PWNYCNY

(2012-04-26 16:56:27)

Is this the worst movie of 2011?

What a dismal movie. Although passed off as a comedy, this movie is atragedy, and in more ways than one. First, the main character is notfunny. Rather, he is repulsive. Second, the movie dwells on morbidthemes relating to substance abuse and death. Three, the movie's storyis so downbeat as to cause one to reasonably ask: when will it end?Four, changes from the original movie utterly fail, making theoriginal, which also had its problems, seem like a virtual classic.Fifth, although Helen Mirren's portrayal as Hobson rates anenthusiastic E for Effort, she is totally miscast. Six, the characterof Arthur is so ridiculous as to reduce him to a caricature. Seven, theconflict between Arthur and the mother is contrived since Arthur'serratic behavior leaves the mother with little choice except to benasty, if for no other reason, to shield her money from someone who isseriously unstable. Eight, the Jennifer Garner character warrantsserious consideration for the worst supporting character ever concoctedby a Hollywood screenwriter. When a beautiful actress like JenniferGarner is made to look and sound like a banshee, something has gonewrong. If the movie wants Arthur to look and sound like a socialmisfit, okay. But when the same standard is applied to a trulybeautiful woman, then that proverbial line has been crossed. Nine,setting this movie in New York City just did not work. A city like NewYork is big enough to swallow up a lot of Arthurs. He can do a lot moredamage, and be a lot more noticeable too, in a smaller city or town.Ten, Russell Brand is a talented, energetic actor who tries to bringsome authenticity to the Arthur character, but he is miscast. Thecharacter is supposed to be a small, vulnerable snip of a man whoprojects vulnerability and is harmless. The same cannot be said Mr.Brand's Arthur, who literally towers over the other characters andprojects himself as an intimidating figure.

rgkarim

(2012-04-26 00:51:12)

Another remake that you may or may not like

The second movie I saw today was none other than Russell Brand'sArthur, the remake about a millionaire with lots of toys and lots ofempty glasses. When I first saw the trailer for this movie I rolled myeyes and thought, "Great date movie to have teens make out in."Fortunately I was wrong and instead was very pleased with the results Isaw in this remake.Let's start with the positives: The first positive was how dynamicRussell Brand was in this movie. Up until now I had only seen Brand actas a wise cracking rabbit, a computer graphic dork, or an insane partyboy that liked drugs, booze, or acted strange. In this movie he stillhad a lot of alcohol involved in his character and played the same partthe same way we have seen him do a hundred times. However this time, weget to see Brand take on a character that is truly in love, which isquite often in this movie. The director of this film brilliantlyintegrated the drunk nature of Arthur with the true love side, whichforced Brand to have to explore his acting dynamics in this film. I'mhappy to say that he did this quite well and really made Arthur abelievable human being. However, this movie would not be nearly half asgood without the talents of Hellen Mirren and Greta Gerwig who playedthe nanny and love interest respectively. The group dynamics playedbetween these three was fantastic and formed an interestingrelationship. The constant struggle Arthur faced to listen to his heartand to his nanny, really made the situation seem real. Although it wasa little extreme, the choice Arthur had to make is similar to thecrucial decisions the typical human has to make. It's not always easyand there are times where you may think everyone else is correct, butin the end you have to figure out what is right. Thus, the characterswere very believable. The acting was also great in this movie, whichfurther added to the believability of this movie and made the moviefeel real. It wasn't overacted as we have seen in a lot of recentromance and drama movies as of late, and it wasn't all about touchingand caressing as Twilight constantly does. Another positive was thequirky nature of the dialog, the large quantity of one liners, and theconstant spoutings of Mirren's character. Other positives about thismovie were the fast pace of the movie, the dynamic toys and settingsthat Arthur dwelled in and the rest of the cast having great support.Weaknesses: Perhaps the biggest weakness of this movie is thepredictability of the story. It's another romantic comedy where theprotagonist pines after one girl and you can probably guess the ending.Other things that were not expected from the trailers were quicklypredicted by the dialog and hints given by the scenes. Another weaknesswas the whole Garner drunk scene where her hammered nature had usingsloppy, slutty dialog that reminds me a lot of some of my friends. Itwas really not my kind of comedy, and reminded me more of a big budgetglee scene. However, others may like it. Other people may also gettired of the constant alcohol usage in the movie. It seems that thesource of Arthur's comedy is being drunk and eventually it can get alittle tiring, of seeing him stumble or sound like he is in ecstasy.Other than that there was little I could think of that really made thismovie weak.To sum it all up, Arthur was a fun remake that I thoroughly enjoyed andlaughed at. I felt the group dynamics were well played, the acting wasfor the most part solid, and the story was pretty well driven and fastenough to not bore you. There are a lot of one liners and alcohol humorand again depending on what makes you laugh and your tolerance for oneliners you may or may not get annoyed. Overall I would probably givethis movie an 8.5, but I'll give it a nine at most. Until next weekendenjoy and email me at rgkarim@mail.roanoke.edu to help me become abetter editor.

