Buy Arthur Movie. Watch online or Download
Genres: Com
Starring: Russell Brand, Nick Nolte, Jennifer Garner, Helen Mirren, Scott Adsit, Geraldine James, John Hodgman
Director(s): Jason Winer
Available Quality: Hi Def
Country: USA
Year: 2011
Available Quality: DivX, Hi Def, iPod, Hi Def, Hi Def
IMDB Rating: 5.7 out of 10 (20239 votes)
A drunken playboy stands to lose a wealthy inheritance when he falls for a woman his family doesnt like.
 |
Arthur (iPod) | Resolution: 480x272 px | Total Size: 392 Mb |
|
|
 |
Arthur (Hi Def) | Resolution: 852x480 px | Total Size: 803 Mb |
|
|
 |
Arthur (Hi Def) | Resolution: 1920x1080 px | Total Size: 8938 Mb |
|
|
 |
Arthur (Hi Def) | Resolution: 1280x720 px | Total Size: 5584 Mb |
|
|
 |
2 | Arthur (DivX) | Resolution: 624x352 px | Total Size: 700 Mb |
|
|
|
1 | Arthur (DivX) | Resolution: 624x352 px | Total Size: 700 Mb |
|
Movie Photos:
We have taken some photos of "Arthur". They represent actual movie quality.
Visitors Review
(24 May 2012)
Shame on you, Jason Winer
Helen Mirren and Russel Brand do what they can to carry this film, butit doesn't stop Jennifer Garner and Greta Gerwig (whoever the heck sheis) from completely and utterly destroying any chemistry and charm thatthe movie may have had. Greta Gerwig brought NOTHING to her role asnaomi and her performance was actually painful to watch . . . yes,painful. It was like watching Sophia Coppola in Godfather III all overagain. Did the actress originally chosen for this role call in sick?Did anyone watch the final product? Clearly not. This is a don't botherfilm. View the original on Netflix on your laptop before you go to thetheatre. I actually watched the original movie when I got home in order torestore my faith in humanity and was charmed to death by Dudley Mooreand Liza Minelli. Nick Nolte was a terrible choice as well. Shame onyou, Jason Winer for wasting everyone's time.
PWNYCNY (24 May 2012)
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.
(23 May 2012)
Quick-witted
Arthur walks away from his sham wedding/billions of dollars. Tries to win back Naomi wearing only a pair of dress shoes and baby blue underwear. Gets shot down anyway. Stays sober for six months, talks to Naomi again in a book reading and play tonsil hockey.Also reveals that he's been forgiven by his mother and therefore still rich. Naomi and Arthur drive away in the Batmobile with the cops on their tail.Impossibly charming movie. I liked it.
dngcal-934-90564 (23 May 2012)
Brand = Moron
First: Brand is not Dudley Moore. He is without question a terribleactor who must believe that his ego will save the day. This is a guyyou want to take in a back alley and break his knee caps. He acts likehe is: a total jerk and moron. Hollywood should make all actors passsome IQ test before they are permitted to be in front of a camera. Whyhe was chosen is beyond me and I suspect some idiot thought that anyonewith a Brit accent will do. This film is a pile of dung. If you likethe story view the original. Why does Hollywood hire such flakes andexpect us to like them? Producers: this man is a total IDIOT!
TheGuyWithStuff (21 May 2012)
Seen Both Movies Both Great
Both are great and what can you expect from Russell Brand besides amovie full of laughs. This movie was well made funny, with bits ofemotional content that will tug at your heart strings. Russell did agreat job playing the out of control character (mainly because hehimself is out of control). All in all the acting was good and thecomedy was great. Laughs everywhere even from some Actors that i wasexpecting to make me laugh. Didn't really differ much from the originalexpect for the Nannies. Great Movie Don't Hate.Thanks,The Guy With Stuff
Bruce722 (21 May 2012)
Surprisingly good.
