A hunger for more

I'm trying to be a little bit quicker on the turnaround for the reviews of the films I saw in theaters, so here we go with my thoughts on Dinner For Schmucks.

Once again we're treated to the pairing of Paul Rudd and Steve Carell. After working so well together in both Anchorman and The 40 Year Old Virgin, they're brought together once more in Dinner For Schmucks - a funny, albeit confusing film.

Rudd plays Tim, a businessman in a thankless job who's always striving to get ahead. He gets that opportunity when his boss (Bruce Greenwood) invites him to a dinner at his house. The catch, however, is that everyone invited has to bring along the biggest idiot (the word schmuck, oddly enough, is never uttered in the film) they can find for the amusement of the dinner guests. Enter Steve Carell, who plays Barry, a weirdo who recreates famous works of art using dead mice as the figures - his mouseterpieces, as he calls them.

Again these two comedians play well off of each other, although Rudd is playing much more of a straightman here. We move from one set piece to the next as Carell finds new ways to get under Rudd's skin, while making us laugh. Carell actually gives a very good performance here. While some of his more recent efforts have failed to make him the funny, likeable guy that made him so appealing in the first place, this film does a nice job of reminding us why he's such a comedic talent.

And if these two guys weren't enough, we're also treated to several scenes featuring Zack Galafianakis as Carell's boss, who also claims to read minds. We quickly learn that this guy has more screws loose than Carell's Barry, which results in big laughs for the audience. The films gets just the right amount out of Galafianakis' character - he's effective without overstaying his welcome.

The film's problem is not its humor. I found myself laughing out loud several times and the film managed to save enough funny parts that were not revealed in the film's trailers or commercials. Where the film slips up is in its message. For two hours, we're asked to sit and laugh at the various idiots who are put on parade for us (one word of note though, the titular dinner doesn't actually occur until late in the film's second half). Then at the end of the film Rudd's character comes to realize that we shouldn't be laughing at these people. He chides his boss and his fellow co-workers, but he might as well be talking to the audience as well.

Further compounding the problem is that most of the 'idiots' didn't really deserve to be laughed at in the first place. Take Carell's character; yes, the notion of using dead rodents as artwork seems really odd, but the craftsmanship is really excellent. You almost admire someone who puts that much work into something they love. Had his art looked like something a 2nd grader would make AND used dead mice, but still thought they looked amazing, you could see why someone would mock that. The same holds true for many of the other guests at the dinner.

So as I sat watching and laughing, I also wondered what the point of this movie was. Given that it was a remake of a very famous French film, it seemed that there needed to be a more clear or relevant purpose seen for doing this film for American audiences. Watching this film is akin to being served French toast, salmon, and jelly beans for dinner - everything is delicious on its own, but it doesn't exactly make for a good meal.

Your enjoyment of this film will truly depend on what you have an appetite for. If you're looking a rich film experience that appeals to your intelligence and your sense of humor, then you may leave feeling unsatisfied. If however, you're looking for a couple of hours of some easy laughs, then you'll be wanting a second helping of Dinner For Schmucks. Grade: B