4 of 4

Write now Article Tools

Page 2 of 2

it with all the obvious sympathy and self pity that you expect. Only Robert De Niro as the overbearing father manages to pull something out of his character, but compared with his past achievements I doubt that this is a role that was taken on for anything more that money to pay the bills. The script is weak the jokes forced and unoriginal and the other actors unmemorable. This has all been done better and funnier before. If anyone can remember Norman Wisdom who based a whole career on just such a character, then they may agree with me that he had more humour in one finger that this film has in its whole body.

Although it may sound like I'm reading too much into this but the film smacks a bit of anti-semitism. Instead of the Jew-doctor, Stiller plays a nurse who is belittled by `real' doctors. Instead of the banker powerbroker, we have Stiller easily ridden by the CIA guy (incidentally a John Bircher type to judge from his bedtime reading. For those who don't know, the book DeNiro is reading is perhaps the most influential creed on `global Jewish conspiracies' in the post-war US.) His predecessor and still competitor for the girl is a devout Christian, in fact every other character seems to be that wholesome church going, successful, humourless, middle class American and a WASP to boot. He is bested by a cat, his name is derided and shrewdness, that Jewish mainstay, is replaced by spinelessness and incompetence and his bumbling destroys an altar. There is too much underlying religious iconography here to be coincidence.

All in all for me the film did not justify its existence or even the time spent invested in it by the viewer. Next time I spend time looking after someone else's house, I will take a book.

Learn more about this author, Dave Franklin.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.

• << previous page
• 1
• 2

Add your voice

Know something about Movie reviews: Meet the Parents?
We want to hear your view. Write now!