I absolutely despise Russell Brand so naturally I assumed that I wouldnot like this movie one bit. That, however, was not at all the case.Sure, the movie started with Brand's typical ridiculous antics andobnoxiousness but it turned out to be quite entertaining. Brand, foronce, was able to actually make the transition from ridiculous idiot tostill idiotic but also charming with his humor. Also, Helen Mirrenstole the movie. She is truly something else. I don't think I'd bealone in saying she is one of the premier actresses in Hollywood. Hercharacter's dry humor but strength and caring shined through perfectlyand was the highlight of the film. Garner and Gerwig's characters arealso pretty interesting. Garner doesn't really step outside the boxwith this performance but it was still solid. I was pleasantlysurprised with Gerwig though. I had never seen her in a meaningful roleand she was very solid in portraying her emotions. All in all the moviewas just a pretty good film and it was definitely worth watching.
bdgill12 (19 May 2012)
Not Nearly As Bad As You Think, Actually Kind of Fun
Arthur (Russell Brand) is your typical man-child. A twenty (or thirty)something, he acts more like an eight year old and everyone treats himaccordingly. The only difference between Arthur and the typical WillFerrell character is that Arthur is filthy rich, the heir to a businessconglomerate and the fortune that comes with it. He lives in a New Yorkhigh rise with his chauffeur/friend, Bitterman (Luis Gonzalez) and hisnanny, Hobson (Helen Mirren), and spends his days terrorizing thepolice in his Batmobile and buying ridiculous things at auction (likethe suit Abraham Lincoln died in, which he then wears). His carefreelife is put to the test, however, when his mother, Vivienne (GeraldineJames) decides she's had it with his embarrassments. She offers Arthura choice: marry Susan (Jennifer Garner), an ambitious woman who Arthurhates or lose his claim to the family money. Complicating his decisionis Naomi (Greta Gerwig), a lower class free spirit that Arthur hasbecome infatuated with. With limited time available, Arthur must growup quickly and figure out what it is that truly makes him happy.Arthur had three strikes against it going in: 1. The trailer ishorrendous, the type of "advertisement" that sandbags its intendedbeneficiary before viewers even step into a theater. It's almost as ifthe studio purposefully picked out the most annoying parts of the movieto include in the trailer. Ouch. 2. I'm not a fan of Brand and I'venever understood his charm. To be fair, Get Him to the Greek (and hisperformance in particular) grows on me every time I happen to catch apart of it on HBO but everything else he's ever done has left meunimpressed. 3. I, like almost everyone else in the world who does notwork in Hollywood, am against unnecessary remakes. No one wanted a newArthur. NO ONE.But for all the negatives coming in, I confess I quite enjoyed my timewith Arthur. The entire movie is one absurdity after another, to besure, but I had fun regardless. Arthur operates within a vacuum inwhich it creates its own environment and sets its own rules(a New Yorkin which everyone treats Arthur the way a small town would treat apre-teen in the 1950s) almost like you'd see in a fantasy or sci-fifilm. More importantly, the film holds to that environment and thoserules and this sort of total escapism serves it well. From a comedystandpoint, too, you could do a lot worse than Arthur. It's all veryjuvenile, of course, but when you're in the right mood and the jokesare plentiful, sometimes easy jokes are the best kind. Arthur is filledto the brim with those and I laughed more than I would have everdreamed coming in.As far as the performances go, I suppose you couldn't really call whatBrand does "acting" since he is basically portraying a cartoon-likeversion of himself. But what he manages to do with Arthur as opposed tosome of his other characters is to make him extremely likable andsympathetic, much more so than I would have thought possible given thathe is a selfish, wealthy, immature man-child. I did not expect to rootfor Arthur but I did, in large part due to the healthy amount of heartthat Brand infuses him with. Arthur is a good person who just doesn'treally know how to be a good person and while his redemption isn't thesame as what you might get from a drunk (like the original Arthur), itis nonetheless appreciated. Mirren, too, is solid. Now, I have no ideawhy in the name of The Queen she took this role but since she doesbring an element of respectability to Arthur that the film definitelybenefits from. She and Brand develop a fun relationship throughout thecourse of the film and she serves as a quality straight man to Brand'sridiculousness. Their underplayed dynamic is what makes Arthur work andwhat keeps it from becoming the disaster that I anticipated at theoutset.Check out my reviews at ieatfilms.com
mgarland (18 May 2012)
Arthur was a surprisingly good movie -- thoroughly enjoyed it.
