· 83 comments · Save ·
For Sale Apr 16, 2026 at 5:51 PM

Ben Stiller Admits Not All of the ‘Meet the Parents’ Sequels Worked: ‘I Stand By the First Two’

Posted by mcfw31


Ben Stiller Admits Not All of the ‘Meet the Parents’ Sequels Worked: ‘I Stand By the First Two’
Variety
Ben Stiller Admits Not All of the ‘Meet the Parents’ Sequels Worked: ‘I Stand By the First Two’
Ahead of 'Focker In-Law,' Ben Stiller admitted not all the 'Meet the Parents' sequels have worked: 'I stand by the first two.'

🚩 Report this post

83 Comments

Sign in to comment — or just click the box below.
🔒 Your email is never shown publicly.
Tiny-Setting-8036 3 days ago +287
I didn’t even remember there were more than two
287
tlollz52 3 days ago +105
There is 3 movies altogether i believe. Meet the Parents, Meet the Fockers, and Little Fockers.
105
satanssweatycheeks 2 days ago +110
First one is amazing. And second one is a good example of a sequel not being terrible. But still not outdoing the original like terminator 2 does.
110
RVAforthewin 2 days ago +94
Terminator 2 is such an unfair comparison bc it’s pretty much the gold standard for sequels.
94
A_Phyrexian 2 days ago +67
*The Empire Strikes Back has entered the chat*
67
Thr33pw00d83 2 days ago +12
‘Not a sequel, a part of a trilogy, completely planned’ -Randy Meeks
12
Wasabi_Gamer26 2 days ago +6
Except it wasn't Randy. It really really wasn't.
6
tomahawkfury13 2 days ago +4
Aliens as well
4
A_Phyrexian 2 days ago +1
Aliens is a fantastic sequel, but I think it’s harder to call as an objectively better sequel since it’s a completely different genre than the original and a completely different take on the mythos. I think there’s enough difference between the first two movies that some are going to prefer one more to the other. Horror fans will more likely prefer Alien, whereas action fans are going to be drawn to Aliens. They’re both phenomenal movies that play to their strengths, but those strengths are so far removed from one another that we start comparing apples to oranges. Can’t go wrong with either one, imo.
1
GonePhishingAgain 2 days ago +42
Godfather 2 has entered the chat.
42
milkymaniac 1 day ago +2
As Godfather 2 was already in pre-production before Godfather 1 came out, I'd give T2 the edge as it was six years between the first one and Cameron writing the second.
2
happyscrappy 2 days ago +10
I'll take Aliens over Terminator 2. Others mention stark examples also. All 4 of these quite outshine Star Trek II and probably outshine Lethal Weapon 2 or Mad Max: Beyond Thunderdome too. Improving on the original is not unheard of. But it is certainly not the norm. Lethal Weapon 2 was really good though. Most people probably think of that movie when they think they are thinking of Lethal Weapon. Riggs was just too much of a sad case in the first one, he's hard to identify with. By number 2 he's gone from suicidal to "funny uncle". Literally he's living in Murthough's house helping parent his children by that point.
10
thedude0425 2 days ago +1
Franchise movies that I can think of where the sequel stands above the already good to great original: - Aliens - Empire Strikes Back - X2: X-Men United - T2: Judgement Day - Spider-Man 2
1
ChiefMark 2 days ago +2
Shrek 2
2
bourbonparade 1 day ago +2
The Dark Knight.
2
TellTaleReaper 2 days ago +1
The only sequal where i prefer it to the original by an -extreme- margin. Im not even sure I like Terminator 1, I only tolerate it cuz it gives us Terminator 2
1
Ollidor 2 days ago -35
Worst movie ever made
-35
Agitated_Reveal_6211 2 days ago +10
Aliens.
10
Fuzzy_Donl0p 2 days ago -5
not even close lol
-5
Agitated_Reveal_6211 2 days ago +3
The first movie was amazing, the 2nd movie was far better. The 3rd movie sucked big time.
3
booyakasha99 2 days ago +2
Meet the Fockers was ok. Alanna Ubach was hilarious.
2
Sighlina 2 days ago +2
>it’s good, but it doesn’t out do the best sequel of all time… so meh… - Listnook
2
freekehleek 2 days ago +11
So he’s basically just saying the 3rd one sucked
11
askyourmom469 2 days ago +11
And there's also a fourth movie on the way called Focker in Law
11
tlollz52 2 days ago +19
Correct. I doubt he's shitting on the movie thats coming out though
19
askyourmom469 2 days ago +6
True. At least not yet anyway lol
6
tlollz52 2 days ago +10
He's saving that for the premier of the 5th one
10
CarrieDurst 2 days ago +2
It would certainly be a bold move
2
tlollz52 2 days ago -1
"Don't waste your time. That large girl sucks"
-1
CarrieDurst 2 days ago +1
What is that quoting?
1
tlollz52 2 days ago -1
