Little Fockers

[SaraJayne]

But, but, but then the seas would not have parted for, the clouds would not be surrounding, and the sunbeams would not be dancing upon the perfect parents that have children cradled upon their bosoms perfectly protected from the world. Their armor would not be able to bounce off the stream of possible bad scenes that they might see in a movie. Of course every single one of them would have figured out from their in-depth research that a medical procedure would be turned into a girl, guy, guy sex-fest in the first five minutes of the movie that was far racier than many R-rated movies out there. OF COURSE the perfect ones would have known that and then they could throw insults at others for not being perfect. I would love to know how some have the time to sit on these boards and read the tragic lives of those kids who might have seen a PG-13 movie when their kids were with their parents. You would think that they would be busy sculpting with their children or doing a bit of live puppet theatre in the dining room with their oh so very blessed off-spring.

I am with you. People do need to get a life and get off these boards to micromanage their kids if they have the time to nitpick a parent for trying to warn others away from something that was pretty bad.

I can tell just by watching the TV commercials that it isn't appropriate for my almost 14 year old.

 

[We_Love_Disney]

This thread is so "Dis". I mean, the passive-agressive community that many on here thrive on.

If someone were to post a thread "It's blue skies and sunny days today", there are at least 10 other people who would argue with it, just for the sake of arguing.

 

[Sanchez]

really, no one seems upset but op....

You seem to be upset about it.

Notwithstanding the fact that the movie appears to be terrible (and the fact that it is the top grossing movie over the weekend makes me embarassed to be an American) I don't think the OP did anything wrong. I think she did the right thing by leaving. It is not always possible (or practical) to thoroughly investigate a movie prior to attending. I think that most parents are correct to assume that a PG-13 movie would not contain this type of humor. The movie seems to be marketed to families.

The ratings system is inconsistent. We saw The King's Speech which was assigned an R rating due to a few F bombs. Parents should be taking children to see this movie instead of tripe like Fockers.

 

[MELSMICE]

Pointing out your responsibility in the situation is not nasty.

I agree.

I am with you. People do need to get a life and get off these boards to micromanage their kids if they have the time to nitpick a parent for trying to warn others away from something that was pretty bad.

She is trying to warn others, however, is not bearing (sp?) any responsibility in making the decision to take the children to a PG13 movie & then realizing, after the fact, that it was inappropriate.

I know if I did that I might have come to these boards saying, "I certainly dropped the ball when I took some 11 year olds to see Little Fockers. Be warned that while it's marketed to this age group, in addition to others, it's not appropriate for them. I spoke to the management & luckily we were able to see a different movie."

I just don't see the point in complaining about something that would have been "my" error in judgement.

 

[lillygator]

You seem to be upset about it.
.

I do???? really???? tell me please......

 

[ms.yt]

Am I the only one that finds it absurd that the OP was shocked that a movie called "Little Fockers" had inappropriate sexual humor? I mean, come on, the actual title is a play on a word that many people find very offensive and inappropriate.

 

[LisaR]

I agree.



I know if I did that I might have come to these boards saying, "I certainly dropped the ball when I took some 11 year olds to see Little Fockers. Be warned that while it's marketed to this age group, in addition to others, it's not appropriate for them. I spoke to the management & luckily we were able to see a different movie."

I just don't see the point in complaining about something that would have been "my" error in judgement.

I admit, this is what is bugging me about this thread. I could care less that the OP didn't think the movie was appropriate, stayed for 5 minutes and got bumped up to another movie. I have zero problem with that. I do have a problem when people refuse to take personal responsibility and that is the way I see this situation.

Warn people about the crappy movie but just admit that you screwed up by not checking it out ahead of time. No biggie.

Did anyone see The Other Guys? We went to see Avatar (I think, or maybe it was Inception) and the movie broke down. They gave us a voucher and also told us we could see any other movie that was playing in the next hour. I didn't have time to review it. I wanted to crawl under the seat when they had the raunchy sex exchange between the mother, her daughter and the SIL since my 13 y/o son was sitting next to me. I can't believe that scene was allowed in a PG-13 movie. While I can complain all I want, it comes down to personal responsibility. Nobody forced me to take my kids to that movie. I was being cheap and wanted to get a free movie in!

