Stupid, but the funniest film of 2010.
I didn't know what to think about this film. The trailer looked outrageous and very weird, but I still like the cast. Steve Carrell is one of my favorite working actors today. Zach Galifianakis, who was in The Hangover, is really funny. But still the trailer looked really stupid. Though it looked like a light-hearted comedy, and that's very rare for these days. Did I like it?
Yes. I loved Dinner For Schmucks. Here's the premise of Dinner For Schmucks: Tim Conrad (Paul Rudd) is a part of a business. And one night every year (or month), their business rents a fancy food place, and invites a bunch of awkward people who do weird things, and they make fun of them. They say Tim has to invite a very awkward person to dinner, and he doesn't want to. But if he doesn't, he'll be fired. So when he's driving home he hits a man with his car on accident named Barry (Steve Carrell). He collects dead mice and makes sculptures out of them. He invites him to the dinner, but Barry doesn't know it's a dinner for idiots. Barry slowly starts to REALLY sabotage Tim's life. And slowly tim starts to get in trouble.
The acting in Dinner For Schmucks is great. Paul Rudd is good, but not great. His character just had some bad dialogue at times. Steve Carrell, was awesome. Barry is him. That is Carrell's PERFECT role. Good job, Carrell. Zach Galifianakis was hilarious. He was so funny! I think the best aspect in Dinner For Schmucks is the chemistry between Steve Carrell and Zach Galifianakis. It's just friggin hilarious. I love the whole fight about Carrell's ex-wife (Galifianakis's character is married to her). I just love those scenes. Also, Jeff Dunham makes an appearance in this film, and he's Lewis the Ventriloquist. He's pretty good too.
The dialogue in Dinner For Schmucks is very clever. I love how original some of the jokes and humor are. Like I've already said about 5 times, the humor in Dinner For Schmucks is outstanding. My sides hurt from laughing at the end of the film. Just a warning: Do NOT take kids to see Dinner For Schmucks, they should be at least 12 to see it. Why? A lot of the huor in this film is very heavy for PG-13.
The direction in Dinner For Schmucks is great. I really love how Jay Roach directed a light-hearted comedy, and succeeded. Every attempt at a light-hearted comedy these days would fail, except this movie. Kay Roach is the man, directing all 3 Austin Powers films (they're good, not great), Meet the Parents, Meet the Fockers, and now Little Fockers (which comes out in 13 days), and now this. There hasn't been a Jay Roach film I haven't like yet, and I will BET you that Little Fockers will not disappoint me.
The pacing in Dinner For Schmucks is the weakness of this film. Some scenes drag on a little bit too long. Also this film is probably 2 hours long. But it feels like 2 hours and 20 minutes. But that's okay because I was engaged with this film the entire time. Other than that, I have 0 complaints for this movie.
Also, Dinner For Schmucks is a remake of a classic French film. But I don't care if it's a remake, because it doesn't feel like one. A lot of the films we have today are remakes, or remakes of classics. Examples: The Karate Kid, Alice In Wonderland, The A-Team (it's a classic TV show), A Nightmare On Elm Street, Piranha 3D, True Grit (I actually really want to see that), Clash of the Titans, and now this. All of these movies we've seen before, and none of us have seen the original Dinner For Schmucks (or whatever it was called in French).
Overall, Dinner For Schmucks is awesome. It has great acting, clever dialogue and humor that were both funny, good direction, and it pretty dumb too. But that doesn't matter, because it's funny.
I give Dinner For Schmucks 4.5/5 stars. Thanks for reading my quick review of the funniest film of 2010.