Director: Jay Roach

Starring: Steve Carell, Paul Rudd, Stephanie Szostak, Zach Galifianakis, Jemaine Clement

 

Popcorns: 2/5

In his successful career, Director Jay Roach has been blessed with an abundance of comedic talent. Be it Mike Myers in the ‘Austin Powers’ films or the occasionally uproarious pair of Ben Stiller and Robert De Niro in ‘Meet the Parents’ (2000), Roach has routinely been rescued by the skill of his leading actors.

 

In ‘Dinner for Schmucks,’ (2010), a remake of the successful French comedy ‘The Dinner Game’ (1999), Roach has a dynamic array of comedic delights at his disposal. Whether it be box-office powerhouses, indie staples or a newly-minted superstar, Roach was poised to ride the coattails of his actors towards another victory.

 

This method worked before, with the director never exercising his own talent. But if the excessiveness of ‘Dinner for Schmucks’ is any indication, he will no longer be able to rely on his cast to carry his projects.

 

After years of wallowing beneath the big dogs at a major investment firm, Tim (Paul Rudd) finally impresses his icy and emotionless boss, Lance Fender (Bruce Greenwood), with a gutsy presentation at a staff meeting. Fender feels that Tim is executive material, but cannot promote him unless he attends, and impresses, at a weekly dinner he holds at his mansion.

 

Of course, it doesn’t end there. Each executive brings the biggest freak show they can find, and now Tim must bring his own distinguished guest. Tim’s girlfriend, Julie (Stephanie Szostak), is vehemently opposed to him attending the dinner, and thus Tim initially agrees to reject the invitation.

 

After a chance encounter with Barry (Steve Carell), a bumbling but well-meaning imbecile, he believes it is fate, and he must attend the so-called ‘dinner for winners.’ The road to the eponymous dinner is littered with land mines, as Barry manages to accidentally jeopardize Tim and Julie’s relationship while inadvertently threatening to ruin his career.

 

In a role perfectly suited to his strengths, Carell again proves why he’s one of today’s most captivating comedic actors. Blending disarming seriousness and outright lunacy with ease is, as always, his strong suit. Where Rudd’s endearing straight man becomes a bit stale under Roach’s guise, Carell’s charisma is infectious and commands constant attention. Like his Michael Scott character from ‘The Office,’ he is oblivious to what people think about him and never thinks to hold his tongue. He is rarely subtle, but this is a role that requires the Carell hallmark of exaggeration.

 

Carell’s heroic effort ensures that the film’s fizzy wit never flattens, though Roach fails to grasp the fact that even in a very broad comedy, the drama needs to be directed with competency. In Roach’s work, characters discover the tragic truth about what someone else thinks of him or her. The character will formulaically listen in the background, only to have the speaker whirl around, flabbergasted to realize that someone heard what was said. This scene plays out multiple times. Roach manages to waste Rudd’s considerable talent as he lets comic sequences last twice as long as necessary. This effectively numbs the audience.

 

Where ‘The Dinner Game’ was praised for erring on the side of silliness rather than plunging into the realm of stupidity, ‘Dinner for Schmucks’ indulges in a brand of humor far beneath the acting talent involved. Carell has been great when it comes to choosing roles. Hopefully he will now be more mindful when it comes to partnering with a filmmaker.  

 

Smlittma@syr.edu

 

 

Published on August 8, 2010 at 12:00 pm