subject: ‘Arthur' Lacks Charm Of Original Version [print this page] Arthur' Lacks Charm Of Original Version Arthur' Lacks Charm Of Original Version
f the past few years of movie-going have taught us anything, its that remaking a beloved film of yesteryear can be a treacherous road. For every "True Grit," there are others like "Nightmare on Elm Street" and "Guess Who" (a remake of the 1967 film "Guess Who's Coming to Dinner?") that drag the original story through an industry line of unimaginative "tweaks" in an attempt to restructure it for a modern day audience.
So where does that leave "Arthur," the most recent entry into the ever growing list of remakes, re-imaginings and reboots?
The good news: the film does little to sully the reputation of the now classic 1982 film starring Dudley Moore as Arthur, Liza Minnelli as his love interest and John Gielgud in his Oscar-winning role as Arthur's dry-as-toast manservant Hobson. The bad news? It doesn't do much else.
Under the influence of director Jason Winer (TV's "Samantha Who?"), "Arthur" has now become a vehicle for its notorious star: controversial talk-show host/actor and current Mr. Katy Perry, Russell Brand ("Get Him to the Greek"). On paper, Brand's outrageous public persons would seem to fit ideally with the clueless, hedonistic billionaire playboy of the original film. Instead, the performance, much like the entire film, ends up feeling far too watered-down to make any lasting impressions.
As the film opens, we find boozy playboy (and heir to a billion dollar industry) Arthur Bach being arrested for the umpteenth time. This time, its for driving a "Batman Forever"-era batmobile into Wall Street's Charging Bull statue. The latest scandal is the last straw for Arthur's mother Vivienne (Geraldine James, "Alice in Wonderland"). She offers him an ultimatum: marry another prominent family's daughter (Jennifer Garner, "Valentine's Day") or be cut off from his inheritance and live in poverty.
Never having lived without extreme wealth, Arthur reluctantly agrees to the arrangement. Things get complicated when he then runs into the girl of his dreams: a spacey, tour guide named Margaret (Greta Gerwig, "No Strings Attached").
As the titular character, Brand is a mixed bag. While certainly capturing the mix of crassness and child-like innocence that made the original character so memorable, Brand lacks a decisively original interpretation for the character. Oftentimes, his performance seems far too reminiscent of Moore's boozy portrayal, particularly in the cadences of his drunken speech. Perhaps if Brand had been allowed to transcend the film's PG-13 level humor and incorporate more of his own highly risqu persona, he could have better made the role his own creation.
In her second gender-reversal role this year (she portrayed a female Prospero in Julie Taymor's recent "Tempest" film adaptation), Helen Mirren takes over John Gielgud's role as Arthur's no-nonsense nanny. Though Mirren brings a biting wit that punctures the film's more, her character often comes across as highly abrasive. This effectively robs any significant poignancy from the part of the film where the relationship between Arthur and her is explored.
The film's uninspired writing reaches its zenith, however, in its portrayal of the central romance. Though both Brand and Gerwig have been greatly appealing in other films, they lack any spark of chemistry as a screen couple. As such, their scenes together which are unfortunately plentiful drag the film to a snail's pace.
Although the revised "Arthur" is far from being a bad film, it nevertheless suffers from a similar, if more extreme malady: it's an incredibly forgettable film. It seems in reimagining the film for a new audience, the filmmakers forget an essential ingredient: actual imagination.