troy-manatunga

(2012-04-23 08:40:53)

For all those Russell Brand fans, happy viewing, this is funny!

There are many a billionaires we stumble upon in life. It's not oftenthat humility is a mannerism shared or valued by a majority. In facthumility is a value that has seen its better days as society drifts outinto the darkest corners of its time where I fear there will be nochance for redemption for us all. A most welcome movie to all RussellBrand Fans all over the world, an alluring revelation of an innocent,honest, warm hearted billionaire. One of those characters that areseldom seen in today's society. A man who values living life more thanhe values his wealth, some may distinguish this as him being immature,however it also could mean that he is one of those less corruptedadults in society in his times, it has been said that a child may enterthe kingdom of god at ease in comparison to an adult, purely due tosocial corruption with maturity. Also did I mention he is a bit of aplayboy!! Arthur however is manipulated by his mother Vivienne usinghis inheritance as bait. Vivienne who has never known her son sincebirth we presume, wishes for her only son to marry into Susan with thehopes of maintaining a positive commercial face for the great empirethat Arthur values less. The British actor Russell Brand is always ahearty laugh and a great entertainer to watch. Since he came into thespotlight with "Forgetting Sarah Marshall", a wide plethora of talentseems to be oozing from within him. Russell Brand builds his characterwith great awe, since Vivienne's unjust request of a marriage with nolove but great financial stature. Unable to stand his ground due to hisinnocence, he turns to his nanny; Hobson. Helen Mirren who plays Hobsonhas been with Arthur looking after him all his life and trying her bestto keep him on the right path. What will become of Arthur and hisinnocent love for unlicensed tour operator Naomi Quinn (Greta Gerwig)?His inability to inflict deliberate pain on another will drive him to asolitary life or is there retribution? In Rom-Com Genres, there isalways a Cruella De Vil. There has not been a Cruella on screen that Ihave been on a mission to hate more than Susan (Jennifer Garner). Awoman who has greed for money and would even risk her body into amarriage without love just so she may get a taste of the Bach empireand its rich life and social positioning. Standing there in the othercorner is Naomi Quinn (Greta Gerwig) a hard working middle class girlwho is an aspiring writer who has never been given the chance nor hasthe confidence in herself to follow her dreams. Quite an unexpected runinto Arthur changes her life, she is shown purpose to her life and isinspired to follow her dreams.Seems like a stereo type Rom – Com to you? If this is what you arethinking as of now and you are not a fan of the works of Russell Brand,please give this movie its chance. Personally this has been one ofRussell Brands better performances with a magnificent, heartwarmingscreen play. Whilst this is and will not a be a "Forrest Gump" today,it has plenty of laughter and rich storyline that will just give youthat needed gentle tug at your heart and maybe even a tear. For allthose Russell Brand fans, happy viewing, this is funny!Title: Arthur Directed by: Jason Winer Starring: Russell Brand,Jennifer Garner, Greta Gerwig, & Helen Mirren Rated: PG-13 for alcoholuse throughout, sexual content, language and some drug referencesRating: 06/10 110 Mins

aaron esmonde

(2012-04-22 20:45:43)

