Arthur Reviews

Page 1 of 161
Super Reviewer
½ July 2, 2011
I think that this is just as good, if not better than the original. I'm sure a lot of people will just hate this by default because it's a remake, but anyone who gives it a fair chance will have a hard time finding it anything but fun. I guess you have to enjoy Russell Brand in order to find it as funny as I did, but I think this role was perfect for him. Everything about Arthur and his larger than life personality is so easy to accept when it's so well acted. Nearly every joke he makes is hilarious and the whole concept is something that never seems to get old. I think all of the characters are great and a step up from their originals. Helen Mirren is amazing as Hobson and I honestly don't think anyone could play that character better. I also think Greta Gerwig was perfect too; she just has a quality about her that is totally unique and lovable. While this is a remake in terms of structure and basic plot, it's completely different in terms of the comedy and general atmosphere. Some of the little things like Frog and Toad, Batman Forevermobile, and the Gummi Bear suit are what make it so much more fun to me. As a heartwarming comedy, you can't get better than this. It gives you exactly what you need and there's nothing cheap or corny about it. No one should feel bad about liking Arthur because it's just so good at what it wants to be.
Super Reviewer
April 13, 2011
This is one i put off watching for a long time because it seemed like such a steaming pile.
Saw it on free to air TV recently. Certainly wouldn't have paid for it.
So, was it as bad as I expected? Well,yes and no.
The main problem with this is Russell Brand. He is meant to be an alcoholic. He just comes off here as mentally challenged.
The female leads pretty much save this. Greta Gerwig and Helen Mirren. I like Jennifer Garner generally. I have to say, this isn't a great role for her either. She does much better with girl next door roles than bitchy ones.
There's a few smiles here (I wouldn't say laughs exactly), and some of it is sweet. It's certainly not as awful as I expected. I liked the date at the train station, for example and the ending is quite romantic (or could have been if the guy was anyone other than Brand).
Super Reviewer
August 7, 2011
Ok. My guilty obsession...Russell Brand. He is just sooo funny to me, and rather charming, in a way. He does a lot of great ad-libbing, as usual. Helen Mirren does a really touching job as his nanny. Good music by Death Cab, great comic timing by all involved, and very sincere performances. Not actually a copy of the original. More of a revamping. I enjoyed this..a lot.
Super Reviewer
January 25, 2012
There is a given disadvantage to any remake; specifically, if it's been done before, why do it again?

In the case of Arthur, the remake, you have a well loved tale from 30+ years ago. Perhaps when pitching this film you could argue that a couple of generations have passed since then, and we've got this hot actor who is box office gold... and I suppose that works to a degree. But speaking as one not of the demographic, and having seen the first film and enjoyed Dudley Moore's antics, my repeat viewing of the remake comes from an admittedly skewed lens. That being said, though the tale is creaky around the edges, there is enough witty dialog and bon mots to make this a worthwhile viewing - and it's got Helen Mirren, so that alone should hold your interest.

Russell Brand holds his own as Arthur in my opinion, and Jennifer Garner is sufficiently waspy in her villainous turn as the woman Arthur is condemned to marry. Greta Gerwig, in the Liza Minneli role comes from a different angle - more sweetness than edgy, but her acting here is sincere. The film totally wastes the great comic talent of Luis Guzman, giving him not much to do other than wear a hilarious Robin costume at the film's intro. Speaking of wasting talent - Nick Nolte... what the heck was he doing here, slumming as a threatening buffoon?

But even though I found the last half of the film a bit draggy - too much plot getting in the way of the fun - there were enough funny bits of dialog coming out of Brand's mouth and enough of Helen Mirren being... Helen Mirren, to give this a marginal passing grade - you could do far worse if you're looking for a bit of light humor.
Super Reviewer
½ January 21, 2012
Arthur: We shouldn't get married... we have nothing in common. You love horses. I don't trust them. Their shoes are permanent. Who makes that kind of a commitment to a shoe? 

"No Work. All Play."

