Dinner For Schmucks

Movies Reviews NOTE: May Contain Spoilers !

Moderator: Fuzz

Locked
User avatar
Sardonicus
Going Postal
Posts: 1141
Joined: 25th Apr, '08, 00:59
Mood: It's academic

Dinner For Schmucks

Post by Sardonicus » 10th Oct, '10, 21:46

I guess that made us the schmucks for paying to see it. You've been warned.

Ok it wasn't a total loss, but like that terrible Adam Sandler movie a few weeks back, we seem to be in some sort of pattern.
I find television very educating. Every time somebody turns on the set, I go into the other room and read a book. Groucho Marx

User avatar
Joseph27
Going Postal
Posts: 1265
Joined: 1st Mar, '08, 09:58
Mood: Reflective and Motivated
Location: In transit between Perth, Jakarta and Singapore
Contact:

Re: Dinner For Schmucks

Post by Joseph27 » 11th Oct, '10, 08:55

I remember watching the french version and the premise didnt seem as absurd as the preview for this remake appeared. Oh and I cant stand Steve Carrell - so will avoid this like the plague. That recent Adam Sandler one was also a dog yeah - so many funny guys coming together and that was the best they could do?
"truth is a group of metaphors, metonyms, and anthropomorphisms; a sum of human relation which is poetically and rhetorically intensified, metamorphosed and adored so that after a long time it is then codified in the binding canon."

User avatar
Tas
I live here
Posts: 3505
Joined: 18th Feb, '08, 11:53
Mood: Confuddled

Re: Dinner For Schmucks

Post by Tas » 11th Oct, '10, 09:13

That golfing moving is the only flick can get thru with AS, otherwise can't stand Adam Sandler, can't stand Will Farrell. Can barely site through Steve Carrell presence on screen. So saw a second of this movie preview and thought who TF pays good production money for this shyte, what don't I understand about funny that I just DON'T get what other people see in these actors or the writing. They're not even slapstick funny.
Nothing is more conducive to peace of mind than not having any opinions at all.
- Georg Christoph Lichtenberg

User avatar
Sardonicus
Going Postal
Posts: 1141
Joined: 25th Apr, '08, 00:59
Mood: It's academic

Re: Dinner For Schmucks

Post by Sardonicus » 11th Oct, '10, 21:25

Exactly, Happy Gilmore was pretty good, but Ferrell never did it for me, and Carrel usually doesn't either. I only changed the last Sandler one because of the cast, who all fell flat on their faces.
I find television very educating. Every time somebody turns on the set, I go into the other room and read a book. Groucho Marx

User avatar
Joseph27
Going Postal
Posts: 1265
Joined: 1st Mar, '08, 09:58
Mood: Reflective and Motivated
Location: In transit between Perth, Jakarta and Singapore
Contact:

Re: Dinner For Schmucks

Post by Joseph27 » 12th Oct, '10, 09:01

I liked Farrell as Frank the Tank in Old School... but largely because he was supported by enough talent for him to shine.
"truth is a group of metaphors, metonyms, and anthropomorphisms; a sum of human relation which is poetically and rhetorically intensified, metamorphosed and adored so that after a long time it is then codified in the binding canon."

User avatar
slinky
Porum addict
Posts: 5703
Joined: 14th Feb, '08, 11:47
Mood: :)
Location: Singapore

Re: Dinner For Schmucks

Post by slinky » 19th Oct, '10, 07:16

Sardonicus wrote:I guess that made us the schmucks for paying to see it. You've been warned.
I started to watch this one on the plane last week and didn't get past the first 45 min or so. I chalked it up to being exhausted and wanting/needing to sleep, but it definitely was a sloooooow mover. Guess I won't bother to try it again :lol:

Locked