Surprisingly likable reworking

A drunken playboy stands to lose a wealthy inheritance unless hemarries a woman he doesn't like, meanwhile he falls for tour guide thathis family doesn't approve of.Entertaining comedy in which Russell Brand surprisingly comes acrossmore lovable that Dudley Moores original incarnation. There are somegenuine funny scenes notably with a magnetic bed, children's store, theBatmobile getting pulled over (yes, really) and when Arthur goes nailgun happy with future father-in-law Burt Johnson perfectly played byNick Nolte.The realistic sets, New York setting including Grand Central Stationact as interesting backdrop that director Jason Winer full utilises.Greta Gerwig as the love interest Naomi Quinn is on likable form whileJennifer Garner refreshingly goes against all American girl typecast associalite Susan Johnson. Evander Holyfield, Luis GuzmГѓВЎn and GeraldineJames Geraldine James put in an appearances. Helen Mirren's Hobson istouchingly portrayed and Mirren steals the show with her grounded andhumanistic performance.Overall the story stinks of countless 80's rom-coms but Arthur isentertaining nonetheless due to its nostalgic yet contemporaryreworking and Russels' engaging tongue-tied performance.

messiah wannabe

(2012-04-16 00:23:58)

are you kidding? i thought this was better than decent, and better than the original too

don't get me wrong - it's not classic cinema, it's not groundbreakingin any way shape or form... but i really don't get why people arecoming down so hard on this. predictable? well, yeah, i mean obviouslyyou can assume the boy will get the girl, grow up a little in theprocess, etc etc. BUTa) the laughs were pretty constant, i had even had to pause the DVD acouple times to catch the last line cause i was laughing right throughitb) the dialog was totally witty, the actors i thought played well offeach other, and i don't know how much was written and how much wasimprov, but there was lots of spark and sparklec) i don't know which original arthur you guys saw, but i thought theone that came out 20 years ago and it was pretty bland - more so thanthe remake if you ask me. funny to see all the reverence to theoriginal version now, at the time it came out i remember it gettingblasГѓВ© reviews, and neither my friends nor my parents liked it at all(or anyone else i knew for that matter)long story short, if you just need a pleasant, upbeat and funny rom comthat will make you laugh consistently for an hour (and you like russellbrandt at all) you could do much worse than renting Arthur (2011)

killer1h

(2012-04-15 10:44:07)

Refreshing

In a world full of dull comedies and witless lines someone actuallymanaged to make a movie which was neither. Having watched thetravesties that have been pawned off as movies this year this movie wasa very refreshing change of pace, for one thing it wasn't entirelypredictable, secondly I thought the wit in this movie was spot on, notto mention the fact that it was actual intellectual humor which letsface it is nearly extinct.This movie is about a lavishly wealthy playboy whose antics are onlyexceeded by his ability to guzzle anything that has high proof content.While at a black tie event his mother(the primary holder of his estateand fortune) loses very important clients due to his publicembarrassment once again. Having had enough of his disappointing andout of control lifestyle she gives him an ultimatum to either marry awoman the he truly appalls or lose his entire estate, after aconsiderable 15 seconds of consideration he chooses marriage, in thecourse of his engagement he meets another woman, one of remarkabledazzle and down to earth plainness, he of course is immediatelyinfatuated with her. Needless to say the story goes from there. This isa very good movie, very nice and light humor, I recommend this foranyone looking for a good comedy 10/10.

Juan E. Robles

(2012-04-12 20:29:23)

Better than expected, but still doesn't hold a candle to the original.

