Actor/Director Jon Favreau hosts an evening with four Hollywood friends (four different people or combinations of people each episode), who casually discuss the craft of acting and the busin... Read allActor/Director Jon Favreau hosts an evening with four Hollywood friends (four different people or combinations of people each episode), who casually discuss the craft of acting and the business of celebrity over dinner.Actor/Director Jon Favreau hosts an evening with four Hollywood friends (four different people or combinations of people each episode), who casually discuss the craft of acting and the business of celebrity over dinner.
- Nominated for 1 Primetime Emmy
- 1 nomination total
Browse episodes
Featured reviews
Get 5 hungry celebrities together at a table and see what goes in and out of their mouths. That's Dinner for Five. Jon Favreau, what a host. I've seen so many different types of celebrities sit together and meet on a common ground, on this program. It just gets better the more the wine is poured. I am a big fan of anything that is independently filmed and you see people doing what we all do, EAT. Well, maybe not a lot of the actual eating is shown, but the dinner conversation is excellent. I hope this program lasts a few years.
I saw this show not too long ago, late at night on the IFC(Independent Film Channel), and I must say that I really enjoyed it. The whole episode revolved around five people at a dinner table discussing their lives(mainly about Hollywood). I thought the show was very funny and enlightening. If you have the IFC channel, I suggest you go see it; you will must likely enjoy it.
Title says it all really. Great interviews with a lot of great people in Hollywood before they collectively lost their minds. Even Alec Baldwin is almost bearable, almost. Anyway I don't want to be too disparaging, because this show is a great reminder of what the creative process used to look like in Hollywood before a certain brand of politics took over. A++
I have watched Dinner for Five since the beginning and have always enjoyed the relaxed, congenial atmosphere and collegial interplay between the guests. However, not one show has gone by without my shaking my head in disgust at Jon Favreau's egregious shoehorning in of his own experiences. His self-aggrandizing ego seems to view the show as His rightful platform to expound upon TRUTHS which He has learned. This unattractive trait only grows as he has new credits to drop. First the endless "Swingers" references, now "Elf", even projects where he was an extra! The ENDLESS self-referencing is incredibly irritating, not to mention pathetic. AND, he does this while cutting off guests - which would seem to contradict the purpose of the show!
Okay, fair enough, I saw most of the "Dinner For Five" shows on Thanksgiving 2002 when IFC broadcasted a marathon of all the previous shows, so I probably overdosed on it. But seeing all the shows in a row gives you a good possibility to compare, without being interrupted.
A few weeks before Thanksgiving I saw episode 4, and yes I was amazed by the Daryl Hannah, Marilyn Manson, Andy Dick show. Michael Rapaport was supposed to be on it, but couldn't make it. This show impressed me, it was fresh, new, and about interesting topics. It had a kind of openness to it, hardly seen in American television. Whether it was about independent film remains questionable, at least in my opinion. It was more a group of people having a dinner and talking small talk. Nothing earth shattering. Little did I know, this was episode 4 out of 8 episodes in total.
Thanksgiving's marathon however did change my view of the show. Maybe I overdosed on it, yet a good show can get away with minor errors; a bad show with any errors starts to irritate. And I must say, quite bluntly, "Dinner for Five" sucks. Mostly due to the host Jon Favreau. He doesn't let any of the guests finish their anecdotes, who without exception are more interesting than him. Only people he highly respects, like Rod Steiger, or like the Andy Dick's (who don't stop talking) have a chance. Favreau, each and every time, interrupts his guests and continues talking about his own experiences, and frankly most of his work stinks. Only "Swingers" can be considered a small jewel, all other films he so endearingly refers to, are not even considered good films, except maybe for one: "Mrs. Parker and the Vicious Circle". Favreau talks about them as if he was the next Scorsese or Coppola, to just name two people who really would have something to say about independent film or any hardship on the set. Besides that, it was very obvious that the conversations were staged, especially in the editing, plates with desert were handed out twice, etc.
Now why would I even bother to comment on a show that I liked, and now is a growing irritation? Well for a simple reason, I like and recognize a good idea, which this show certainly has the potential to be. Initially, if they were planning on making one or just a couple episodes, inviting most of your friends does seem natural -- but you can't keep that up for 8 shows, besides his colleagues/friends must be bored with his stories by now. Hopefully this idea will be continued again, but with a different host, Favreau should stick to do what he does best, playing in crappy films.
A few weeks before Thanksgiving I saw episode 4, and yes I was amazed by the Daryl Hannah, Marilyn Manson, Andy Dick show. Michael Rapaport was supposed to be on it, but couldn't make it. This show impressed me, it was fresh, new, and about interesting topics. It had a kind of openness to it, hardly seen in American television. Whether it was about independent film remains questionable, at least in my opinion. It was more a group of people having a dinner and talking small talk. Nothing earth shattering. Little did I know, this was episode 4 out of 8 episodes in total.
Thanksgiving's marathon however did change my view of the show. Maybe I overdosed on it, yet a good show can get away with minor errors; a bad show with any errors starts to irritate. And I must say, quite bluntly, "Dinner for Five" sucks. Mostly due to the host Jon Favreau. He doesn't let any of the guests finish their anecdotes, who without exception are more interesting than him. Only people he highly respects, like Rod Steiger, or like the Andy Dick's (who don't stop talking) have a chance. Favreau, each and every time, interrupts his guests and continues talking about his own experiences, and frankly most of his work stinks. Only "Swingers" can be considered a small jewel, all other films he so endearingly refers to, are not even considered good films, except maybe for one: "Mrs. Parker and the Vicious Circle". Favreau talks about them as if he was the next Scorsese or Coppola, to just name two people who really would have something to say about independent film or any hardship on the set. Besides that, it was very obvious that the conversations were staged, especially in the editing, plates with desert were handed out twice, etc.
Now why would I even bother to comment on a show that I liked, and now is a growing irritation? Well for a simple reason, I like and recognize a good idea, which this show certainly has the potential to be. Initially, if they were planning on making one or just a couple episodes, inviting most of your friends does seem natural -- but you can't keep that up for 8 shows, besides his colleagues/friends must be bored with his stories by now. Hopefully this idea will be continued again, but with a different host, Favreau should stick to do what he does best, playing in crappy films.
Did you know
- ConnectionsReferenced in Wild West Comedy Show: 30 Days & 30 Nights - Hollywood to the Heartland (2006)
- How many seasons does Dinner for Five have?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Runtime30 minutes
- Color
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content