. Bikini-clad women drape themselves all over one character.
  • The name “Focker” is, of course, meant to suggest the word "f--ker" (and characters sometimes pronounce it in a way that emphasizes this). Other language includes several uses of "s--t," "damn," "boobs," "hell," "crap," "ass," and "oh my God" (as an exclamation).
  • One character (who's pointedly referenced as being more well-off than another) has many symbols of affluence: a fancy car, a mansion, etc.
  • A woman brings a bottle of wine to visit a married man, gets drunk, and then proceeds to "attack" him after she undresses down to her underwear.

What's the story?

After the son-in-law he originally favored has an affair, ex-CIA agent Jack Byrnes (Robert De Niro) decides that his other son-in-law, Gaylord "Greg" Focker (Ben Stiller), is good enough to entrust with the future of the Byrnes family. Always starved for Jack's approval, Greg takes his mission seriously, but is discouraged when he learns, during a visit from Jack and his mother-in-law (Blythe Danner), that things -- as usual -- aren't as simple as they first seem. Meanwhile, an article that Greg wrote for a medical journal has attracted the attention of an alluring (and persistent) pharmaceutical sales rep (Jessica Alba), who recruits him to be the spokesperson for an erectile dysfunction medication. (He considers it because his kids might have to attend a fancy preschool.) Plus, Greg's wife Pam's (Teri Polo) ex-boyfriend, Kevin (Owen Wilson), is still hung up on her; Greg's father (Dustin Hoffman) is off to Seville to find himself; and his mother (Barbra Streisand) continues to dish out sexual advice while sharing anecdotes about him.


Is it any good?

 

LITTLE FOCKERS is the third installment in what has proven to be a successful, if entirely predictable, franchise. At this point, De Niro and Stiller have their banter and prickly chemistry down to a science, and they inhabit their tense relationship in a satisfying and believable way. Even the cheesiest lines -- De Niro calling Stiller’s character "the Godfocker," for example -- elicit a chuckle.

The cast is the best thing about the movie, save perhaps for Alba, who appears to be channeling Tea Leoni’s kooky charm in Flirting with Disaster, but with less success. But, honestly, some of the Fockers antics are really tiresome at this point. Shouldn’t Greg and Jack get along by now? A secondary storyline that has Laura Dern playing the director of an uber-preschool is a funny diversion and could have added more interest had it been further explored (perhaps Little Fockers should have attacked helicopter parenting instead?). The film will entertain Fockers fans, but if you didn't like the first two, don't get your hopes up.


Explore, discuss, enjoy

  • Families can talk about the movie's messages about marriage and family. How does having children impact a relationship? How are families with young kids typically portrayed in the media?

  • Why do you think Hollywood makes so many movies that show tension between family members? Do you think that's realistic?


This review of Little Fockers was written by
Teen, 14 years old
January 2, 2011
 
Weak sequel
A very sex-centered film that's not too funny, although the little Fockers are the best thing about the film, the kids were very comical. I thought because of the title it would center on them, but it focused more on Greg's role as "The Godfocker."
What other families should know:

Flag as inappropriate 
Parent of 2 year old
January 6, 2011
 
Inappropriate all the way around
I was extremely disappointed in this movie. They took the inappropriate sexual behaviors and innuendoes way too far. I was sitting between my husband and mother when watching this movie and was embarrassed many times.
What other families should know:

Flag as inappropriate 
Parent of 11 year old
January 1, 2011
 
I laughed through Fockers 1 and 2 but wished I had read the reviews and skipped 3.
Not as funny as the first and second. I foolishly went to it with my 11 year old before reading reviews as we had all laughed through number 2 when it was on TV. Erectile dysfunction was not appropriate for my son and he asked questions that night which clearly indicated he was confused by it. Jessica Alba's character is a bad role model. A drug Rep who is abusing prescription drugs and trying seduce a married man. Not pretty.
What other families should know:

Flag as inappropriate 
Parent of 14 year old
December 30, 2010
 
not good for adults or teens
My husband and I saw this and disliked it for many reasons. It is not appropriate for anyone - teens and adults alike. The entire thing was potty humor and just not funny - similar caliber to a class of third grade boys writing the script. Everything was body functions and body fluids. After the 47th joke along these lines, it got very, very old. Go see Narnia instead. Not funny if you have at least completed 5th grade.
What other families should know:

Flag as inappropriate 
Parent of 5 year old
January 5, 2011
 
did not see it
It burns me up that I have to walk my family beside the huge posters that say "Meet the Fockers." Those huge words passed in front of us at the xmas parade too. Shame on them for naming it that!

Flag as inappropriate 
Parent of 12 year old
January 9, 2011
 
Not for kids, just not funny!
Thought it was an awful movie. Had too much sexual overtones. I guess the producers thought they would be funny but they were just stupid! I wouldn't want my 13 yr old to see this. They said and did things that were just not funny. Almost embarassing! I maybe laughed one time.
What other families should know:

Flag as inappropriate 
Kid, 12 years old
January 7, 2011
 
Only for teens and up
This is a funny movie only for older teens and all adults.
What other families should know:

Flag as inappropriate 
Parent of 10, 12, and 13 year old
January 10, 2011
 
Don't even think about it
Awful, Awful, Aful! This is a bad sequal for adults and a horrible movie for kids. With the excpetion of a few chuckles that can be outdone in everyday real conversation, this movie is worthless and void. The only thing it can do for kids is expose them to sex, dishonesty, and bad people doing bad things to each other. I am very tolerant of mature theme and it was embarrasig with my 13 y/o son. It wasn't even potty humor that could be enjoyed by early-teen boys; just useless raunch.
What other families should know:

Flag as inappropriate 
Teen, 14 years old
April 24, 2011
 
it was pretty funny
What other families should know:

Flag as inappropriate 
Parent of 14 year old
December 23, 2010
 
This movie series supposed to be family oriented comedy ... and bacame pack of tasteless and poorly written sexually oriented jokes! Movie title - "Little Fockers" is totally disconnected from actual content. Very bad choice for anyone either adult or teenager
What other families should know:

Flag as inappropriate 

This review of Little Fockers was written by
Studio:Universal Pictures
Director:Paul Weitz
Cast:Barbra Streisand, Ben Stiller, Dustin Hoffman, Robert De Niro
Genre:Comedy
Run time:98 minutes
Theatrical release date:December 22, 2010
DVD release date:April 5, 2011
MPAA rating:PG-13
MPAA explanation:mature sexual humor throughout, language and some drug content

This review of Little Fockers was written by
 

Review It

Share your review with others

Hang on! You need to be a member to post your review.
A safe community is important to us. Please observe our guidelines.

Video review


Learning Products Quick Finder