I had no preconceived notions about this movie, other than I likeRussel Brand as an actor, absolutely love Helen Mirren in anythingshe's done, and like Jennifer Garner for the most part.This movie surprised me. I loved the original, although I haven't seenit in several years, but saw it back in about 1987 or so and loved itthen too. This "remake" is more of a reworking, I think. Russel Brandadds his own style and class to it, and it's that much better for it. Iimmediately felt connected with his character, Helen Mirren's character(Hobson) as the stuffy English nanny who is gruff on the outside butloves Arthur deeply on the inside even if she doesn't always show it.Greta Gerwig, who plays Arthur's love interest, is absolutely charmingin a quirky, goofy, sweet kind of way, and I absolutely adored her inthis role. The chemistry between her and Arthur is believable andinteresting to watch. Loved every minute of it.Jennifer Garner is one of those actresses that I really like in someroles, and don't really care for in others. She's not really supposedto be likable in this movie, but I found myself strangely attracted toher. I think she pulled off the psychotic-power/money hungrybitch-demon from hell role quite well, actually, and thought she andher character added a much-needed dimension to the movie. As for NickNolte's character (her father), I could have done without him. I likeNick, but thought this role was unneeded and a little disturbing, and Ifelt like it would have been a better movie without him. Sorry, Nick.Overall, the comedy in this movie works wonders. I laughed at most ofthe jokes, and I was thoroughly entertained by the three maincharacters' interactions and their blossoming relationships. Everyminute was believable and enjoyable. I even liked the chauffeur'scharacter, played by Luis Guzman, and like him in pretty mucheverything he does. He's just funny and entertaining to watch onscreen.Overall, I highly recommend this movie. I was surprisingly mesmerizedby the whole thing, and I will definitely watch it again, probablyseveral times. It's really, really sad at one point, and I can'tremember the last time I cried watching a movie. I just don't do that,and this one has a particularly poignant and touching scene that leftme watery-eyed.Just a good, funny, entertaining movie all around with lovablecharacters and good story. I don't require much else from my movies, soI give it 9 out of 10 stars and loved it. Thanks for reading, and Ihope you enjoy the movie as well.
SeriousJest (17 May 2012)
Great cast, weak script, kind of endearing, but not funny
I loved Brand as Aldous Snow in Forgetting Sarah Marshall and Get Himto the Greek. However, with a mostly-unfunny script (I have to admitthere were a few witty quips that made me laugh, though), his lovablealoofness just became idiotic and annoying. What a shame, since thecast was talented, and did the best they could with the lines they weregiven. In particular, I've got to say that I initially did not findGerwig's looks to be right for the leading lady (of course, she wasn'thelped by the silly outfits she wore), but she delivered such a sweet,genuine performance, that by the end she had won me over. Another thingthat this movie did well was incorporate New York City; specifically,its use of Grand Central Station and the Whisper Wall was pretty cool.The film even became kind of endearing in its second half, and almostgot 3 mugs from me but ultimately, it wasn't good enough as a romanticdrama to make up for its failure as a funny comedy.
fruitsoffamily (17 May 2012)
hilarious
Looking for a funny bit to enjoy with some friends, I was very pleasedwith the outstanding one-liners and Russell Brand's silly antics. I waspleasantly surprised with the sweet romantic plot and deeper underlyingplot. Not having seen the original, I had no expectations and I reallyloved the laugh. I think the motherly relationship between Arthur andHobson added to the complexity of the situation between Arthur and hismother, as did the parallel between the death of Arthur's father andNaomi's mom. The depth of Naomi's character also added to the growth ofArthur's character and promoted an emotional connection. Surprisinglysweet, Arthur (2011) is a secretly lovely romance with the addedseriousness of alcoholism and the complexity of deep lovingrelationships.
Alex Frey (15 May 2012)
It was wonderful actually!
Right in the beginning I'd like to point out that I have never nor willI ever compare a remake with the original because this would attractexpectations and a movie is to be seen as an individual piece! What doyou expect from a movie with Russel Brand? Probably not too much depth!It is a pop corn movie in some way and if you settle for that you willgive this movie probably 5 points! However if you decide to let thismovie sink in a little bit you either love it or hate and that isbecause of Russel Brand! You love him or hate him... I love him becausehe can pack 4 punchlines into one sentence and either you find thatannoying or funny! I actually laughed a lot during this movie and Ithought the cast was absolutely brilliant! Now again big words for aPop Corn Movie but there is indeed a bit more to it! Hellen Mirren hasgiven this film some seriousness that was unexpected and without givingtoo much away the relationship between Arthur and his Nanny (HelenMirren) is the key to the story! The movie has 3 acts white the firstact is a comedy, the second act a love story and the third act a dramawith charming comedy the whole thing was unexpectedly good! I wassurprised about Greta Gerwig playing the love interest Naomi! UsuallyHollywood likes to point out by stunning looks who the one is we haveto cheer for but Gerwig is just a very natural woman which wasimportant for the plot and while it was overdrawn in almost any partsit had believable moments! The Movie clearly shows what we forget toappreciate in our daily lives. The main plot was love or money but inthis remake the entire movie had a sub text to it where it is aboutfriendship, family and the little things in live like a bowl of soup!That is mainly why I loved this movie! I saw the original, I knew howit would end so that was no bog thing but portraying Arthur as anaddict was a great idea! I can't give for a comedy 10 stars but i giveit proper 8 stars rating simply because it surprised me with theparallel plot! Worth to watch it and absolutely not to compare to theoriginal which is the only way to go!
