Take a break from work: watch a trailer…
Why, Bruce Greenwood, why?! And Ron Livingston? Why?
Oh, wait, now I get it: The schmucks are the kiss-ass employees who actually go along with this assholery. The big boss is in fact looking for someone to stand up to him, to not be a schmuck.
Or else the schmucks are everyone who agreed to appear in this movie. See, it’s a game that Hollywood execs play among themselves: Who can get to star in the stupidest movie ever? And they all have big laughs as they one-up each other. “Paul Rudd? Bah: he’s a bad-movie slut. Top Steve Carell!” “Ha-ha! I’ll see your Ron Livingston, and I’ll raise you Bruce Greenwood! Top that!
Dinner for Schmucks opens in the U.S. and Canada on July 30, and in the U.K. on August 20.
Well, the original “Dîner des cons” (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0119038/) wasn’t that bad as far as i remember. Of course, i was 17 when i last saw it.
And it wasn’t a US-remake.
I saw the original, too, and it was actually really sweet! However, I suspect that this remake will completely miss the point…
Why did I even try to watch the trailer? I could have predicted every single move. BORing.
It’s actually a decent cast but based on the trailer appears to fall pretty short. Paul Rudd is rather funny though so I’ll probably see the film anyway.
Why hate on a movie you haven’t seen? I saw it at a preview in Sacramento and everybody was howling. I got to be part of the focus group and it received a unanimous must see recommend. The trailers and TV commercials don’t capture the tone or the jokes. It ranks with the all-time hilarious buddy comedies like Planes Trains and Automobiles.
I’m hating on the trailer, not the movie.
Yes, and as the performance of *Grown Ups* has demonstrated, if audiences like it, it must be smart and witty and clever.
If I feel the same way after I see the film, I’ll certainly say as much. That doesn’t make the trailer look any less moronic.