Really Arthur isn't the terrible remake I thought I was getting myself in for. Russell Brand and Helen Mirren are enough to make this a decent effort at remaking a classic comedy. Sure it never touches the greatness of Dudley Moore's Arthur, but it is amusing in its own little way. I actually can say I enjoyed the experience for the most part, but after the first hour it did feel like it was getting a little longwinded. This mostly comes from the fact that the laugh out loud hilarious moments of the original are sized down a bit. There are still moments of hilarity and a great deal of the jokes are met with at least a smirk, but in comparison, it's just not the same.

If you've seen the first is really important in knowing whether you will be able to enjoy this on a higher level than I did. If you have seen the original, odds are you won't care for this. If you haven't, you still might not like it, but there is a greater chance. I'm surprised in my mild liking of the film and actually a little ashamed. I feel like I'm somehow slaying the originals greatness. But this did manage to be, like I said, mildly fun. Once again... mildly. I'm not saying it's a great movie. Amusing is the best word for it.

The story is of Arthur... obviously. He's a filthy rich, drunk, who has no intention of ever doing anything other than easy girls he meets and buying stuff he has no need for. His mother gives him an ultimatum; get an arranged marriage or lose your money. So he decides to get married. Then he meets the woman of his dreams and must decide if he loves her enough to give up all of his money. For the most part, the plot is the exact same as the original with one big difference. Helen Mirren plays Hobson as a nanny.

Worth a look, just don't expect a classic like the original. I'm actually happy I decided to give this a watch despite my own preconceived notions about just how awful it would be. In reality it is a lesser film, but Brand and Mirren do make it a little more than watchable.
Super Reviewer
½ January 11, 2012
There is no real reason for this movie to exist, but with Brand's winning star turn, it's likable and its heart is in the right place.
Super Reviewer
½ September 27, 2011
Honestly I cannot be the only person in the world getting tired of Brand being paid big bucks to act like himself. If I didn't hold the 80's classic in such high regard this movie would have just irritated me, but as a die hard fan of Moore and the original film, this ramshackle remake left an extremely bitter taste in my mouth. Mirren as always was the saving grace of this film but I think even she will look back at 2011's "Arthur" with gritted teeth. Actors like Brand (if an actor is what he is) are best left destroying their own legacy and not that of others.
Super Reviewer
April 22, 2011
I surprisingly quite enjoyed this movie. Admittedly if you go in with an open mind and not expecting much and of course if your a Russell Brand fan then you'll like this movie!
Its entertaining and quite amusing in places that with The Brilliant Helen Mirren it is a recipe for a half decent comedy!
Its a cute and enjoyable movie that you shouldnt expect much but just enjoy it for its simplisity! The gorgeous jennifer garner also adds to it and makes it entertaining! Worth a watch!
Super Reviewer
½ September 18, 2011
'Arthur''s ability to easily entertain it's audience is foiled by Russell Brand's overly-childish character that creates more annoyance than it does pathos. The film is not completely devoid of charm or laughs, but it makes it so hard for it's audience to fall in love with it. This silly remake proves to be it's own saboteur, and it's not pretty. Only Helen Mirren is actually a joy to watch.
Super Reviewer
½ August 21, 2011
Bland...boring...uneventful... just a few of the words I can use to describe this completely unfunny remake. It's not offensive, which is why I gave it the score I did, but I would not ever even considering going near it again and will be more cautious of movies with Russel Brand in a leading role.
Super Reviewer
August 7, 2011
should i be ashamed that i seem to be the only one who finds russell brand cute? lol.
Super Reviewer
August 8, 2011
three stars
Super Reviewer
January 12, 2011
Cast: Russell Brand, Jennifer Garner, Helen Mirren, Nick Nolte, Greta Gerwig, Luis Guzmán, Geraldine James, Leslie Hendrix, Anna Kuchma

Director: Jason Winer

Summary: Recasting the 1981 comedy classic starring Dudley Moore, this romantic chuckler chronicles the dilemma faced by philanderer Arthur Bach (Russell Brand) -- whether to give up a respectable life and an inheritance of millions for the sake of romance. Jennifer Garner co-stars as Susan Johnson, the gorgeous socialite that Arthur's family has chosen for him. Greta Gerwig plays Naomi, the girl who steals Arthur's heart in the meantime.