Gemma Ryan (15 May 2012)
Arthur Rocks!
OK, I am going to start that I have never seen the original so i knowwhat people are saying that the original is better but I can't reallygive an opinion on the original.I have always been a Russell Brand fan and now since he has gone fromstand up comedy to acting, he's doing really well in the film industry.Russell Brand seems to be getting better at his roles such as fromForgetting Sarah Marshall, Get Him To The Greek and Hop.The film is full of comedy as Russell Brand is a natural comedian. Andthe film does very well from start to finish.Also, Helen Mirren and Russell Brand share that incredible chemistrytogether on screen. That probably gave the reason enough why someoneought to sit through this remake.Overall, Arthur is a fun remake (even though I has seen the original)which I enjoyed. The film is funny, moving & full of fun. This film isan like it or not like film but give the film a chance and see what youthought.Verdict: 8/10
Christian_Dimartino (12 May 2012)
Though it doesn't live up to the original, it lives up to my expectations.
I really loved the 80's romantic comedy Arthur for many reasons. Itspremise was sweet, the characters were all likable, and Dudley Moorewas just brilliant. So, when I heard last year about a remake starringRussell Brand I knew it wouldn't be as good as the original, but withBrand as Arthur I knew it would be enjoyable. And thats just what itis.The premise remains the same. Arthur(Brand) is a drunken playboymillionaire who is told by his mother that he has to marrySusan(Jennifer Gardener) otherwise she will stop giving him money,which he obviously doesn't want. So, when he meets Naomi(Greta Gerwig),he has to choose between the money or the love.Arthur has its funny moments. It also has some of the charm that madethe first one so wonderful. But the thing that I enjoyed most was thatit wasn't word for word, scene for scene like the original. Theychanged certain things up.There are certain things that I wish would've remained the same. I wishthat Susan could've been more likable. You know she's bad from thestart. But in the original she was innocent. She wasn't a total wacko,unlike Gardener's character. I also like the small similarities, andthe big ones.But I did enjoy some of the differences. I like how they went out oftheir way to make it different. Such as Hobson being a woman(originallyplayed by John Giugland now played by Hellen Mirren), and the fact thatthe mom is the one threatening Arthur, not his dad.Though Brand isn't quite Dudley Moore, he still does a good job. He wasborn to fill in the shoes. I just wish he got drunk more.Moore's drunkmoments stole the show. Gerwig is a delightful star, and i'm glad tosee her do more. The two have wonderful chemistry. So, the new Arthur isn't perfect, but its a charming and funny remakethat doesn't go down in infamy.I mean, most remakes blow. But Arthurworks because its not a total retread. I say see it as soon aspossible. Din't believe what you hear. Brand, Mirren, and Gerwig willmake your afternoon a good one.B
(12 May 2012)
Don't Waste your time
You caoonet re-maike a classic with Russal in the lead and some films are just not meant to be re-made.
JackTLovesJackD (12 May 2012)
Arthur (2011) is a remake of the 1981 Classic starring Dudley Moore
This film, is at best a huge advertisement and fanfare to the name ofArthur, the 1981 film starring Dudley Moore. At worst it is a remake ofthat great film. Approach this film with the same tremor and fear thatyou might feel when looking at someone defecating on a statue. Becauseat best this is what Russell Brand does. It's not worth the effort.Thumbs down. If you want mindless fun, rent out an average Will Ferrellfilm (not Old School or Zoolander, they're actually very good). But ifyou're looking for genuine laughs, a film that treats YOU, yes YOU,like an adult... then watch the original Arthur with Dudley Moore, it'sa great comedy. This abortion is just an arrogant attempt at fame forRussell Brand and a sad attempt at profit for everyone else involved inthis nastiness. The audience is smarter than this.
