Meet the Fockers

  • Thread starter Thread starter diamondntheruff
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
40.png
Raynd:
Are you currently under the influence of a drug?

…Sean Penn rawks!..Alec Baldwin is responsible for some of the funniest moments in SNL history, and Robbins?? Can I say Shawshank…?
I have to agree here. Also, don’t forget the great baseball movie of Tim Robbins whose title I forget. He played a minor league player and Kevin Costner was in it too.

I still don’t see how anybody couldn’t like Barbra’s gorgeous voice. Her earlier movies were amazing as well. Can you say Funny Girl? What a classic!

Alec Baldwin was a bad husband but he is very talented. I loved his performance in The Cooler. If you haven’t seen this film, it is a must see.
 
40.png
Jrabs:
Folk, I am deeply ashamed to say I saw this movie. I enjoyed the first one. Actually loved it. Hated the second and thought it offensive.
We were finally able to rent it this weekend, thinking the movie would be funny, as the jacket portrayed it.

:bigyikes: After sitting through a writhing session of sexual depravity in the first 45 minutes, and thinking it would get better, we pulled the plug in pure disgust. I had the feeling we should have first examined the jacket to see if it was X-rated or R, but almost fell over when the rating said “PG-13!!!” The innuendo in the title is exactly the pasttime of Streisand and Hoffman, with deviations of kinky overtones. In one scene, even their dog was humping the other parent’s leg when they were introduced.

The most disturbing thing is that my 14-year old granddaughter recommended it! Probably, parents have no idea of the filth in this film when they permit it in the home, unawares, since the first one “Meet the Parents” was not oriented in this manner. Visual imaging afterwards was the most difficult thing to remove from my imagination, for a mental image can do considerable harm.

Parents, watch out for this! I gather we can no longer trust the PG-13 ratings as being slightly amiss. More like grossly amiss!

Carole
 
40.png
Edwin1961:
The first movie?
You mean there is ANOTHER movie like this one? :eek:
Yes. It’s called “Meet the Parents” and it was a little funny but mostly distasteful

my Mother my Confidence,
Corinne
 
40.png
mkw:
I just have a problem with the name Fockers. My children said it the other day and it sounded like they were saying… :eek:

Well, you can guess what I THOUGHT I heard.
That seems to be by design. There are several jokes to exactly that effect in the first movie, “Meet the Parents.”

I really liked “Meet the Parents” despite its problems. It was a birthday gift from my oldest son, who is chaste but worldly wise, and was probably 17 at the time he gave it to me. We watched it together and had a big laugh.

My reaction was a little bit like Corinne’s, but reversed. I thought it was a lot funny and a little distasteful. Then again, coming from somebody who occasionally South Park, you might want to second-guess my taste! 😉

Alan
 
Both movies were funny. The 1st being better. I am no big fan of Barbra Striesand but I have to admit she and Dustin Hoffman were a perfect match to play “Gaylord’s” parents.

Funny thing, recently I was driving with my son. As we got off the highway exit ramp we saw signs pointing toward a park saying “Phocker Family Picnic”. We had a good laugh and briefly thought about crashing the picnic. 🙂
 
It’s funny that I came across this thread this morn. Yesterday, I was on the forums and my husband was in the den watching that movie. He asked me if I wanted to watch it, my daughters fiancee rented it. First, Barbara Streisand is in it. Second I can’t stand movies that I put in a category I call “Distasteful, Juvenile Humor.” American Pie, Along Came Mary, I put them in that category also. Those kind of movies just have no appeal to me. When my husband asked me if I wanted to watch it, I just looked at him and said, “H-E-L-L-O! let me introduce myself,and No thanks,I don’t want to watch that movie!”:rolleyes:
 
40.png
ktm:
Wow these four are also on my list. Allow me to add:
  • Susan Sarandon (Tim “Chill Wind” Robbins’ “life partner” or whatever he is)
  • Patrick Swayze
  • Bruce Willis (ever since that idiotic scene in Die Hard when he walked in glass)
  • Demi “Demimonde” Moore
  • Richard Gere (so greasy he sweats olive oil)
  • Julia Roberts
  • Eric Roberts
  • George Clooney (whose idea of acting is to droop his head while talking)
  • Leonardo De-crapp
There are some others I’m forgetting, but you get the drift. I may start to give Bruce Willis a break since he’s a quasi-Republican.

As you may surmise I rarely go to the movies. The last two movies I saw in the theater were the last two Lord of the Rings movies, I think.
I haven’t seen this movie - title is too ranuchy for my tastes & I don’t care for Barbara at all - but I’m wondering ktm, why Julia Roberts made your list? I like most movie’s she’s in… Is there something about her I don’t know?
 
Ah yes, juvenile humor. I remember when in a conversation about vintage military aircraft, mention of the Fokker could always be counted on to induce giggles. The Messerschmitt was nearly as effective. Apparently some Hollywood screenwriters are still in fourth grade.
 
40.png
jrabs:
Folk, I am deeply ashamed to say I saw this movie. I enjoyed the first one. Actually loved it.