I have to admit, when I saw this movie, I was expecting next tonothing. I was wrong. I agree, Russel Brand is no Dudley Moore. (Imean, come on, nobody else could have played such an iconic character.)But the Arthur had a good story. Here, Russel Brand's Arthur is farmore reckless than Dudley Moore's Arthur. (To the point that RussellBrand's Arthur get arrested.) Jennifer Garner's portrayal of Susan is far more extreme than theoriginal. Here, Susan isn't just some spoiled rich girl, who issomewhat clueless, but rather this Susan is a gold digger. And then there's Hobson, played by Helen Mirren. As it is, I love HelenMirren, (Excalibur, 2010, etc.) I loved the way she played the part asa stern, yet compassionate mother figure to Arthur. While this movie is in no way better than the original, I think thatthis is one of the better remakes as of late. (Way better than Clash ofthe Titans.)

SnakesOnAnAfricanPlain

(2012-04-12 12:05:55)

Arthur (2011)

I thought I'd check this out before watching the original. Overall Ienjoyed it. It begins like Billy Madison, with some oaf getting drunkbecause he's bored and doing stupid things. Arthur's alcoholism neverreally comes across as an obstacle here. The drink makes his life morefun and challenging for those around him. Arthur here is a child, andis constantly supervised by Helen Mirren. Brandt deserves some creditfor this role. He plays his normal self for the majority of it, but heis able to pull at the correct heartstrings now and then. Hisrelationship with Mirren is beautifully played, and there's a line atthe end which is simply fantastic. It does stretch itself out to anunwelcome length with ridiculous scenario after ridiculous scenario.Never dull, sometimes very funny, and sometimes very moving. Doesn'tsound like it matches the classic status of the original, but I'll justhave to wait and see.

Neil Welch

(2012-04-12 07:01:04)

Enjoyable comedy

Count me in as one of those who has never seen the Dudley Moore Arthur.I'm beginning to think that Russell Brand is very smartly going forHollywood success, given that the ill-judged Andrew Sachs debacle hasrather queered his pitch back on his home territory. If so, this remakeis not a bad step for him, because his childlike alcoholic with moremoney than he could ever spend is, for the most part, quite welljudged, sympathetic, and funny (even though Brand's lack of actingexperience does show through from time to time).Helen Mirren as nanny Hobson is, as expected, superb, and she and Brandhave a very effective chemistry, and some sparkling dialogue. GretaGerwig does attractively vulnerable very well, and here is another one.And I suspect that Jennifer Garner had a hoot playing the odious (andfunny) Susan.I wasn't expecting to enjoy this: I did.

Shady Cat

(2012-04-11 18:03:59)

Brand Delivers A-LIST Performance, Helen Mirren was amazing.

Brand exhibits quite a range of emotion throughout the film. He plays abillionaire alcoholic, quite brilliantly displaying the emptiness ofhis character. When he falls in love, he truly captures the emotion -the natural high - which contrasts well with his random encounters atthe beginning (i.e. the thief). Finally, he conveys the closenessArthur feels for his nanny magnificently I shouldn't have been moved by anyone in this film - this was supposedto be a comedy, laced with Brand-style theatrics! And here I was, intears at several points in the movie, I'm talking tears I haven't shedsince watching The Notebook! This film took me by complete surprise. In fact, my expectations werelow, I decided to watch the movie on Saturday afternoon simply to fillin my day. If anyone is reading this, looking to watch a hilariousmovie with a moving storyline, then please give this movie a chance. Ifanything, don't go watch this movie with "re-make" in your mind. Treatit as its own movie, independent from the previous Arthur, and judgeBrand accordingly. You will be surprised!

TheTruthDoor

(2012-04-10 12:48:47)

OMG, Forget It.

