Tuesday, August 3, 2010

Movie Review: Dinner For Schmucks

I've seen "Dinner For Schmucks," and it sucks.

Paul Rudd once again proves that he should either step away from leading roles or simply choose better ones. He plays essentially the same character as in "I Love You, Man" which is a funny movie, but not because of Rudd. And this is a huge, embarrassing failure for a guy that can do much better. What he really needs is to turn to frequent collaborator, writer/director Judd Apatow, the next time he takes his chances as leading man. If not, he may become the male equivalent of Jennifer Aniston. Even though "Friends" is a great show, this is not a compliment.

Steve Carell manages to bring about a few laughs, but most of the slapstick misfires. The supporting characters are terribly written and the concept, which was taken from a French film, is completely stupid. Zach Galifianakis got the biggest laughs, still riding high from last summer's box office superstar "The Hangover." His screen presence made the audience laugh harder than any of the intended bits.

I recommend you do not see this movie unless it looks hilarious to you. Because if not, you won't laugh. I promise.

Grade: C-

1 comment:

  1. Honestly, the first time I saw it I couldn't keep my hand away from my mouth because it was just so unbelievable. Is it really possible for one person to be THAT stupid? No. I just couldn't believe the silliness of it all. The second time I watched it I laughed at Steve and Zach quite a bit. After the initial shock at the stupidity of it all, I was able to let go and laugh. My favorite character was the creepy artist guy. He was the only original thing in the movie. And you're right about Rudd. He really needs to do something different or he's going to sink his career down the crapper.