Movie Reviews: "Arthur" - Sitcoms Online Message Boards

JamesG · 04-08-2011, 05:46 PM

Movie Reviews: Arthur

Russell Brand is no Dudley Moore, just a dud.

That’s the general conclusion of critics reviewing Brand’s performance in the remake of the 1981 film Arthur, which starred Moore.

“Brand is unable to charm,” Kyle Smith writes in the New York Post.

“Without coming near a ukulele, he manages to be as odious as his doppelganger, the ’60s novelty singer Tiny Tim.”

Joe Neumaier in the New York Daily News judges Brand’s performance to be:

“one click above moronic.”

But A.O. Scott in the New York Times is reluctant to single out Brand for the apparent failure of the movie.

He is rather, “more like the beast of burden, charged with hauling this grim load of mediocrity to the box office.”

Calling the remake “utterly redundant,” Michael O’Sullivan writes in the Washington Post:

“This Arthur is an exercise in time-travel tedium, a trip to the Land That Funny Forgot.”

But Roger Ebert in the Chicago Sun-Times argues that the film doesn’t deserve such harsh treatment.

“This Arthur is not as laugh-out-loud funny as the earlier one … but the dialogue is well-written — witty and quick and not clunky. … And Russell Brand takes on a thankless task and earns at least some thanks.”

-IMDB News

dakert · 04-08-2011, 10:53 PM

I didnt like drunks 30 years ago and even less now

Mr. Television · 04-08-2011, 11:19 PM

Dudley Moore is Arthur. You can't go home again.

JamesG · 04-08-2011, 11:25 PM

I'm not a Russell Brand fan so I don't really watch anything he does.
A lot of people love him but I'm not a fan of his comedy.

Mr. Television · 04-08-2011, 11:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JamesG

I'm not a Russell Brand fan so I don't really watch anything he does.
A lot of people love him but I'm not a fan of his comedy.

I've never even heard of him.

Marvo301 · 04-09-2011, 12:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stuck In The '70's

Dudley Moore is Arthur. You can't go home again.

Exactly! Dudley had the talent to take a character with basically no redeeming values and still make him charming and lovable. From everything I've heard about this movie Russell Brand does not have that same ability. In fact a movie reviewer on the local news suggested going to the video store and renting the original starring Dudley Moore rather than spending any money on seeing Russell Brand's version!

HuntingtonM15 · 04-09-2011, 12:38 AM

Not a surprise. It looks like trash. I can't believe Helen Mirren ever signed on to do this mess.

sara · 04-09-2011, 01:35 AM

Our paper gave it 3 stars, but I am not going to see it. I can't stand Russell Brand.

Dudley Moore had more charm in his pinkie than Russell Brand will ever have.

TV Knowledge Fan · 04-09-2011, 02:39 AM

...when you have a perfectly memorable film (produced 30 years ago) starring Dudley Moore- why bother to remake it?

For the same reason Hollywood does this all the time.....MONEY.

04-08-2011, 05:46 PM	#1
JamesG Freakshow Moderator Forum Icon Join Date: Feb 01, 2008 Location: Brooklyn, NY Posts: 57,121	Movie Reviews: "Arthur" Movie Reviews: Arthur Russell Brand is no Dudley Moore, just a dud. That’s the general conclusion of critics reviewing Brand’s performance in the remake of the 1981 film Arthur, which starred Moore. “Brand is unable to charm,” Kyle Smith writes in the New York Post. “Without coming near a ukulele, he manages to be as odious as his doppelganger, the ’60s novelty singer Tiny Tim.” Joe Neumaier in the New York Daily News judges Brand’s performance to be: “one click above moronic.” But A.O. Scott in the New York Times is reluctant to single out Brand for the apparent failure of the movie. He is rather, “more like the beast of burden, charged with hauling this grim load of mediocrity to the box office.” Calling the remake “utterly redundant,” Michael O’Sullivan writes in the Washington Post: “This Arthur is an exercise in time-travel tedium, a trip to the Land That Funny Forgot.” But Roger Ebert in the Chicago Sun-Times argues that the film doesn’t deserve such harsh treatment. “This Arthur is not as laugh-out-loud funny as the earlier one … but the dialogue is well-written — witty and quick and not clunky. … And Russell Brand takes on a thankless task and earns at least some thanks.” -IMDB News

04-08-2011, 11:19 PM	#3
Mr. Television 23 Years at Sitcoms Online Forum Icon Join Date: Jun 06, 2003 Location: Somewhere you're Not Posts: 62,133	Dudley Moore is Arthur. You can't go home again.
	__________________ Sonny

04-09-2011, 01:35 AM	#8
sara Member Senior Member Join Date: May 21, 2002 Location: grandville michigan Posts: 2,296	Our paper gave it 3 stars, but I am not going to see it. I can't stand Russell Brand. Dudley Moore had more charm in his pinkie than Russell Brand will ever have.
	__________________ Help stamp out and eradicate superfluous redundancy!

04-09-2011, 02:39 AM	#9
TV Knowledge Fan Member Senior Member Join Date: Mar 29, 2006 Location: Long Branch, N.J. Posts: 2,577	Let's put it this way... ...when you have a perfectly memorable film (produced 30 years ago) starring Dudley Moore- why bother to remake it? For the same reason Hollywood does this all the time.....MONEY.

04-08-2011, 10:53 PM	#2
dakert Member Forum 3000 Club Member Join Date: May 10, 2007 Location: Altoona PA Posts: 3,411	I didnt like drunks 30 years ago and even less now

04-08-2011, 11:25 PM	#4
JamesG Freakshow Moderator Forum Icon Join Date: Feb 01, 2008 Location: Brooklyn, NY Posts: 57,121	I'm not a Russell Brand fan so I don't really watch anything he does. A lot of people love him but I'm not a fan of his comedy.

04-09-2011, 12:38 AM	#7
HuntingtonM15 That Bothers Me Moderator Forum Star Join Date: Jun 20, 2003 Location: Metro Detroit Posts: 11,060	Not a surprise. It looks like trash. I can't believe Helen Mirren ever signed on to do this mess.