Hated the second and thought it offensive.

Didn’t see the first one, or not really - but the second was hilarious; a laugh (or several) every minute 😃

And there are not many comedies of which that can be said. Most of them - most films - are mere swearing-contests. ##
 
I thought the movie was repulsive…it was so sex-drenched that it made my toes curl. My husband said I did not have a sense of humour. 😃

No wonder our society always thinks of sex…that is all you hear of! :mad:

Blessings,
Shoshana
 
I like the first and REALLY LIKED the second!

Dustin Hoffman was great, Streisand was good as well in role of a free spirit wacky sex therapist. There wasnt really anything raunchy in this movie at all… No surprise it did major box office, cause it was FUNNY!
 
40.png
ShroudMan:
I like the first and REALLY LIKED the second!

There wasnt really anything raunchy in this movie at all… No surprise it did major box office, cause it was FUNNY!
HOLY COW MAN WHAT COLOR IS THE SKY IN YOUR WORLD??! My 13 year old wanted to see this so I went to preview it…I took 3 (THAT’s 1+2 more) pages of notes why he should re-think his request before I quit taking notes.

Sure this movie isn’t raunchy:
  • If incessant discussions of masturbation are topics for Sesame Street
  • If a teenager lifting her shirt (on a school bus) and showing her breasts is normal for Mr. Rogers neighborhood
  • If statues of “69”, as well as male and female genitalia are the decor you want to see in your childs daycare.
WOW! I hope if you’re a parent you re-think your position. If your a teenager, you need to spend less time at the movies…your sense of right and wrong are skewed.

I whole heartedly agree with Joysong below!
I had the feeling we should have first examined the jacket to see if it was X-rated or R, but almost fell over when the rating said “PG-13!!!” The innuendo in the title is exactly the pasttime of Streisand and Hoffman, with deviations of kinky overtones. In one scene, even their dog was humping the other parent’s leg when they were introduced.
The most disturbing thing is that my 14-year old granddaughter recommended it! Probably, parents have no idea of the filth in this film
 
I didn’t think the Puritans had a time machine.

You learn something new every day.
 
40.png
Ghostgirl:
I didn’t think the Puritans had a time machine.

You learn something new every day.
Code:
I guess Ziggy, myself and others are Puritans…I have never been called one. But knowing that Lord is offended by sins of the flesh (imagination et al), I try to stay away from such filth.

Blessings,
Shoshana
 
40.png
Ghostgirl:
I didn’t think the Puritans had a time machine.

You learn something new every day.
Carnival time! I’m going to guess your age.

I’d say you are between 14 and 20. If I had to be specific, I’d pick 17.
How’d I do?
 
I didnt realize how many Catholic “Fundies” are on this board.

Note taking for the Fockers movie… whatever…

May the day NEVER come that every movie is nothing but holiness and values …not a world I wanna live in.

I like uplifting moral value film…but I also love low brow humor and sexual inuendo… I have adjusted to the fact that people in the world masturbate…gee so do I sometimes… I have no problem laughing at such things. More power to ya if you do.
 
40.png
ShroudMan:
I didnt realize how many Catholic “Fundies” are on this board.

Note taking for the Fockers movie… whatever…

May the day NEVER come that every movie is nothing but holiness and values …not a world I wanna live in.

I like uplifting moral value film…but I also love low brow humor and sexual inuendo… I have adjusted to the fact that people in the world masturbate…gee so do I sometimes… I have no problem laughing at such things. More power to ya if you do.
Code:
:eek: :eek: :eek:
 
Dh and I sat down to watch it last night. It was pretty bad- we turned it off 1/3 of the way through the movie. I was shocked that he suggested we turn it off, but glad, too.

We’ll watch Napoleon Dynamite sometime this week.

Anyone see Secondhand Lions? Now that was a great movie!

C<><
 
40.png
TZiggy:
HOLY COW MAN WHAT COLOR IS THE SKY IN YOUR WORLD??! My 13 year old wanted to see this so I went to preview it…I took 3 (THAT’s 1+2 more) pages of notes why he should re-think his request before I quit taking notes.

Sure this movie isn’t raunchy:
  • If incessant discussions of masturbation are topics for Sesame Street
  • If a teenager lifting her shirt (on a school bus) and showing her breasts is normal for Mr. Rogers neighborhood
  • If statues of “69”, as well as male and female genitalia are the decor you want to see in your childs daycare.
WOW! I hope if you’re a parent you re-think your position. If your a teenager, you need to spend less time at the movies…your sense of right and wrong are skewed.

I whole heartedly agree with Joysong below!

I didn’t notice any of that - St. Thomas Aquinas’ philosophical POV is not exactly a pressing concern for​

http://www.sesamestreetlive.com/uploads/ssl_bio_photo_bigbird.gif
or http://www.sesamestreetlive.com/uploads/SSL_bio_photo_oscar.gif - but why should it be ?

It has its place: and so do various sorts of humour. ##
statues of “69”

Sounds like a fizzy drink to me 🙂

 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top