Dinner for Schmucks: 3/10

Dinner for Schmucks (2010)
Like a fancy restaurant with all style and no substance, Dinner for Schmucks has all the pieces for awesome potential, but none of them fit

Dinner for Schmucks is a very weak comedy that has trouble getting its footing from the beginning, resulting in a total tumble for the rest of the film. What surprises me the most about this movie is that the talent was most certainly there, but with a very weak script and poor pacing, the movie maintains a disappointing taste throughout the overlong 114 minutes. Paul Rudd is among the funniest out there in terms of deadpan and everyday man humor, while Steve Carell is easily one of the brightest comedy talents in Hollywood. Then we have Jay Roach, who has plenty of comedic experience with the like of Meet the Parents and Austin Powers. But despite the capability and decent resume, they all fail in delivering the laughs.

From the trailers (which were weak too), it looks like the big focus is on the dinner planned by higher-ups in a company that requires that you bring an idiot to dine with the bosses. Instead, Dinner for Schmucks is about an aspiring rising executive (Tim, played by Paul Rudd) and his complications after accidentally meeting the idiotic but unselfish and sweet IRS employee (Barry, played by Steve Carell). Their encounter together triggers a series of events that involves a psycho stalker, a unique artist, several mix-ups, and the potential ending of the relationship between the main character and his girlfriend (Stephanie Szostak). This movie is a remake of a 1998 French black comedy Le dîner de cons, and with some of the humor and subject matter, the French influence was a bit heavy.

The weakest portion of the movie is clearly the writing. The script was full of bad jokes, pointless scenes, predictability, very little payoff, and worst of all prevented the cast from adding the extra ommph needed to make this a truly enjoyable film. Surely there were some funny moments and some funny situations, but overall Rudd, Carell, and Jay Roach did not have much to work with. Even the main dinner itself had minimal time to expand or evolve into something very memorable to the likes of the infamous dinner scenes of Meet the Parents, Goodfellas, or American Beauty. The script was easily the weakest part of the movie, because the material presented just wasn't good at all.

Steve Carell and Paul Rudd are among my favorite actors in Hollywood. Their comedic timing is impeccable, with Anchorman and Role Models being the best examples. However, they had very little to work with. Paul Rudd had to play the backseat to become the middle man, with no chance of being remotely funny. With Steve Carell's character, it's even worse, because he was written so poorly. Clearly, he couldn't improvise much, but what was written down was not funny at all. They consisted of stupid lines, stupider comments, and sometimes plain garbage. The trailer definitely hid all the actual funny lines from Carell, but clearly it was because there isn't much to begin with. Even Zach Galifanakis, who is a rising force in comedy, couldn't deliver anything past a chuckle. This is one of the few cases in which the actors are not to blame; they did the best they could.

Jay Roach isn't exactly a genius, but usually does know how to maintain pace and deliver some fun little surprises here and there. With Dinner for Schmucks, there weren't any fun surprises, and the comic timing was a bit off. The softer, more heartfelt scenes were handled with much better care, especially when Barry is seen working and displaying his hobby. The dinner itself however could have been much better, and this missed opportunity really hampers the overall movie, especially after all the build-up. The film was nearly two hours long, and I can guarantee you that less than 15 minutes was dedicated to the big finale, the gigantic climax. That was supposed to be the big payoff. Compare this to the comedic classic Blazing Saddles, when the final battle becomes insanely elongated, but utterly hilarious in all its insanity and impulsiveness (if you have not seen this movie yet Netflix it immediately). Dinner for Schmucks has the makings of an insane comedy that cannot be predicted—unfortunately, doesn't deliver on the premise and the promise.

Bottom Line: Dinner for Schmucks is a tough movie to fully rip apart and garnish it with a very low rating, because of the comedic talent and obvious effort involved. But, I personally saw a stinkpile of a script totally ruining and obliterating any possible attempt at becoming the big comedy of the summer; becoming this year's Hangover or There's Something About Mary. The acting wasn't too bad, the directing wasn't a disaster, and there weren't a lot of technical annoyances. But the storyline, pacing, dialogue, lack of a heart and lack of structure destroyed the quality of this movie. In order for your comedy to succeed, there must be a bit of heart and allure attached, whether it's subtle or clearly out there. If there is someone to blame, definitely blame it on David Guion and Michael Handelman. You two, please go back to your writing classes please, you clearly did not pass. Rudd and Carell were not as charming or as funny in similar previous roles (Danny in Role Models and Brick in Anchorman respectively), and Jay Roach has definitely seen better days (Austin Powers—the original and maybe the sequel; Meet the Parents). To say you won't laugh at all is exaggerating, but there isn't a standout moment, and there most certainly isn't a reason to join this dinner a second time.