Who cares about the original, this movie can't even stand on it's ownfeet. The acting was no where near believable, Helen Mirren could noteven be believable and that is saying something. Her last scene waslaughable and it was suppose to be a serious moment in the movie.The good reviews that you read here are obviously written by teenagegirls that have a crush on Russell Brand. I like him and think he is abreath of fresh air in Hollywood, but this was a bad movie in justabout every way.If you just have to see it, do yourself a favor and wait for it to comeout on DVD...it will be just as meaningless on the small-screen.

Queer-qatfm

(2012-04-09 23:28:27)

Arthur is a study of excess.

Arthur is a study of excess. Well, I suppose it's also a study inaccess, and many people get those two homophones confused, so I guesseveryone wins this time. But my original point is that everything inthis movie, including the very filming of it, is extravagantlywasteful. See, we already had a film called Arthur. It was a long timeago, so I'm sure you could be forgiven for not knowing this is aremake. Alas, here we are, presenting a comedy featuring Russell Brandplaying the role he was born to play. And play. And play.Not content enough with simply being Alduous Snow in both ForgettingSarah Marshall and Get Him to the Greek (the latter of which isinsanely hilarious), here Brand plays the title-character man childwith lots of money and no responsibility. Eventually, he gets to thepoint where he has to marry a horse played by Jennifer Gardner, not forlove, but for business. Conveniently, he falls in love with the film'ssaving grace, Naomi. Greta Gerwig, along with Helen Mirren, buthonestly, does that woman NEED any more accolades at this point,provided me much needed grounding in all the chaos created in Brand'swake.His style of comedy is best described as throwing as much insanity atthe wall until something sticks. That works well with good writing,less so when recreating a character that was nominated for an AcademyAward. Yes, I recognize that there is very little here that is carriedover from the original, and that's not even really my point. My pointis again excess. The storyline contains it: billionaire heir throwinggobs of money around in a failed attempt at making himself happy. Andso does Brand's acting. It's funny up until the point when it justbecomes too much.While there are glimpses of heart: a truly charming relationshipbetween Arthur and his help, or perhaps a few fleeting moments whenromance wins over exuberance, the film is essentially in love withitself. And we're left just kind of trying to string together goodmemories brought about from selected funny bits. None of which includeshots of Russell Brand in his underwear.

DICK STEEL

(2012-04-09 07:33:19)

