Friday, June 25, 2010

Focked Up

Weren't we just talking about unnecessary sequels?

For as much as I enjoyed Meet the Parents ten years ago (!!!), I had an equal and opposite negative reaction to its sequel Meet the Fockers, in '04. Thus, my net response to the trailer for the third trip to the well, Little Fockers, is pretty much total apathy, and I'm curious how many people feel the same way I do.  Despite the first sequel's $279 mil domestic total, I chalked that up mostly to goodwill left over from the original, and didn't sense any kind of groundswell for a third entry.  Also, I never thought I'd see the day that Robert De Niro, greatest actor of his generation, was doing "24-hour hard-on" jokes, but here we are.  Ah, progress.

Like with most threequels, the vibe I get from the trailer is an over-reliance on the audience's familiarity with the character and situations from the previous films to do most of the heavy lifting.  To my mind that's just lethal for comedy, but also marks this as strictly a bank account movie.  Just look at the Austin Powers or Naked Gun series, both of which started humbly but morphed into mammoth commercial enterprises with most of the creativity drained away by the time their respective trilogies closed out.  Come to think of it, is there any comedy franchise that's successfully made it to three entries before burning out?  I'm drawing a blank.


Dan said...

I've seen Little Fockers. Probably shouldn't talk about it online so all I'll say is, if the trailer did it for you, you'll probably like the movie. If not, well...

As for successful comedy trilogies, I suppose this doesn't count, but the Toy Story series sustained and continued to improve upon it's humor and heart-tugging all the way to the end.

Parvez said...

What, all 20 Police Academy movies don't count?!