Sunday, August 1, 2010

Dinner for Schmucks

As I learn time and time again, funny actors and interesting concepts don’t always make a movie successful. The first issue came when I learned the film is based on a French film, Dinner for Dolts. European humor is not the same as American and if this film defines what the U.S finds funny then I’m embarrassed. From the mean-spirited ridicule to the cringe worthy situations I was saddened more than I was entertained.

Schmucks stars Paul Rudd who plays Tim, a businessman who strives for a promotion in order to impress his girlfriend. His boss then invites him to a dinner where each person brings an “idiot” with them and the group proceeds to make fun of them. He then meets Barry, played by Steve Carrell, who creates detailed dioramas using dead mice dressed as people. A gut-wrenchingly sad story ensues in the build up to the dinner party where the audience learns about Barry’s loneliness, and witnesses Tim’s relationship go down in flames. It completely disgusts me how the packed movie theater was laughing hysterically as these characters suffered.

I understand the desire to create sympathetic characters but in this context it just made me pity them. America knows that Carell can play awkward and his Schmucks performance is a less confident Michael Scott with a psychological disorder. Keeping with that similarity to his persona on The Office, Barry flip flops between unfortunate and infuriating. Rudd continues his reign as the straight man of modern comedy. He has found a niche there and does well playing average, and likeable protagonists. The ability of the actors was not the issue in Dinner for Schmucks. Zach Galifianakis and Jermaine Clement also gave strong performances in support.

When the film finally gets to the dinner some of the discomfort is replaced with laughs but there aren’t enough. While the characters preach understanding and respecting the talents of others, it subtly covers shallow knocks meant to get chuckles out of the callous members of the audience. Movies are intended to showcase different perspectives to broad demographics of people. That does not mean they should insult the people filling up theaters by assuming they enjoy laughing at the misfortune of others to make themselves feel superior. I may be ending with a cheesy resolve but it might as well be called ‘Movie for Schmucks.’ (4.0 out of 10)

No comments:

Post a Comment