A Nutshell Review: Arthur

Can one lose touch with reality? I suppose if one has multi-millions toone's name without even trying, then probably yes. There's a ratherpoignant moment in the film that a key character hammers this pointhome to the titular Arthur, played by Russell Brand, that brought out asmile inside of me since it brought to mind how some folks in powerstart behaving as ridiculously as Arthur and spouting some of the mostinane nonsense just because they can, and do so because there's not aworry in their world possessing that kind of obscene wealth.Yet again we have another remake of a movie descend upon us, with theoriginal Arthur some 30 years ago played by the late comedian DudleyMoore. Russell Brand takes over the main role as the alcoholic playboywhose family riches fuels his major consumption habits of wine, women,and plenty of movie cars from the Batmobile to the DeLorean withouttime travel components. Getting into trouble seems to be his hobby,with butler and driver Bitterman (Luis Guzman) and nanny Hobson (HelenMirren) ever ready to bail him out. You wonder just when this man childwill grow up, which forms the crux of the issue at hand when his momVivienne (Geraldine James) issues an ultimatum for him to marry hertrusty assistant, the ambitious Susan (Jennifer Garner) or be cut offfrom his inheritance of a billion dollars forever.It brings to mind just how some will want to be amongst the elites andare willing to do just about anything to achieve that. And whileJennifer Garner has limited screen time to make you really hate herSusan character, you can feel the type of craving she goes after to beassociated with a family with its own coat of arms. With her richcontractor dad (Nick Nolte) money isn't an issue, but to be associatedwith Arthur's last name of Bach that owns a global conglomerate ratherthan to still be looked down upon for a less than modest familybackground, now that's something to aspire to, even if it means goingthrough a sham marriage that Arthur is reluctant to get into. I supposethis also carries some weight when put into political ambition that wesee today, since some lust after the more surefire way to get into aseat of power through the compromising of principles, versus the schoolof harder knocks when sticking to one's ideals against something that'sfundamentally wrong.And it's also because the story's actual romantic thread has thatsomething going on between Arthur and a random lady he meets on thestreets, the tour guide Naomi (Greta Gerwig), who proves to Arthur thatlife isn't necessarily always centered around the money, although youdo know that a little something does help with the daily bills, and anetwork of names do help to open doors to new opportunities, just ashow Arthur helps her on the sly to push her writing/drawing talentsthrough. In fact this films is really about Arthur and the four womenin his life, one after his last name, his mother, his true romanticinterest, and Hobson.Originally a male butler in the original, this remake has Helen Mirrenstep in as the nanny, or more accurately the surrogate mother sinceArthur's biological one cannot peel herself away from the business. Forall his flaws, Hobson is the one to see through to Arthur's strength,even though his constant shenanigans test her every patience. HelenMirren and Russell Brand share that incredible chemistry together onscreen, that probably gave reason enough why someone ought to sitthrough this remake, with Mirren putting in her fair share of gravitasin a role that may seem like an over-glamorous Alfred role to a BruceWayne, dishing out good advice laced with sarcasm if warranted.And the subplot which took the cake involves Arthur being woken up tohave lost touch with the common man, and to prove a point he was toseek a job, which naturally demonstrated he cannot. It's a reminder tothose sitting in ivory towers that without coming down once in a whilein all earnestness to learn about the plight of the masses, one canalmost be sure of losing touch, and begin to spout nonsense andbehaving in a jackass fashion like how Arthur does it. I hate topoliticize the film, but with the environment we're in currently, onecannot fail to see how there are those who belong to the Arthur camp,others belonging to the Susans of the world, or even the Hobsons whoremain blindly loyal and probably see gold even when Arthur descendsinto idiocy.

Chad G

(2012-04-08 14:03:46)

Great review of this film!

Film director Matthew Toffolo wrote an interesting review of this film.You can read it here: http://www.wildsound.ca/arthur.htmlIt's about how perhaps the studio bosses were scared of presenting theTHEME of "the best things in life are free" angle. And how we as a society are obsessed with owning things and why.How the things we own at times really own us? And perhaps that what themovie should of been about. Also, it's hard to relate to a billionaire man/child in today's currentworld. Kind of a strange move for Hollywood, isn't it? Giving us a story abouta rich guy who isn't happy! Oh poor him!

daniel56789

(2012-04-07 18:01:28)

Don't Compare, it will be your downfall - A fantastic tale of an extraordinary individual

It seems these days it is far too easy to dismiss a film simply becauseit bears to resemblance to a previous film and shares its title.Instead of concentrating on whether this is better or worse than theoriginal you should instead watch this film with the open mind itdeserves.It doesn't try to be clever, Brand while not my favourite actor has apersonality that fits the character perfectly, who else could have beencast in such an extrovert fantastical role. The brief aim is clearly toguide the viewer through a fantastic tale of love and the moralistictale of how money can't buy you love no matter how hard you try.The plot is well rounded and the casting great, yes there are somestereotypes (Mirren as the nanny) but these are there to add and notdetract from the movie. Really this movie should be taken at face valueand let it fill you with the happiness that is intended.

gfoucaud

(2012-04-07 02:02:34)

A fairly funny movie

What do you expect while going to watch this movie? You see the title,you watch the trailer, and finally you notice the actors...and you canpicture the kind of movie you're about to see! It might seem logical,but this is not true...Actually the movie was rather better that what we had in mind. RussellBrand plays quite easily a young rich alcoholic brat worthing 950mdollars whom has no idea of how Mr. Everyone's life taste like. Theladies plays well without being fantastic.The whole scenario is rather an easy one that could have done a goodcartoon, but overall we had what we payed for, 1h40mn of easy laugh,good fun and incredibly hard to understand Russell Brand "darn" Englishaccent.

