Dinner for Shmucks

Here's the problem... In the French version, the main guy is actually an asshole and he's successful and he has problems with his wife. In this version, the main guy is nice and not married and he needs a promotion. So you feel sorry for him, which takes away from the whole story because it's better when the guy is an asshole, it's funnier and you think he's getting punished.
In this version, the guy has a horrible time but he's nice, so it's not that funny.
Plus it feels like they took the best parts from the original and randomly put them into this film. The end result, despite all the comedic talent involved, is a not very funny film. I smiled a couple of times. With the original, I was laughing so much I had tears in my eyes.

So this is another example of Americans fucking up a good thing by adding whole new unnecessary plot points and by changing the best things from the original story. Fucking Hollywood: Audiences would not be able to watch a whole film set in one living room. And I love Carrell, but he doesn't even come close to Villeret. They even try to give him some 'depth' so that we feel sorry for him, but that's pointless. As are the cheap laughs they are going for.
And of course, there's a morality tale, where the main guy feels sorry and convinces the main idiot not to be one and blah blah blah. But it doesn't end before a big slapstick 'confrontation' to slay the bad guy.

And then they do it again with the other bad guy.

Yeah. There are bad guys in this version.

Oh, and here's the big shocker: it ends happily. What a surprise! During the epilogue, I think I threw up a little in my mouth. And swallowing it back felt better than watching this film.

I'm surprised Veber sold the rights to this film after the whole 'Pure Luck' fiasco.
I guess they paid well.

Where the French were subtle (yes, I did say that), the Americans go overboard with an overblown story. And then they criticize the French. Yeah. This film makes it now impossible for any American to criticize the French.