Movies

Just as good the original, in my opinion. Any sequel-slack was ironed out with Dustin Hoffman's sidesplitting performance. I'm really surprised to see so many people find this an unworthy sequel... it's more of what made the original funny with just enough additions to keep it fresh.

'Meet The Fockers (2004)' may be similar in premise to its predecessor, but it feels distinct enough to work as a sequel and is the natural extension of the series' core concept. Pitting in-laws against in-laws is a solid idea, especially when you have a cast as good as this. I mean, who doesn't want to see De Niro get body slammed by Hoffman? The picture is a good time throughout. It amps up the slapstick ever-so-slightly but it still remains relatively grounded and relatable. It's properly funny, too; it may actually be funnier than the first flick. Overall, it's a solid comedy with memorable characters and classic comedic beats. It's really enjoyable. 7/10

I walked out after about ninety minutes in the theater."Meet the Fockers" didn't make me laugh once. There was some weak laughter in the crowded theater.It was just so dumb, so ham-handed, so grotesque.Even a funny set-up -- a baby gluing his hands to a bottle of rum -- was handled in such a ham-handed way that I couldn't find it funny.A bunch of youngish males were sitting behind me, and they didn't laugh, either.I hope that Dustin Hoffman and Barbra Streisand make other movies soon. Heaven forbid that this should be the last movie for either one of them.Oh, and by the way, why did two Jewish stars participate in a movie that so grotesquely stereotypes Jews? Hoffman and Streisand are a Jewish Amos and Andy routine here.Ew. Just -- ew.