Arthur (2011)

Touches You

Best movie of this year hands down!

A lot of fun.

One of the most extraordinary films you will see this year. Take that as you want.

It was bad .Very bad . There was no real plot, or a good script Just a waste of time

Despite my best efforts, I didn't hate this film as much as I thought I would. I don't like Russell Brand and I don't like his comedy. Scenes in this film meant to be driven by his comedic talents are dreadful. For example, the scene where he plays with the nail gun then shoots nails into Nick Nolte is more uncomfortable than funny - it's not all down to Brand though, Nolte is also awful in this film. The terrible thing is that his smile is definitely infectious and for the last 1/5 of the film he actually does manage to be likable.The unlimited money provides some excitement e.g. the Batman mobile and the DeLorean from Back to the Future, Grand Central station empty with acrobats, etc. Actually the settings are well chosen, beautiful and well shot. It doesn't cover up for Brand's clawing personality however. Jennifer Garner (Susan) does psychotic b*tch very well but even the presence of Helen Mirren (Hobson) can't cover for Brand's overacting.The only bit when I laughed was when a little boy asks Brand if he is a boy or a girl and Brand replies "it doesn't matter". Quite frankly, I'd imagine this interaction is based on real life. What saves this film is Brand getting sober at the end to get the girl, this is of course based on Russell's "Brand". In the last 1/5 of the film Brand managed to win me over to his side with his sobriety and somewhat reigned in acting.It's an okay film, though only really worth a watch though if you don't have anything else on the player. I was glad that I stuck it out till the end because I didn't hate Brand as much as I did at the beginning of the film.

What an amazing, not-great movie.This movie fires on all cylinders, but unfortunately not all in the same direction.The story is light hearted and entertaining. The cast all transcend their roles and show off what smart people in broad movie roles can achieve if they work and have talent. The script is occasionally very clever. But above all, there is actual legitimate TRUTH and ROMANCE in this film. Everyone's motivation and personalities are believable, even amid the farce of the plot.The biggest problem of the film stems from it being a remake that keeps unnecessary elements for no reason. The biggest culprit is the biggest element of the film, which is that Brand portrays a drunk. I suppose there was a certain irony in casting Brand in the role, but the irony play out in that Brand does not play a convincing comedic drunk. Except for the scenes in which they take great care to demonstrate his possessing alcohol, one would forget that he even IS drunk. The greatest offense is that it is unnecessary. The alcoholic elements play into the film in order to justify Arthur's selfish excess. But many films have been made in the past 30 years with the same conceit minus the alcohol. Adam Sandler, perhaps, has most solidified our ability to believe in the man-child without the plot device of alcohol to buoy the concept. I would very much recommend this movie. It's clever, inoffensive and showcases a great deal of original wit from Brand and Mirren who are both so lovable that every second of screen time is a joy.

Full disclosure: I must be one of the only people in the known universe who DIDN'T like the original - so if you come to this update with an affection for its progenitor, then I can well understand you hating it, and dismissing my opinion... However, if like me you're one of the rare breed who senses potential for improvement, then you might just be well satisfied!Part of the problem with the 1981 version for me was that I couldn't shake the feeling that I was watching Dudley Moore kill himself, on screen... The character of Arthur (and indeed, maybe Dudley himself... ) seemed to drink to hide an inexhaustible sadness, and all of his hijinks were just a way for him to feel not so alone... Some of you out there may be the type of viewers who like that kind of pathos, but I just found it tragic, and it made me uncomfortable that we were being encouraged to cheer on an individual in slow decline.In this new film, Brand still drinks - but this time it feels more like an accompaniment to the silliness, than the very fuel that propels it... Arthur here is someone who refuses to grow up, but not because it appears that he's running away from anything; rather, it appears that he's just having too darn good a time... and I found that playfulness infectious.Brand, of course, can play the cheeky cad with his eyes shut, since that seems incredibly close to his real-life persona... and Gerwig is a nice foil for him as the centred yet dreamy girl who gradually makes him want to assume responsibility.Mirren uncovers yet another angle to an otherwise familiar role; stern and motherly as opposed to put-upon, like the previous Hobson... With some terrific one-liners from Peter Baynham (who has yet to write a bad comedy... ) this feels altogether lighter and sweeter than the established classic with the decidedly melancholic undertone... Maybe I'm naive and sentimental, but consciously and knowingly living in a fantasyland works for me... In truth, it's just more fun there.The only thing I genuinely do miss is the theme from Christopher Cross!