1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Wednesday, December 29, 2010

[4.00/10] Dinner for Schmucks (2010)


Dinner for Schmucks (2010)

"Dinner for Schmucks" tells the story of Tim, a rising executive, who works for a boss who hosts a monthly event in which the guest who brings the biggest buffoon gets a career-boost. Though he declines the invitation at first, Tim changes his mind when he meets Barry, a man who builds dioramas using stuffed mice. The scheme backfires when Barry's blundering good intentions send Tim's life into a downward spiral, threatening a major business deal and possibly scuttling Tim's engagement to his fiancee. Jay Roach, the director of "Meet the Parents" and its sequel, brings yet another unbelievably lame and painfully unfunny comedy, that fails to deliver any genuine laughs. Unsurprisingly, "Dinner for Schmucks"'s main problem lies within its script, as it offers nothing but silly jokes, idiotic characters, and a formulaic story that becomes predictable rather quickly. This remake completely lacks wit and clever humor, as instead it uses practical jokes and tired gimmicks, to turn itself into an agonizing journey that is, at times, physically painful. Jay Roach's stupid comedy also suffers from uneven pacing and poor editing, and with its 114 minute running time, "Dinner for Schmucks" is just a little too overlong and pretty tedious. Steve Carrell could have been this film's saving grace, but unfortunately he's just plain bad. As a whole, Carrell is a decent comedian, but he plays an unbelievably dumb character in this film. There's just nothing interesting or amusing about him, except for the dioramas he makes - those are absolutely incredible, and nothing like I've seen before in my life. The scenes that the mice and the dioramas are thoroughly compelling and truly fascinating to watch, and unfortunately the only highlight of "Dinner for Schmucks". Paul Rudd is physically sympathetic, but his character is neither interesting, nor funny. Also, sadly, Carell and Rudd share very little screen chemistry, which makes this film an even more unpleasant experience. The supporting performances are mediocre at best. Zach Galifianakis is annoying as usual, Lucy Punch is typically over-the-top, and Stephanie Szostak, while very good-looking, is rather boring. Painfully unfunny, thoroughly predictable and outrageously lame, "Dinner for Schmucks" is a film made for schmucks.

10 comments:

Vapor said...

Will be avoiding, thanks for saving me time.

Nebular said...

You're welcome, buddy ;) Avoid this one like a plague!

Alex J. Cavanaugh said...

What a waste! It wasn't high on my list anyway.

Andrew Green said...

I had a feeling this one would be a disappointment....

Nebular said...

Alex, tell me about it :) I should have skipped it.

Nebular said...

Andrew, you got it right. It was horrendous.

Melissa Bradley said...

I am in absolute agreement. I abhorred this film because I never saw the end. I paid for a nap, which really, really bugs me. $10 when I could have slept at home for free. F*^%!!! :)

Nebular said...

Thankfully, I didn't pay a thing to see this crap. It almost put me to sleep too. $10? That's quite an expensive nap, Mel! :)

Jaccstev said...

Definitely a movie for Schmucks! :) It’s obvious Steve Carrell is only out for a paycheck these days and has compromised his comedic principles, if he ever had any.

Nebular said...

Welcome back, buddy! :) Honestly said, I missed you quite a lot. I absolutely agree, "Schmucks" is a real stinker!