A fake quote i made up imaging Stiller insulting the movie and Ariana Grande
-1
PackageOk4947 2 days ago +3
I saw the trailer, and f*** me it looks bad.
3
afkstudios 2 days ago +3
John Hamburg is back at the helm for this one (he wrote and directed the first one, as well as I Love You man and he wrote Zoolander) so I have a small glimmer of hope that this one won’t be dog shit. But he has made his fair share of dog shit too and it’s hard to imagine anything they do capturing the magic of the original
3
moonshinedesignSD 2 days ago +2
With…Ariana grande. Naturally
2
DarthSomething05 2 days ago +4
I really hate that they stopped naming them “meet the (insert)” The third movie could’ve been called Meet the children or something
4
iterationnull 2 days ago +3
Fourth film comes out this year
3
NotVerySmarts 2 days ago +3
Fock Around And Find Out was my favorite.
3
Hawvy 2 days ago +19
“Larry, I missed one shot.” “It was a BIG shot!”
19
MattyIce1220 2 days ago +7
That line is so relatable. Others miss a shot and no biggie. You miss it and all of the sudden it's the end of the world.
7
chunkah69 2 days ago +4
The first is one of the most quotable perfect comedy movies I’ve ever seen
4
iamacannibal 2 days ago +9
What’s shocking is there is 36 of them
9
Yommination 2 days ago +4
3rd one was a pile of shit
4
HoneyReasonable9316 2 days ago +1
Trolls 2 enters the chat, looks around, hears what the chat is discussing, and walks out, sighing softly.
1
mcfw31 3 days ago +83
> Responding to a post on X asking if one needs to watch the first three “Focker” movies to understand the plot of the upcoming fourth film starring Ariana Grande, Stiller wrote, “No! But I stand by the first two.” > When another user commented, “So what went wrong with Little Fockers? You worked on it,” Stiller replied, “We always try. Fully.”
83
St0n3yM33rkat 2 days ago +48
It's the perfect definition of a grey response. Ben carries himself humbly and I've always respected the guy for being someone who just wanted others to feel good at his movies. Not many people left like that anymore.
48
olemiss18 2 days ago +2
Yep. Although quite different from the variety act background of his parents, he carries there mindset of simply just wanting to entertain.
2
St0n3yM33rkat 1 day ago
Imagine if all the big stars of today made stuff because they just wanted people to feel better after they had experienced their art. They would be equally as rich (if not more) and society (along with the mental states of many, many susceptible younger people) would be all the better for it. Art is what sets us apart from everything else in the entirety of our universe. Not opposable thumbs. Not our intellect or our place in the food chain. It's our art. Because art requires that special something from humanity. It requires sacrifice and pain and love and happiness all mixed in and rolled around. It requires something that we, as humans, uniquely experience for ourselves. Some people get chills, others don't. Some people are moved to tears, others aren't. They're beautifully subjective experiences that help shape these lives we lead and so many have lost their way, gaining following and causing others to lose their way and so on and so forth. Money should never be the motivating factor of any art form. Here we are at the peak of human existence. Capable of moving mountains and reaching the stars. Curing incurable diseases, providing hearing to the deaf, sight to the blind.... yet we choose to roll around in the dirt and the muck and the filth...then get the audacity to say that we deserve whatever we want, whenever we want it, no matter the cost. As long as people like Ben exist, who just want others to experience happiness through their art, I will always remain hopeful.
0
riegspsych325 3 days ago +53
third was a weird and heartless rehash, Stiller having to deal with a still-disapproving De Niro just wasn’t funny for a 3rd time. And Jessica Alba’s character causes so much trouble and then she just disappears from the movie and isn’t called out for it. Just a lazily made comedy sequel all around EDIT: autocorrect fix
53
waitmyhonor 2 days ago +8
It plays like a 20 min family sitcom of thinking the husband is cheating where communication would have solved it but instead took like 90 mins
8
CleverRadiation 2 days ago +43
I actually like MEET THE FOCKERS better than MEET THE PARENTS. Streisand and Hoffman were hilarious!
43
Anon28301 2 days ago +12
Same here. The only thing that gets annoying after a while is the baby they introduced. Greg’s parents are the best part of that movie.
12