 

[LisaR]

Am I the only one that finds it absurd that the OP was shocked that a movie called "Little Fockers" had inappropriate sexual humor? I mean, come on, the actual title is a play on a word that many people find very offensive and inappropriate.

My 15 y/o went to see the movie the other day. When she got home, her 80 y/o grandma with false teeth and bad hearing asked her what movie she saw. My daughter had to repeat the name multiple times. When grandma finally said the title out loud, lets just say it didn't come out Fockers. Grandma was soooooooooo embarrassed but we all had a great laugh.

 

[lillygator]

You seem to be upset about it.

Notwithstanding the fact that the movie appears to be terrible (and the fact that it is the top grossing movie over the weekend makes me embarassed to be an American) I don't think the OP did anything wrong. I think she did the right thing by leaving. It is not always possible (or practical) to thoroughly investigate a movie prior to attending. I think that most parents are correct to assume that a PG-13 movie would not contain this type of humor. The movie seems to be marketed to families.

The ratings system is inconsistent. We saw The King's Speech which was assigned an R rating due to a few F bombs. Parents should be taking children to see this movie instead of tripe like Fockers.

any rational person equates pg -13 to age 13 and up..not 11 and yes, in this day and age you can tell the entire movie before attending.

 

[Tinkh]

any rational person equates pg -13 to age 13 and up..not 11 and yes, in this day and age you can tell the entire movie before attending.

Now the OP is not rational. You are just big on the insults over a subject that doesn't bother you huh? Here are the descriptions of ratings. I have agreed with the original poster that the movie goes WAY further than other ones in the series. Also, the sex innuendo was seriously over the top beyond what I have seen in most other PG-13's. Just because there was no nudity they were able to get away with a VERY overtly disturbing sexual anal penetration scene with an extended sexual tone. Also, the movie very clearly shows the medical rep taking and abusing prescription sex drugs with alcohol. The movie should have been edited or been given a possible rating of R by their own standards. Have you seen the movie? Saw the Fighter this weekend and it is rated R. They use the F bomb in it, but there was nothing as disturbing as the medical anal sex scene in the Fockers.

PG-13 Rating

PG-13 indicates there's material in the film that may not be suitable for children under the age of 13. A PG-13 movie could go "beyond the PG rating in theme, violence, nudity, sensuality, language, adult activities or other elements, but does not reach the restricted R category." The MPAA will give this rating to films with drug use or more than brief nudity, although the nudity in a PG-13 is not sexual in nature. In addition, the MPAA states "there may be depictions of violence in a PG-13 movie, but generally not both realistic and extreme or persistent violence. A motion picture's single use of one of the harsher sexually-derived words, though only as an expletive, initially requires at least a PG-13 rating. More than one such expletive requires an R rating, as must even one of those words used in a sexual context."
R Rating

R-ratings require a parent or adult guardian to be present in order to view the film. An R-rated film "may include adult themes, adult activity, hard language, intense or persistent violence, sexually-oriented nudity, drug abuse or other elements, so that parents are counseled to take this rating very seriously."

 

[Tasha+Scott]

Am I the only one that finds it absurd that the OP was shocked that a movie called "Little Fockers" had inappropriate sexual humor? I mean, come on, the actual title is a play on a word that many people find very offensive and inappropriate.

Ha! This was my first thought as well! The title alone is enough to let me know that it is not appropriate for kids. Of course I really, really don't like most of Ben Stiller's movies anyway but that's another issue.

I did see Meet the Parents but not until it was on TV and there was nothing else on. It was just okay but I definitely have no interest in seeing the 2nd or 3rd Focker movies.