My Thoughts: "I want to start out stating I haven't seen the first film, nor had I heard of it. But I want to now just to see how different it may be to this one. The whole film is quite silly, as it is suppose to be I'm sure. By far the most funny moment for me was when Helen Mirren put on the mask and said what she did. The only reason I wanted to see the movie was because of her. Love her! Anyways, the movie is one of those stupid funny films that are made just for pure entertainment not to win awards. So if that is the type of flick you like or are looking for, then you should enjoy this."
Super Reviewer
½ July 28, 2011
A predictable yet light and fluffy comedy which was enjoyable to watch
Super Reviewer
July 19, 2011
Arthur (2011) is another example of why remakes suck. It's like a bolt of lightning if a remake is actually any good and this film has no spark in it at all. The basic story is the same as the original: rich Arthur (Russell Brand), arranged marriage with Susan (Jennifer Garner), falls in love with Linda-eh-Naomi (Greta Gerwig) Hobson (Helen Mirren) even had a sex change in this one.

The problem with this remake is that where the original shied away from using cliches, this one is chock full of cliches from the wonderful world of film. There's the sadistic future father in law meeting. There's the "I've got another woman hidden in my house." We get them all. The sad part of this film is when it tries to resurrect scenes from the original, which instead of giving nostalgia, just seem uncomfortable for the actors and the viewer watching it. Maybe it's because I watched the original a few nights before. I don't know.

There are some funny parts and it's almost an even film. It would be quite forgettable if it wasn't the remake of a good film.
Super Reviewer
July 17, 2011
I've never seen the original, so I can't compare. But with this remake you have a decent comedy with a few good laughs. After reading reviews of Arthur, I was apprehensive about watching it, and I thought it would be a film that I wouldn't like. However, my dad rented it and I took a chance.and I actually quite enjoyed it. Sure the film has it faults, but it wasn't as bad as everyone pointed it out to be. Now, I'm speaking as a viewer who hasn't seen the original. For what I've seen here, is an average comedy that does have good laughs, a decent story and surprisingly decent acting. I thought that the film was entertaining, and funny, and it doesn't deserve all the negative press it has received. Sure I understand why people hate it, but I don't think that Arthur is the worst comedy of 2011. I thought that Russell Brand was interesting in the role that he played, and his role as Arthur Bach was very different than that of Aldous Snow. They're are some great moments in this film, and though not a memorable comedy, it definitely isn't a bad one. I would say that Arthur is an average film with a few good laughs. What makes this film worth watching is that its simply a whimsical comedy. I like this film, and thought it was a really well done comedy that doesn't deserve the flack it has received.
Super Reviewer
½ April 20, 2011
not funny.
Super Reviewer
April 7, 2011
The only person I liked in this movie is Helen Mirren. She doesn't even looked like she tried to be funny but she was. Russell was annoying. Didn't like him that much. And the story was lame. Two stars for Helen Mirren and Greta Gerwig because she was adorable in this.
Super Reviewer
July 4, 2011
I thought I'd check this out before watching the original. Overall I enjoyed it. It begins like Billy Madison, with some oaf getting drunk because he's bored and doing stupid things. Arthur's alcoholism never really comes across as an obstacle here. The drink makes his life more fun and challenging for those around him. Arthur here is a child, and is constantly supervised by Helen Mirren. Brandt deserves some credit for this role. He plays his normal self for the majority of it, but he is able to pull at the correct heartstrings now and then. His relationship with Mirren is beautifully played, and there's a line at the end which is simply fantastic. It does stretch itself out to an unwelcome length with ridiculous scenario after ridiculous scenario. Never dull, sometimes very funny, and sometimes very moving. Doesn't sound like it matches the classic status of the original, but I'll just have to wait and see.
Super Reviewer
July 3, 2011
Don't bother.... Russell Brand can't really do this kind of movie, when he is trying to be funny, he is just annoying, when he is trying to be serious, he is just unconvincing. Stick to films like Sarah Marshall and Get Him To The Greek.
Page 1 of 161