Patrick Kurosawa

(2012-04-06 13:52:12)

One of the better comedies i saw this year...

I never saw the original, but this was a pretty good movie to me! The acting was solid, the humor ranged from raunchy to sweet to witty.I think it had a top notch script. Vissually it's engaging. RusselBrand is a character you either love or hate, i like his kind of humor,and in this movie he does deliver his best effort yet.I think this movie get a really bad rep just because it is a remakefrom an old school classic which i am going to see as soon as possible,and i, for one am not a great fan of remakes (especially the greatAsian horror/ crappy remakes, but that's on a whole other level), soi'm kind of glad that i did not watch the original before, but on it'sown, i think i can safely say that this was one of the better comediesi've seen this year.I guess i'll just have to watch the original to see if the exaggeratedhate campaign is justified, but in my honest opinion, i think it's not.

MovieProductions

(2012-04-06 07:00:45)

Tedious, unfunny, long, just a big mess

* out of (****)After giving such a rancid review to "The rite", making the claim thatit was the worst film so far of 2011, well... 2011 has a new contender.Even going in, I knew this film was going to be atrocious from start tofinish. Why see it then? Apparently my friend's fun night out consistedof buying my ticket to a movie I didn't ask to see, then having toreimburse him/her later, and eventually just seeing the damn movie. Honestly, I kept in open mind in the beginning, but this film just didnot do it for me. Even in the most stale comedies, I can laugh here orthere. I NEVER laughed or chuckled. Not even a heartfelt smile. Ihonestly sat there with the same blank expression. What's even worse isthat I predicted absolutely every scene, guessed every punchline, andeven knew going it what I was going to get. First of all, let's talk about the performers. Russell Brand isseriously the most irritable, pretentious actor, or at least in thisfilm. I swear, I did not care at all about him. He didn't bring anycharm or wit, he was just flat. Jennifer Garner was as equallyobnoxious, but at least she didn't take up the majority of the film. Asfor the others? Honestly, I didn't connect to any characters. There wasno development, no depth, no purpose. The characters were just there. Not to mention, this story has been told a thousand times before. CanHollywood stop beating a dead horse? Remake or not, the script is justvery uninspired. Rich, pretentious dude has to marry an equally rich,pretentious dude, but falls for an arrogant, so called "sweatheart" anddoesn't care about the "money". Maybe this would be interesting had itnot been projected on the screen so many times.All in all, "Arthur" is just another waste of celluloid. It isn'tfunny, it's not entertaining, and it's not worth seeing. Plain andsimple. Had I not been forced to see this movie, trust me, I wouldn'thave. If you MUST see it, please just rent the original. It's probablybetter than this movie. All I'm glad is that 2011 so far has had onlytwo stinkers, or at least I've seen.

mia-noisia

(2012-04-05 03:14:45)

Why you don't use talentless Boyfriends of celebrities

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

Bollywood_Chewbacca

(2012-04-04 16:37:40)

Just listen to the rhythm of a gentle bossanova...

Well, if you are a fan of a remake movie, you are gonna love this. Theeffort is exemplary and i could not ask for more.I usually love American remakes because of its evident detailconcerning the plot works best the second time around, but giving theclassic comedy Authur! a try is something never seen before and handsoff to Hollywood for pulling that off.The only problem with such a film would be as to how much detail canthey go into as not much is there. It is highly unlikely to drawaudience if the content is not substantial and relevant as many of youmight agree that the latest sequel to the Resident Evil series wasundesirable and off.Well, it too soon to point that out but to what the trailers and thefirst episode looked like, i would suggest you to watch the thing assoon as you can because its awesome. The actors are good, the plot isgreat, the CGI is pretty cool and appears real, suspense and thrill isall over me, can't stop to watch next remale.