I have to say though that I have been to some movies that I thought were pretty inappropriate for children and there is almost always little kids in there that sit through the whole movie. And I am not talking about 11 year olds. I'm talking the preschool set!

It was a bad decision on the part of the OP to take her kids to this movie but I am glad she did leave after realizing how crude and vulgar the movie was going to be (even if I do still think the title hinted toward it).

 

[bluesaturn]

This thread is so "Dis". I mean, the passive-agressive community that many on here thrive on.

If someone were to post a thread "It's blue skies and sunny days today", there are at least 10 other people who would argue with it, just for the sake of arguing.

People are passive aggressive around here because if you ever dare to be up front about anything, you either get chided for being "mean" or you get points.

 

[MELSMICE]

People are passive aggressive around here because if you ever dare to be up front about anything, you either get chided for being "mean" or you get points.

 

[Heidict]

You seem to be upset about it.

Notwithstanding the fact that the movie appears to be terrible (and the fact that it is the top grossing movie over the weekend makes me embarassed to be an American) I don't think the OP did anything wrong. I think she did the right thing by leaving. It is not always possible (or practical) to thoroughly investigate a movie prior to attending. I think that most parents are correct to assume that a PG-13 movie would not contain this type of humor. The movie seems to be marketed to families.

The ratings system is inconsistent. We saw The King's Speech which was assigned an R rating due to a few F bombs. Parents should be taking children to see this movie instead of tripe like Fockers.

There are a lot of horrible things going on out there that would make me embarrassed to be an American. A crappy, stupid wouldn't even register.

I agree, the MPAA rating system is inconsistent and unreliable. Which is one of the reasons why it is so important to do a little research prior to bringing underage children to see a movie. You don't have to thoroughly investigate it or spend a lot of time. It would literally take a few minutes to go to one of the websites mentioned in this thread to find out about any questionable scenes, nudity, violence, language and gross humor. Then you could make a well informed decision. The OP could have spared her kids from seeing this and she could have avoided any problems.

 

[MickeyMomOfThree]

We saw it last night. We liked it. We didn't love it like we did the first 2, but we enjoyed it. I thought the last few minutes (during the credits) we really funny. It felt to us like they left it open for a 4th but both felt it was done (series wise) and if they were to come out with a 4th we'd see it but from Redbox.

It was crude, but we expected that. We have not let our DD11 and DD8 see any of them, DD16 has seen the first 2 (after we did and OKed it) and if she wants to see this one she can but she said she'll wait for it on Redbox.

I am often surprised when we go to the movies how many children are at them. Two that really shocked me were The Hangover and I Love You Man. I mean..the Hangover??? I loved both movies but there was no way. Course those are both R and worse then this but I was still surprised.

As for this, everyone is different. I felt the rating was appropriate, my DD16 is allowed to see it my other 2 are not. I think when in doubt see it for yourself first. I rented Charlie St. Cloud for DD16 this week, in the end I let the other 2 watch it and it was PG-13 but this one I wouldn't. Both aare fine to be PG-13 IMO but since they aren't 13 it is up to me to view and decide.

I have no issue with you walking out, you have to do what you think is best for your family, but personally my younger kids wouldn't have even seen the first 5 minutes because if they had asked to see it the answer would have been no. (I'm a mean mommy. )

 

[LuvCuteBoys]

Not silly if you are a parent. It is our responsibility to know what our kids are watching and listening to, so if means reading a summary of the movie, so be it. If you as an adult are going to the movies, then you don't need to asses the movie for appropriateness, but with kids, especially underage kids like the OP had, it is imperative to do so, or face a situation such as the OP was faced with.

Tiger

Meh. She already said she would have walked out whether or not her kids were with her.

Am I the only one that finds it absurd that the OP was shocked that a movie called "Little Fockers" had inappropriate sexual humor? I mean, come on, the actual title is a play on a word that many people find very offensive and inappropriate.

Not that it negates your comment, but I read somewhere that the MPAA required the producers of Meet the Fockers to actually find a family whose last name was Focker in order to give it that PG-13 rating.