Dinner For Schmucks (2010)

First- go back to read what i said about the original of Dinner For Schmucks, Le Diner de Cons
Great. 
So the only way you can judge the remake of anything, when you've seen/heard/read the original is against what it does better and what it does worse.
I pretty much called it when i imagined what Dinner For Schmucks would be like, last month. It does focus on the 'dinner' element almost like a 3rd act that was missing from the original. Otherwise the 1st hour is very similar. The characters are not though. I'm sure i'll give anything with Paul Rudd or Carell in it a shot, a fair chance because they're good performers but they're really not right for the material here or the way they approach it is... off. Like Rudd can't really pull off 'asshole'. If he's seen to be acting like one it's kinda like when Superman goes off the rails in Superman 4? You're like 'stop it, you are gonna feel silly about this in hindsight ya big silly'. The guy who played his part in the original was an asshole, not a nice guy. Rudd probably volunteers to do the nightshift to the cat orphanage. Then Carell sadly does worse then Rudd but them Carell has a harder job- he has to be dumb and dull yet likeable. In fact i'd say the
tone of the whole thing depends on him being likeable, but his character is not likable. I do however like the mouse taxidermy thing, (it was matchstick buildings in the original)it's a really strong funny device and it makes you laugh and feel sorry for him but that doesn't make you likable. How could Brick and Brian Fontana fail me like this!
Anyway it's not all bad, at it's best, Dinner for Schmucks is a cavalcade of comic talent. Jemaine Clement, David Walliams, Kristen Schaal and Gilafinakis are fine here doing that thing you've seen them do before; Chris O'Dowd is really funny in his small part but Lucy Punch takes over every scene she's in. She's like the Nicki Minaj of this movie. I dare you not to love this crazy, sexy, scary, intense woman that she plays. She is tremendous and hilarious.
It's like everything this version tries to copy from the original it messes up and all the new stuff it improves on; not that it is in any way better but for example, Lucy Punch has a bigger role than the character had in the original and it's the best thing in the film but in the original, the Rudd character was having an affair with her character which made him more assholey but here she's a one night stand from years ago.
I was actually wrong in my prediction that Rudd tells Carell about the dinner premise and they break-up only to get together at the end- no, some how it causes their friendship to improve and becomes a call Carell to be more confident. Unsurprisingly they don't manage to land that idea well and the ending is quite unsatisfactory.
So Hollywood- don't remake films because you mess them up but because they'll always be judged against the original...

I watched Dinner For Schmucks (2010) on DVD, via LoveFilm.

My 2011 in Movies continues with Never Let Me Go (2010)...