Dinner For Schmucks review scores probably should have been higher. Even some negative Dinner For Schmucks review comments show that reviews for the movie could have been quite high. The vast majority of critics have very nice things to say about the cast, from top to bottom. But, for all the praise for the schmucky actors and actresses, the real schmuck is said to be director Jay Roach, and the changes he made to the original French comedy. As such, Dinner For Schmucks review ratings are high for the cast, but low on almost everything else.
The 1999 French film The Dinner Game had business leaders mock idiots by bringing them to dinner for their amusement. For the remake, Paul Rudd is a more torn would-be exec who needs to bring an idiot to dinner for the sake of his career. Steve Carell’s clueless, diorama-loving moron fits the bill, and also ruins his life before they even get to dinner.
The Dinner For Schmucks review scores were quite high to start off, but they have declined throughout the week. Rotten Tomatoes has it down to 54 percent, and a 5.9 average rating. That is pretty much right down the middle, despite the many positive comments for the cast.
Along with Carell and Rudd, the movie has Zach Galifianakis, Jemaine Clement, Lucy Punch, David Walliams, Bruce Greenwood, Larry Wilmore and Ron Livingston running amok. Many a Dinner For Schmucks review concedes that it’s hard not to get a few laughs from that bunch. However, they are divided on whether the script, and Roach, gives them enough to go on.
As for the main schmuck, Carell has also been quite divisive for once. Some critics are way too turned off by his character, while others say that he makes him lovable in spite of everything. Clearly, there are a share of uncomfortable moments, just like in the original. But most Dinner For Schmucks review comments say that the film ultimately chickens out.
The rulings for this movie may reflect feelings for American comedy as a whole. Despite the cringe-worthy premise and antics, the film ultimately goes for sentimentality, and softens up Rudd’s character considerably. This borders on hypocrisy for many critics, since the movie laughs at the expense of the “schmucks” for two hours, then lectures against doing just that at the end.
The Dinner For Schmucks review rulings are typical for American comedy movies lately. Despite approval for the cast, many say that the film doesn’t deserve all these comedians, and is too soft to really do anything with them. For the sake of sentimentality, a moral message, and the fear of turning audiences off too much, it appears the dinner was not as appetizing.
Rotten Tomatoes- “Dinner For Schmucks”