Arthur (Remake)

[mexicanjunior]

Is it a "must-see"? Reviews don't seem to flattering...

Critics Reviews Average Grade: C
Source Brief Review Grade*

Boston Globe
Wesley Morris "The story is essentially the same as it was 30 years ago, only it’s been drawn against the backdrop of megabusiness." more... C

Chicago Tribune
Michael Phillips "...blobby and a bit of a mess but offers a fair number of laughs..." more... B-

Entertainment Weekly
Owen Gleiberman "...as the movie went on I found it increasingly hard to separate the character's self-indulgence from that of the actor playing him." more... C+

Filmcritic.com
Bill Gibron "While perhaps a bit too PC considering its source, this is still a funny, if flawed reinvention." more... B

Hollywood Reporter
Kirk Honeycutt "A muddle-headed remake of a classic screen comedy." more... C

New York Post
Kyle Smith "Unable to relax, Brand is unable to charm." more... C-

New York Times
A. O. Scott "...grim load of mediocrity..." more... C-

Rolling Stone
Peter Travers "Beware! The multiplex has officially become a no-fly zone for laughs." more... D

San Francisco Chronicle
Mick LaSalle "...in many ways the new Arthur is an improvement on the old." more... C+

USA Today
Claudia Puig "A little Russell Brand goes a long way." more... C

[Sideshow Bob]

OUT

[mexicanjunior]

Saw it on Saturday, it was ok but nothing spectacular. Brand had some decent one-liners but he played the role way too child-like, I don't recall Dudley Moore acting that much like an adolescent. I watched the original right after the remake and the remake stole ALOT of the original dialogue, word for word. Also, I liked John Gielguld playing Hopson better than Helen Mirren. The new Bitterman had more schtick than the original black guy though.