Movie-Holic

Comedic films, like ‘Dinner for Schmucks’, are a genre where you must really like the ensemble so as you can enjoy the film itself. If there are a few in the cast where their type of comedy is not one which you generally enjoy, the movie then suffers because of it. However, there is always that silver lining that can possibly pull the move from the brink of utter disappointment into where you can at east chuckle a few times. For me, this is what happened with ‘Dinner for Schmucks’.

Being a fan of The Office I like to see how Steve Carell continues to grow as a comedic actor. I think the bumbling idiot type of character never grows old (as in Chris Farley, and vintage Jim Carey). And I was so glad that the movie centered around the innocent actions of Carell’s character. It was the type of things that you know are going to happen, but you feel bad as they happen. Of course, at the same time you are laughing at the various ridiculousness of Carell’s comedic style.

But…

Dinner for Schmucks The Basic Premise

The story of Dinner for Schmucks actually revolves around Tim (Paul Rudd) who is looking for advancement in his investment firm. However, in order to do that he must abide by some crazy dinner rules to evaluate executives. This “Dinner for Shmucks” then is how Rudd’s character meets up with Barry (Carell). A rather odd person, but one that you want to like.

As the story progresses, and Barry continues to wreck everything in Tim’s life, the dinner date gets closer and closer. Included in all of these mishaps is the usual girlfriend who is upset by the things going on, the complex series of events that are set off in a chain reaction, the crazy characters that are met along the way, and the torment within the main character over whether they should do the right thing or not.

While the plot is “cookie-cutter” in form it does leave you with some laughs and enjoyment.

Dinner For Schmucks The Downfall

What really keeps me from completely enjoying this movie is not the “cookie-cutter” plot, or the fact that Paul Rudd is yet again the main character. What really keeps this movie from scoring very high on my “must see again” meter is the forced issue of having Zach Galifianakis within the story line as an acquaintance (and nemesis) of Barry. It just didn’t work. At least for me. Of course, I’m not a fan of Galifianakis so that may play a large part of my troubles with this section of story.

The whole thing just seemed forced to me as if the writers, and director Jay Roach, wanted to add another comedic element. They really didn’t need to do that.

Dinner for Schmucks is Saved by Carell

Which leads me to my opening statements. The movie is saved by the presence of Carell. It is what kept me from turning it off and moving on to another. Would I watch it again? Probably not, but it was good enough to laugh.

If you’re looking for a Steve Carell movie for a night at home, then pick up Dinner for Schmucks. It is good for a laugh or two.