ARTHUR - The Remake

“ARTHUR (The re-make)” (Russell Brand & Helen Mirren)

When I heard about this movie I was totally against it – You don’t re-make a classic, you re-make movies that had a good idea but for some reason didn’t quite work out onscreen the first time around – “3:10 To Yuma” is a prime example – Or – to ‘update’ an oldie but goodie to introduce it to a new audience (“The Wolfman” SHOULD have fit this category, but failed miserably) This re-make of an endearing comedy doesn’t fail miserably, but fails nonetheless. There are several reasons, the main being writing. There simply aren’t that many funny lines, whereas the original had more laughs in the first twenty minutes than this has total.
The second is casting; I like Russell Brand as a back-up singer, but not as a lead vocalist – too much dosage of Brand leads to many annoying side effects.
#1 – playing a lovable drunk millionaire worked for Dudley Moore because he was diminutive (Which helps with making him lovable) Brand is freakishly tall & lanky (Something about that combo doesn’t lend itself to lovable – Don’t ask me why)
The first time I saw Brand was on the BBC’s ‘Graham Norton Show’ – he came out as though he were a rock star – I had no idea who he was, of course - & was surprised to discover he was a comedian. Not a joke-teller per se, more of the teller of humorous antidotes – he seemed to be famous in England for getting laid a lot.
The persona Brand exuded on that talk show was similar to the Arthur Bach he plays in this film; exceedingly laid-back, childish, devilishly impish in his openness in discussing his sexual preferences and somewhat difficult to understand because of his annoying habit of slurring his speech. An interesting character, but not lovable. Arthur needs to be lovable, otherwise he’s just an annoying drunk spoiled brat millionaire playboy with no scruples. As I watched this film I found myself wondering ‘Why would they put this out NOW?’. Now, at a time in America when the filthy rich are being given every break possible & the working people are not only suffering because of it, but are also getting the blame for the economy, instead of the filthy rich who screwed us out of our savings & homes?
I know, no one likes it when I get political in my reviews, but as I’ve said before I try to relate my movie-going experience with these blatherings & I was annoyed at the way this ‘Arthur’ foolishly & wastefully threw cash away like it was bread crumbs in a park full of pigeons.
Next, let’s talk chemistry; the original pairing of Moore & John Geilgud (as butler ‘Hobson’) clicked in every scene. One of my favorite Hobson lines, “It was a pleasure to meet you, Linda; normally one must go to a bowling alley to meet a woman of your stature.” obviously wouldn’t have worked coming from Helen Mirren’s mouth – still playing ‘Hobson’, but as Arthur’s ‘nanny’ instead of his butler.
Is it acting ability that Brand is lacking, or just that his version of Arthur wasn’t lovable that generated zero chemistry between him & Mirren? I’m leaning toward the former, because his relationship with chauffer Bitterman (Luis Guzman) didn’t connect either.
Making potential bride Susan Johnson (here, played by the vastly over-rated Jennifer Garner) a greedy b*tch didn’t help – It was her father, Burt that needed to be the unlikable heavy. All I need to say as to why this Burt Johnson didn’t work is two words; Nick Nolte.
Extravagances; Why did this Arthur have a floating, magnetic bed? So that when unwanted fiance Susan came over to show Arthur her kinky side (In a metal corset, naturally) the bed, which she conveniently crawls under scoops her off the floor and attaches itself to her. Why? I asked again. So Arthur could say the 'really reaching for bit of comedy' line, "At least something in this room is attracted to you."
And every scene that they copied from the better Arthur seemed out of place – A clear mistake every time they did it. Which brings me back to my original complaint – Why didn’t they just make an entirely new story about a drunken millionaire playboy that falls in love with a commoner when his family wants him to marry for ‘prestige’? They could have called it ‘Dudley’ as a nod to the original for the idea, but re-making ‘Arthur’ didn’t work because you’re only going to invite comparisons that your new version can’t possibly win.
The original opened with Arthur driving up to two prostitutes and from the back seat of his Rolls Royce asking, “Would the one of you who’s the more attractive please step forward?” & despite being constantly drunk, Arthur was polite; “Aren’t waiters wonderful? You ask them for things and they bring them to you!” It was funny and charming right from the git-go. The new Arthur opens with Arthur in a batman costume and chauffer Bitterman in a 4 sizes too small Robin costume on their way to a fund raiser hosted by Arthur’s mother. They drive recklessly through the streets of New York and crash their batmobile. There was nothing funny or charming about any of it.
Finally, I’ll end by picking on Greta Gerwig – for some reason playing Naomi, instead of Linda (Liza Minnelli in the original) the only name change that I could tell. Linda is introduce to Arthur after stealing a tie to give to her father for his birthday & the police are forced to let her go when Arthur intervenes and tells them to put it on his tab. Naomi, although much prettier than Linda gives ‘illegal’ tours of Grand Central Station... WTF? I can’t remember the last time I witness such really awful acting. She’s very cute and I enjoyed the throw-back mini skirts she wore, but Greta is in need of acting lessons.
If you’ve never seen the original – go see Brand’s Arthur first. Then rent the ‘classic’. I’d like to know if you agree that the two versions are miles apart, or if it’s just a matter of ‘timing’ – that now is just a dumb time to put out a film with a drunken spoiled billionaire as the lead.
Other than the woman Arthur falls for being better looking, there is nothing about this remake that comes remotely close to matching the original.
If this is ‘The Best That Brand Can Do’ – he’d better go back to being the screwball side-kick because this starring role attempt is a complete failure.