‘Dinner for Schmucks’ is Twisted Awkward Comedy
Some comedies rely on their writing to elicit chuckles, while others use the ability of their actors to improvise hilarious dialogue. Even though Steve Carell and Paul Rudd have appeared in films that contain a mixture of these two strategies, Jay Roach’s Dinner for Schmucks does not derive humor from either method. The majority of the comedy in this movie comes from scenes that are so incredibly twisted and awkward for the characters, that you cannot help but laugh because you do not know how else to react.
Roach perfected the art of uncomfortable situations directing the Ben Stiller movies Meet the Parents and Meet the Fockers, which had parts that were so painful, you found yourself laughing at the protagonist’s comic misunderstandings with his future in-laws. It is this same suffering that Roach effortlessly recreates for Paul Rudd’s character Tim in Dinner for Schmucks.
Tim is a mid level employee at an investment management firm looking for his chance to join the executive team. He seizes the opportunity to impress his boss Lance Fender (Bruce Greenwood) by pitching a potential partnership with a wealthy foreign businessman. Fender is impressed by Tim’s initiative so he hints at a big promotion, but in addition to being able to close the important deal, Tim must pass another test: he must bring a special guest to Lance’s home for a monthly dinner.
This dinner as Lance calls it, is a “dinner for idiots” where each executive brings a guest with bizarre abilities, so that they can mock how strange these people are. All of this is done under the guise of celebrating the people there as inspirational. For the executives, the most unusual and hilarious the company is what scores the biggest brownie points with Fender.
Despite the protests of his girlfriend Julie (Stephanie Szostak) that this dinner is ethically wrong, Tim decides to chase the promotion anyway. With his new job he will be able to afford his fancy car and huge apartment. By securing these assets, Tim believes Julie will see him as an appropriate caretaker and that she will accept his offer of marriage. He flounders on the final decision to attend the festivities though until he bumps quite literally into Barry (Steve Carell).
This loner who stuffs dead mice and creates elaborate dioramas for them is shoe-in for the “dinner for idiots.” Barry is an eccentric personality with the sense of wonder of a child and the same naivety. As a character it is astounding how mentally immature he is while still being a functioning adult. Even though Barry usually has the best of intentions at heart, his impulsive decision-making and his complete misinterpretation of the relationships around him raise hell for his friends.
By inviting Barry to this dinner, Tim has no idea the monster that he has created. Immediately Barry sticks to Tim like glue, effortlessly causing train wrecks wherever he turns. Barry manages alienate all of those around Tim, including his girlfriend Julie and his potential business partner by offering his “help.” The challenge for Tim becomes figuring out how to deal with the mess that Barry has created, and trying to maintain his patience with his new friend.
Even though this comedy uses uncomfortable situations and misunderstandings to create humor it sticks to remarkably safe territory. Tim is never very mean or rude to Barry, and the dinner itself only mildly shows the cruelty of its hosts. Aside from the film’s middling stance on the ethics of the dinner, Tim’s motivation for using Barry is not well fleshed out. Tim lusts after money, however his girlfriend outwardly indicates it is not of importance. This seems like a weak motivation for him to seek the promotion, since it should be the driving force of his actions throughout the film. The most disappointing aspect of the movie though, is that there are no lessons or consequences for the actions of the men who hold the dinner. No one seems to be imparted with a greater sense of humility after the events that unfold.
In comparison to Paul Rudd and Steve Carell’s work in films like The 40-Year-Old Virgin and Anchorman, this film is nowhere near the same caliber. Although the awkward scenes in Dinner for Schmucks can be funny, none of them use Carell or Rudd’s great improvisational abilities to the fullest potential. The lack of good impromptu banter, the weak pre-existing dialogue and underdeveloped plot lines produce a merely average comedy. An honorable mention in this film though is Jermaine Clement who is great as Julie’s client Kieran, a self-involved artist that dabbles in painting which is bizarrely sexual. Clement’s presence in several scenes provide for a great deal of humor in his interactions with Carell and Rudd.