Read Mixed User Reviews for Dinner for Schmucks

4

Tranquilbez22May 7, 2012

I was extremely dissapointed with this film. I really wanted to love it but it was too hard to do so. This isn't neither of Rudd's or Carrell's best work. Humour is extremely dry although the funniest moments take place with Zach Galfinakis.I was extremely dissapointed with this film. I really wanted to love it but it was too hard to do so. This isn't neither of Rudd's or Carrell's best work. Humour is extremely dry although the funniest moments take place with Zach Galfinakis. Your best to rent this one or wait untill it shows up on a cable movie channel.Sure it has a great moral about not judging a book by it's cover but it really lacks charm that these two comedic actors have. If you wanna see Paul Rudd and Steve Carrell work well together, watch the 40 year old Virgin or anchorman but not this.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

5

MattmcdonaldAug 12, 2010

Look, i am not going to lie. I laughed a couple times, but that does not make this a good comedy. Sure, all being said Steve carell gives a above average performance and he really fit with that roll, but that again does not make a good movie.Look, i am not going to lie. I laughed a couple times, but that does not make this a good comedy. Sure, all being said Steve carell gives a above average performance and he really fit with that roll, but that again does not make a good movie. It could be a good movie but iit is held down by too many cliches that really took me out of the experience. That is really all that is to be said about this movie. Average.… Expand

3 of 4 users found this helpful31

All this user's reviews

4

nutterjrDec 4, 2010

Movie for schmucks... Interestingly enough, I like Carelll, Rudd and Clement. I just hope I had watched them in a different movie; maybe a funny one. This one cost around 50 million euro, which is about 10 million per non-forced laugh ifMovie for schmucks... Interestingly enough, I like Carelll, Rudd and Clement. I just hope I had watched them in a different movie; maybe a funny one. This one cost around 50 million euro, which is about 10 million per non-forced laugh if I'm generous.… Expand

2 of 3 users found this helpful21

All this user's reviews

6

kingshahidOct 4, 2011

The movie centered on a lot of odd characters that made you laugh but it wasn't completely hilarious. I wouldn't say the odd characters they describe where completely far-fetched I have met some people that are too hilarious to believe thatThe movie centered on a lot of odd characters that made you laugh but it wasn't completely hilarious. I wouldn't say the odd characters they describe where completely far-fetched I have met some people that are too hilarious to believe that they actually believe themselves to be talented. Overall, the movie wasn't worth renting but I rented because of the two main actors. It was somewhat disappointing.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

4

DukeNov 2, 2010

A Film Review by: Sam Fragoso

"Dinner For Schmucks" ** 2010 has definitely not been a good year for comedies and "Dinner For Schmucks" does not help the genre. Like most comedies "Dinner For Schmucks" fails to stay humorous through out.A Film Review by: Sam Fragoso

"Dinner For Schmucks"

**

2010 has definitely not been a good year for comedies and "Dinner For Schmucks" does not help the genre. Like most comedies "Dinner For Schmucks" fails to stay humorous through out. The first twenty minutes are great fun but from that point on it goes on autopilot, till the long waited and anticipated dinner scene but by that point your overwhelmed with the movies awkwardness and predictability. Carell and Rudd are very talented and likable actors but even they can't save o so predictable plot and a very flat script. You'd be doing yourself a favor by skipping "Dinner For Schmucks".… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

5

ZorglyJan 13, 2011

Steve Carell is always funny, but this time he's working with unusually bland and predictable script, even for mainstream comedies. There were a FEW laughs to be found, but overall it was quite forgettable in every way. The "Artist" in thisSteve Carell is always funny, but this time he's working with unusually bland and predictable script, even for mainstream comedies. There were a FEW laughs to be found, but overall it was quite forgettable in every way. The "Artist" in this movie is one of the most horrendously unfunny characters I have seen in a long time.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

