the critics seem to be missing something in their otherwise entirely accurate reviews

Rating: Null/10 (16 January 2005)

I've read a number of reviews--over a dozen--of this flick, and I've yet to come across a single one that mentions the sheer ineptitude of the filmmakers, namely the fact that various microphones show up in over forty shots in the film. FORTY SHOTS! What I don't understand is that critics seem to be politely ignoring this, rather than doing their jobs and, well, criticizing it. I mean, forty shots. All tepid and lowest-common-denominator comedy aside, this is Ed Wood caliber, folks. The fact that this movie is garnering such big bucks at the box office, so riddled with sophomoric and unapologetic blunders, speaks very lowly of the average American moviegoer's appetite for junk. I teach composition courses. Were a student to hand over a paper so filled with punctuation errors, grammatical flaws, and bad spelling that it wasn't readable, I'd have to say, "Here, do it over, and do it better. It's unacceptable this way." That's what MEET THE FOCKERS is: bad movie grammar. Nothing ruins the silver-screen illusion (or a tasteless joke about strap-on breasts, foreskin, or foul-mouthed babies) like a big black metal rod thrusting in DeNiro's mug. Where do we go from here? I'd like to say, only up, but....