The-Mustard-Man 2 days ago +7
I didn't know people don't like meet the fockers, my wife and I watch them both once a year and love them equally. Can't remember little fockers at all though.
7
NaiRad1000 2 days ago +15
Little Fockers was meh so I’m surprised they’re doing a fourth
15
Iginlas_4head_Crease 2 days ago +8
My grandma laughed her ass off at little fockers. Its not highbrow stuff. Its for sitcom fans and they make money
8
Suitable-Answer-83 2 days ago +3
It's been 16 years since Little Fockers so they probably figure the quality of that one mediocre sequel will have almost no bearing on whether people will see this movie.
3
NaiRad1000 2 days ago +5
Bloody hell has it really been that long?
5
Wasabi_Gamer26 2 days ago +1
Ya. When you end on a bad sequel all you need to do is wait long enough for people to get over it, remember they miss the movies, and then make a new one to get some good will/MONEY. They could probably do a new Hangover movie now. People should be over the 3rd one.
1
bookant 2 days ago +13
They need to work Samuel Jackson into the mix somehow for "Mother Focker."
13
zero2789 2 days ago +3
Hahah yes. End of the movie (near credits) or middle of the movie as a random one off event as it rises to the climax. 
3
TanAllOvaJanAllOva 2 days ago +3
FIRST TWO?? How many did they make!?! I only saw one sequel.
3
5043090 2 days ago -1
I know. TIL there’s more than 2 Meet the Parents sequels…I also learned I don’t care.
-1
Wasabi_Gamer26 2 days ago +3
I want an alternate universe series where Greg Focker dumps Pam and goes off and dates someone who sticks up for him and has a family that doesn't treat him like shit.
3
chestertravis 2 days ago +8
He stands by the first two sequels? Is he saying the new film doesn’t work?
8
Human_Document_1577 2 days ago +16
The comment in context was not referring to sequels. He means he stands by the first two movies, not including the third film (second sequel), Little Fockers
16
Yokai_Mob 2 days ago +2
I love Meet The Feebles
2
Specialist-Web-9216 2 days ago +2
So this sequel is like the last sequel in the die hard franchise, Just a cash grab.
2
rabbibert 2 days ago +2
Even though the movie wasn’t great, I will always have a fond memory of the 3rd one because they were filming a scene from it by my apartment the night I met my wife.
2
happyscrappy 2 days ago +2
Not all the Night at the Museum sequels worked either. Maybe one worked, tops. I do agree with his sentiment that they do try. Just not every time does it work out.
2
moonshinedesignSD 2 days ago +1
There’s a new one coming out in December with Ariana Grande
1
ImaginationDoctor 2 days ago +1
I agree with him and I'm glad he can acknowledge it. The first two films are perfectly fun and entertaining. And the third film is utter trash. Hopefully this next one is like the first two.
1
ScipioCoriolanus 2 days ago +1
Wait, there's more than two??
1
JJB46 2 days ago +1
Just overpaid actors they really need to give the money to the writers that made it, but that’s Hollywood for you. They have no other good ideas except the old ones.
1
Foreign_Rock6944 2 days ago +1
The third one was poop from what I remember. Painfully unfunny, and that scene with the v***** stands out for all the wrong reasons.
1
BuddyEbsenSalt 1 day ago +1
The sequel absolutely no one is asking for.
1
chrisinvic 2 days ago +1
They were funny but also forgettable. Like most movies these days. Watch laugh and move on. Yet so many older movies are rewatchable over and over. Maybe I’m just getting older but the movies seem so generic these days with the same actors over and over.
1
DarthSomething05 2 days ago +3
Depends on which movies you watch. There are a lot of great and memorable movies still coming out, they just often don’t get talked about as much as the big franchise films
3
chrisinvic 2 days ago +2
Very true. It’s also possible that I have shitty taste. 👍🏻
2
HuhYeahSo69 2 days ago
This one isn't going to work either tbh.
0
Jeremy_Melton 2 days ago
I didn’t even know there was more than one movie. I only remember Meet The Fockers due to Robert DeNiro being a CIA agent or something.
0
SugarCube80 2 days ago +2
lol he’s a former CIA agent or whatever in all the movies.
2
Unhappy_Plankton_671 2 days ago +1
Fockers is one of the sequels. Parents was the first.
1
Jeremy_Melton 2 days ago +1
Like I said, I only remember Meet The Fockers. I didn’t know that wasn’t the only movie.
1
impracticalweight 2 days ago
Giving all that is happening in the world, this is perhaps the boldest stance a person has taken in the last two years.
0
← Back to Board