4

JeffS.Aug 2, 2010

I was honestly disappointed upon seeing this movie, especially after some hype due to its respectable metascore. I'm a fan of Steve Carrell and have enjoyed almost everything he's put out in recent years. However, I felt this movie I was honestly disappointed upon seeing this movie, especially after some hype due to its respectable metascore. I'm a fan of Steve Carrell and have enjoyed almost everything he's put out in recent years. However, I felt this movie was just too over the top at times, even for a comedy. Such scenes just took away from the film and left the audience with forced laughs. This movie did have sincere laughs in it and was still enjoyable. The most troubling fact is that the movie had the potential to be so much better had it invested more in down to Earth humor instead of the over the top fiasco the audience is led through for close to an hour.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

4

C.ClarkAug 2, 2010

The trailer was completely misleading as the majority of the movie had nothing to do with the dinner. The dinner, however, was the only really funny part of the movie. I really like Steve Carell, but he is really annoying in this one. Not a The trailer was completely misleading as the majority of the movie had nothing to do with the dinner. The dinner, however, was the only really funny part of the movie. I really like Steve Carell, but he is really annoying in this one. Not a complete waste of time, but definitely a sub-par comedy that is worth no more than a rental. I'm just glad this was a matinee for us.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

6

ChadSAug 3, 2010

Nobody likes to see a good person being treated like a schmuck. In Nancy Savoca's "Dogfight", the waitress is the schmuck, a shy woman, treated so by a marine, a coffee shop customer she follows to a bar, where Rose(Lili Taylor) Nobody likes to see a good person being treated like a schmuck. In Nancy Savoca's "Dogfight", the waitress is the schmuck, a shy woman, treated so by a marine, a coffee shop customer she follows to a bar, where Rose(Lili Taylor) unwittingly enters an anti-beauty contest, a pageant no woman ever dreams of winning. The IRS agent is the schmuck; the IRS agent-cum-taxidermist in "Dinner for Schmucks", who gets invited to a schmuck-fight by an up-and-coming businessman; a schmuck-fight that should make the moviegoer cringe, but doesn't. While it would be wrong to equate mice with Chinese dissidents, the same ethical questions come into play surrounding Barry's artwork, the same questions that plague the people responsible for Bodies...The Exhibiition. Lost in the artistry of the taxidermist's furry installations is that little matter concerning taste: Is it in bad taste to engage the dead with an aesthetic eye? And are Barry's tableaus, murder tableaus? When Tim(Paul Rudd) first bumps, literally bumps into Barry(Steve Carrell), the automobilist interrupts the mouse artist's process of obtaining his next carcass; a found object, presumably, cause of death unknown. "Dinner for Schmucks" never answers the question as to how Barry collects his subjects. Imagine the same installations, but with kittens, or puppies, then you get the idea. Contrary to Francis Veber's "Le diner de cons", in which the French schmuck is wholly sympathetic(no animals are harmed; he works with matchsticks), and schmuck's friend, undoubtedly a lout, who preys on the social misfit, this American retelling blurs the protagonist/antagonist binary(Rudd plays Barry with a dose of humanity). If Barry's rodents perished via means of corporal punishment, maybe there's a self-awareness to the taxidermist's naivety, the hustled playing the hustler, which lends a considerable edge to the farcical misunderstandings that temporarily dismantles Tim's personal and business relations. After all, Barry is a taxman with the power to audit; he can destroy Tim's life on purpose. The mice are adorable, but like the bodies in the controversial art exhibit that continues to tour the world, the dead rodents and human beings respectively, are victims of degradation; post-mortally humiliated by aesthetes. "Dinner for Schmucks" is more ambiguous than most mainstream comedies, because its not abundantly clear who the real schmuck is. How good can a taxman be?… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

4

walrusgodAug 18, 2010

I haven't seen French movie it's based on, but Dinner for Schmucks was very disappointing. The trailer continued at least half of the truly funny moments in the movie, of which there were precious few. It starts off fairly strong, but losesI haven't seen French movie it's based on, but Dinner for Schmucks was very disappointing. The trailer continued at least half of the truly funny moments in the movie, of which there were precious few. It starts off fairly strong, but loses almost all steam in the painful-to-watch scenes involving Rudd's character's "stalker." The first scene just sucked the life out of the movie, and it doesn't really regain its footing until near the end, and even then still can't capture the strength of the first 15-20 minutes. I really like the cast, but unfortunately the jokes just weren't there, and instead we get a movie that can't decide if it wants to be funny or poignant and winds up neither.… Expand