Little Fockers - April 5, 2011

[Gardenofstone10]

I am glad that I did a blind buy on this one as the special features are pretty good. Not often you get that with a comedy.

[Gremal]

Originally Posted by i_bleed_Cubby_Blu

Nothing wrong with liking "crap movies" however. I quite enjoyed Transformers 2, even though it was nowhere close to the first.

The whole point of the franchise is that they're crap movies--just silly, crude humor, not to be taken seriously. Like I said, lighten up about it. Live and let live.

[Dynamo of Eternia]

Originally Posted by jinkinquackers

Not a real "deal", but Best Buy has Meet the Parents and Meet the Fockers for $9.99 this week. Add that with Little Fockers for $22.99 and then the whole trilogy is only $42.97.

This is already posted in the deals forum, but it seems good to mention here...

Amazon just dropped the prices on the first two movies to $11.49 each (the new one is still $22.99 by itself). But if you order all 3 together, there is some promotional discount, and it comes out to $37.97 for all 3 movies.

You can also buy just the first two together, and there's still a promotional discount that makes the total $17.98.

That Best Buy deal is not bad, but the Amazon one ended up being better, so I went with that.

[Dynamo of Eternia]

Originally Posted by Mr. Cinema

Meet the Parents also had a budget of $55 mil and the final gross of $166 mil was way back in 2000. Adjusted for inflation, I'm sure it blows past Little Fockers, which had a budget of $100 mil.

Meet the Fockers took in $279 mil, so there was a huge drop-off from the 2nd to the 3rd. Word of mouth was definitely worse this time around.

I have yet to actually watch the 3rd movie, so I don't know if anything in it was obviously a huge 'budget buster,' but how and why did it cost $100 Million to make? While I'm sure the actors were getting bigger paychecks this time around, it still shouldn't cost THAT much to make such a silly comedy movie.

[Mr. Cinema]

Originally Posted by Dynamo of Eternia

I have yet to actually watch the 3rd movie, so I don't know if anything in it was obviously a huge 'budget buster,' but how and why did it cost $100 Million to make? While I'm sure the actors were getting bigger paychecks this time around, it still shouldn't cost THAT much to make such a silly comedy movie.

I agree. But with this being the 3rd one, they probably had to pony up quite a bit to get Stiller and DeNiro back.

Sex and the City 2 had a budget of $110 million! And that didn't include marketing. I have yet to figure that one out. Lots of makeup I guess to cover up the wrinkles.

[bam777]

Does anyone have pictures of the Target exclusive packaging for this? I'm thinking of getting that version.

[AutomaticDriver]

So I watched this movie last night(First time). The only good thing about this movies was having the same cast. Other that, the movie was a piece of crap. A couple of funny parts and thats it. I hope they dont make a 4th.

[djgeneral]

Not amazing, but there was some good parts. I picked up for 14.99 on Amazon (really 0.00 with my trade-ins from other movies)..

I kinda hope there is another. I think they could really do something good with the both families living together.

[Hunk Golden]

Just tried to download the digital copy for this turd...found out it was expired. The movie was released 4/5. The digital copy download window closed on 9/30. That's not even 6 months. What an arbitrary date. I know a few studios/releases are only giving you 6 months now. I think they did it with "Inception" and "The American." It's lame. 1 year is bad enough. Fox, whom I've no affinity for, often gives 2 years. But 6 months (or less, in this case)? Ugh.

Also, Amazon has this (and the DVD) up for sale with a release date of 9/25. Did they reissue it or something?

[Batman1980]

Originally Posted by Hunk Golden

Just tried to download the digital copy for this turd...found out it was expired. The movie was released 4/5. The digital copy download window closed on 9/30. That's not even 6 months. What an arbitrary date. I know a few studios/releases are only giving you 6 months now. I think they did it with "Inception" and "The American." It's lame. 1 year is bad enough. Fox, whom I've no affinity for, often gives 2 years. But 6 months (or less, in this case)? Ugh.

Also, Amazon has this (and the DVD) up for sale with a release date of 9/25. Did they reissue it or something?

Look at your own post, it's probably a "new" release of the movie without the digital copy.

[Hunk Golden]

Originally Posted by Darth Anakin

Look at your own post, it's probably a "new" release of the movie without the digital copy.

Not according to the description on Amazon (Little Fockers - Two-Disc Blu-ray/DVD Combo + Digital Copy). They've screwed up before though.

[Nicolas554]

I didn't like this movie and i'm glad i didn't blind buy it.

I absolutly love ''Meet the Parents'', i consider it a classic and it keeps making me laugh when i watch it. But ''Meet the ****ers'' and ''the little ****ers'' are just BAD and not even funny.

[Hunk Golden]

I liked the first a lot. I liked the 2nd more than I thought I would. I hated this. Bought it because BB had the $5 coupon this summer, and it was cheap. Also for the dig copy, a lot of good that did me. Lastly because I wanted to complete the trilogy. It is a bad flick though.

[Vikeologist]

I liked this film. I think it was the best one since Meet the Parents. Also Jessica Alba in HD makes it even better!

[HD Goofnut]

This one was just plain awful. The wife and I rented the BD after loving Meet the Parents and feeling Meet the Fockers was decent. Well, we both absolutely thought it was wretched.

[Vikeologist]

well, like all movies, it's a matter of opinion, but I didn't think this film was as bad as a lot of people made it out to be.

[Warnerbros2001]

Originally Posted by Shallow_

Pictures if anyone is interested. Nice embossed slip too.

Sweet!