Review of Dinner for Schmucks (2010) by Pierce B — 18 Jan 2016

I remember chuckling after first learning the premise of this movie. Such a zany set-up could result in an all-time classic comedy, I thought -- a great idea with a stellar cast, all under the command of a capable director.

What could possibly derail this movie's potential? As it turns out, the answer to the question was a script that wasn't nearly as ambitious and clever as its synopsis led this reader to believe.

There are big laughs for sure, but they occur much too infrequent. I think where the writers erred was making the actual dinner referenced in the title such a small part of the movie. I would have preferred a more high-brow concept, more akin to a movie with a similar story, such as "The Party," starring Peter Sellers.

Early on, the dinner is mentioned and we are informed about the cruel intentions of the event's host. What follows is sporadic talk about the dinner itself, while Rudd's character grows increasingly annoyed with Carell's character, who he cannot shake and who makes his life increasingly complicated.

Rudd and Carell work well together. Audiences knew that going in, based on their previous co-starring projects. They do as much as they can with the script they were given, and the audience is rewarded with some genuinely hilarious bits.

The dinner sequence itself was worth waiting for, especially once Carell and Galifianakis are allowed to square off in a memorable scene. The movie could have used more of that and perhaps it would have attained the loftiest heights, as I had initially considered.

The makers did get the more serious elements right -- Rudd's character discovers his sense of decency and Carell's eccentric character earns a friend -- but I only wish the overall focus and tone had been adjusted slightly.

In spite of any disappointment, I still can recommend the film... just don't expect to place it among your favorite comedies.