Arthur

source: Arthur

Helen Mirren and Russel Brand do what they can to carry this film, but it doesn't stop Jennifer Garner and Greta Gerwig (whoever the heck she is) from completely and utterly destroying any chemistry and charm that the movie may have had. Greta Gerwig brought NOTHING to her role as naomi and her performance was actually painful to watch . . . yes, painful. It was like watching Sophia Coppola in Godfather III all over again. Did the actress originally chosen for this role call in sick? Did anyone watch the final product? Clearly not. This is a don't bother film. View the original on Netflix on your laptop before you go to the theatre. I actually watched the original movie when I got home in order to restore my faith in humanity and was charmed to death by Dudley Moore and Liza Minelli. Nick Nolte was a terrible choice as well. Shame on you, Jason Winer for wasting everyone's time.

Comedies should be fun. Sometimes they can deviate from reality but the whole premise of this movie is absurd. Arthur was just a totally unbelievable character. Maybe it was brand, maybe it was the script, maybe it was the director. It doesn't matter. If we don't believe Arthur could ever be a real person then we will never have the connection that is needed for a movie to succeed Perhaps the people who find torture and sadism entertaining could rate this movie highly but for the majority of the human population they will find this a piece of trash. I am just surprised that this movie with the deridingly unfunny revised script was ever released.

How this guy keeps getting into movies i don't know.Shockingly bad you can see Brand's mind ticking over trying to do something funny, and failing.Most of the time he's just doing a poor Dudley impression.Its almost an insult to Dudley Moore.Hollywood sure is desperate nowadays.This is why you don't use TV presenters as lead in comic roles.Brand tried his hand at stand up, and it was a lot worse than this film (ponderland). He needs to stick to what he knows best, presenting trashy reality TV gossip shows. Hopefully the last instalment of a desperate attempt at a career in comedy.And on behalf of the United Kingdom may i thank Katy Perry for taking the annoying **** off ours hands.

Making a remake of a comedy classic is a horrible idea. Than when you consider the horrible acting and casting, makes it an all around bad idea. The original was absolutely fantastic it is funny without being stupid and intelligent, all that can be said about this one is STUPID. Dudley Moore was absolutely wonderful in the original and this guy is soo bad i don't even care what his name is. the chemistry between the original cast was also better. I would highly recommend everyone avoiding this movie and going for the original. you would have to pay me to go to watch this one. Please do yourself a favour and just watch the original and if you have any taste in movies at all you will understand in an instant that the original Arthur is in a class by itself.

Apparently this movie is not for everyone, it was however, for me. This movie is not going to change the way you live your life or love your family, but it achieved what it set out to do. It made me laugh. Not only was this movie incredibly funny, but I thought the cast was successful in creating likable characters with more depth than one would expect from this calibre of movie. I find most comedies of late fall apart in the latter half when jokes themselves are not enough, and the story has to actually advance some sort of plot. Interestingly enough in Arthur dealt with this nuisance excellently. The plot was wrapped up efficiently while still maintaining the high level of comedy as seen throughout the picture.

If you had seen the original 1981 "Arthur" you have seen the better of the two movies. Dudley Moore was charming, funny and a pleasure to watch. Russel Brand for all of his effort, fails. This Arthur should have never been made, the only reason to remake a movie is if you can improve upon it, this remake is an EPIC failure. I knew that this re-do was going to be weak, but it is a slap in the face to anyone who had seen the original, you had to know going in that this wasn't a redo of the original when the producers started calling it a re-telling of the Artur story. The last time I was this disappointed with a movie was the latest of the "Focker" movies which I was forced too see.... Russell Brand is funny when in a supporting roles, IMO he doesn't have the acting chops to pull off lead man roles.

Why, why, why did they remake the Dudley Moore classic. My guess is that Hollywood has finally run out of ideas. Russell Brand attempts to re create the lovable Dudley Moore drunk playboy character-and fails miserably. Helen Mirren-a fine actress gives what is arguably her worst performance in a role she obviously did for a paycheck. About all she does is scowl and have a mean, exasperated expression on her face.Rest of cast is pretty non descript as is the story, screenplay, and direction. Everything in this wet turd of a movie falls flat on its face, and the director didn't even try to redeem it. Guess he knows the score. He was paid to turn in a movie and he does just that. Only thing is that this waste of celluloid is not a movie. It is just another product of contemporary Hollywood , a heartless and soulless Hollywood that has absolutely no clue on how to make a real movie. About the only good thing in this bomb are some of the on-location New York sites where this was filmed, but Grand Central Station looks like a leftovcer set from Superman II. Do yourself a favor. Save your gas and 11 bucks, stay away from the multiplex playing this atrocity and rent the Dudley Moore original. There is absolutely no comparison between the real thing and the remake. The kind of film that should never have been made in the first place. If you are sucker enough to pay good money to see this Dudley-less dud, demand a refund! Any wonder why movie-going in the US is down by 20 percent? Crap films like this are the reason!

I can only echo what most people have already said. Whoever thought that remaking this movie should have his head examined and his professional credentials seriously reviewed. Yes, Russell Brant is funny, in his way, but he is NO MATCH for the effortless, charming comedy of the dear, departed Dudley Moore. And though Helen Mirren is a fantastic actress, she in no way can come close to the incomparable John G. Totally different acting styles, and generations. Certainly she never shared the stage with Olivier. And there's no Lisa Minelli to make us really laugh. Like the scene when she is shoplifting and Arthur 'covers it up', meets her and sets the groundwork for the rest of the movie. Bottom line: Don't mess with something that cannot be done better. Period, the end.

Went to see this because my fiancé thought the previews were funny. Admittedly, the previews I had seen made it look funny as well, but I had read some critical reviews, and wasn't enthusiastic. As it turned out, the critics were right, and I applaud the marketing geniuses who were actually able to make "Arthur" look even remotely entertaining. Brand, who I usually like, was nothing better than annoying, and he might have been the best one in the cast. The dialog was silly in parts and completely corny in others, the premise was poorly executed, and the six people at the showing I attended never let out anything more than a slight giggle from time to time, probably out of embarrassment for the performers more than anything else. On the plus side, if my fiancé ever criticizes any of my cinematic choices, I can remind her of this tripe. That ought to put an end to that conversation.