DICK STEEL (11 May 2012)
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.
aaron esmonde (11 May 2012)
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 Guzmán 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.
Mina Martinez (11 May 2012)
A spoiled alcoholic and big baby behaving as a rock star finds himself involved in a marriage for interest in the way he falls in love.
His mom is forcing that marriage so he has to decide between money orlove, He lives in a bubble spending money as crazy and without caringabout anything and is unable to understand the real world but thanks tohis nanny he starts to do his best. His mind works as a mind of a kiddoes, he loves colors, toy and games and falls in love with someonelike that.Sweet, funny, heart warming, and enjoyable. Jennifer Gardendoes an amazing job here, aggressive and sexy. The nanny is just lovelyand smart and the guy an asshole... a new love story. You will enjoyhow fun is to spy people and don't forget the moon is always followingyou. Those 10 bucks will not be regretted. =)
bopdog (10 May 2012)
More real than the original. Brand and Gerwig are great! (As are Mirren, a good guy, and Garner, a villain)
I must confess to being one of the curmudgeons who found the original"Arthur" really bad. Drunkenness has never been funny to me.Loutishness, narcissism and a life without vision or purpose has alsobeen nothing to tolerate, let alone boast about, in my world. When Iheard that this new incarnation of the old Dudley Moore movie wasmarkedly unlike the original, that actually prompted me to give it ago. Plus, I have always found Russell Brand's loopy self-absorptionkind of funny (he loves his mum!).This new version was much better cast than the original. John Gielgudsimply had too much gravitas and dignity to have really tolerated thatDudley Moore Arthur. He wouldn't have stayed more than a few days, thenhe would have booked out of there. And whatever good qualities LizaMinnelli may have possessed, sexual appeal, charm, and romanticpotential were totally not among them from my perspective.This time Helen Mirren as the Gielgud character lets on that she toomay have a few dark corners of her libidinous make-up, and that shefound the arrangement of a loving and care-giving relationship withArthur somewhat satisfying, and at least safe. Her reasons, of course,she wisely keeps to herself, the audience is left to make up their ownplausible back-story.And this time the "approved" betrothal object, played by the marvelousJennifer Garner, is not hideous (Jennifer Garner is constitutionallyincapable of playing hideous) so much as cold, heartless, driven, andon her own mission. With that character one is repulsed, but one alsohas a momentary flirtation with the idea of "Heck- why not?"Garner's dad, aptly played by Nick Nolte, was a vulgar thug, venal andcoarse. Greta Gerwig as the real love interest of Arthur is simply adorable. Ihave never seen her before, but found her absolutely perfect. She issweet without being cloying, attractive without catering to somecranked-out version of media hotness "a la mode." She seemed genuine,deep, innocent, and completely the kind of person anyone, especiallyArthur, would love to spend time with for the intrinsic delight of hercompany and her vibe. Gerwig deftly showed us her character's heartwithout any effort or melodrama.Lastly- this movie wisely decided NOT to try to re-do the old storypoint-by-point. The old story simply wasn't worthy then, and God knowsit wouldn't be now. No departures are radical, in case you did somehowfondly recall Moore and Co's 1981 effort. But it was re-thought in arelevant and meaningful way that makes it a better story. All in all, then, this "Arthur" is more believable than the stinky anddreary original. The premise of both is so outlandish as to be almoststupid, but watching these great actors take us through the stages ofthe story was a joy.
SpartanIII (09 May 2012)
Haters gonna Hate
I thought this film was simply brilliant. The acting in it was great,the comedic timing perfect, the script well written, and the settingwell shown. Yes, once again it is a movie set in New York, but there'sa reason why they can't having them there. It's an amazing city. Andthis movie showcases that very well. I appreciated the range of humorthey had in there as well. Some of it was raunchy, and then at othertimes it was mild and a relief from some of the over the top jokes. Theclimax was well done, humorous yet tasteful at the same time, and theconclusion was very appropriate. I heard some people complaining about how this movie was showcasing howrich people have it made and it wouldn't be received well today becauseof the economic climate. That was ridiculous. If anything, it shows howmoney really can't buy happiness, and that the most important thing inthis world is that we have each other. Overall, very enjoyable filmthat one should go into with an open mind and just have a good time.
Review total: 20, showing from 1 to 20