Arthur 2011 (2011) Other movies recommended for you
Arthur 2011(in Hollywood Movies) Arthur 2011 (2011) - Download Movie for mobile in best quality 3gp and mp4 format. Also stream Arthur 2011 on your mobile, tablets and ipads
Plot: Arthur is a rich, alcoholic playboy with no regards to his working life. After another drunken run-in with the law, his aloof mother has had enough and forces him to marry Susan, a proper business woman, or else he will lose his inheritance. Just as he's engaged to Susan, he meets Naomi, a free-spirited girl who Arthur thinks is perfect for him. Any attempts at holding down a job are fruitless, so Arthur has to decide, what is more important: love, or his mother's money. Runtime: 107 mins Release Date: 07 Apr 2011
Apparently this movie is not for everyone, it was however, for me.This movie is not going to change the way you live your life or love your family, but it achieved what it set out to do. It made me laugh. Not only was this movie incredibly funny, but I thought the cast was successful in creating likable characters with more depth than one would expect from this calibre of movie.I find most comedies of late fall apart in the latter half when jokes themselves are not enough, and the story has to actually advance some sort of plot. Interestingly enough in Arthur dealt with this nuisance <more>
excellently. The plot was wrapped up efficiently while still maintaining the high level of comedy as seen throughout the picture.
A funny, real, and heartfelt movie that goes above and beyond the original Arthur (by BreakawayDaily)
Having scene the original film and being a huge fan of Russel Brand, my heart was set on seeing this movie at the theatre. I wasn't quite sure what I was going to be served going into this remake or if it would live up to the original, but I wanted to give it the benefit of the doubt. In all honesty, I was expecting them to make Arthur kind of ridiculous, look stupid, or just throw in the type of stupid comedy that many of the comedies are turning into these days. If I was judging it based on some of the trailers, especially the "wash your winky" scene, then I shouldn't be <more>
far off right? Wrong! Instead while watching the film I was pleasantly surprised and even exited. I think this remake did what any remake should do and give the story a new life and take it above and beyond the original. There was many parts in the original that skipped through scenes or ideas too fast, where in this one they chose to deal with it for example Arther's mother and his alcoholism . Even Arthur's love interest is a lovable character that doesn't seem as needy or off track as the original character. It was charming, witty and heartfelt. I think it even went to a deeper level then the original. At one moment I was even a bit teary-eyed. If you want a movie that is funny, real and tells a great story definitely see Arthur.
Not really a spoiler, but was not sure.This movie had myself and the rest of the theater laughing their butts off through all but the last 15 minutes when something unfortunate happened. This movie blew by and kept me thrilled the whole way. I was surprised to see 2hrs had passed when it was over. Good Job Russel Brand and crew.I highly recommend going and seeing this movie if you like to laugh. I don't understand why everyone has rated it so low. I have never seen the original 1981 Version of the movie, but I don't want to after seeing the remake.
Another remake that you may or may not like (by rgkarim)
The second movie I saw today was none other than Russell Brand's Arthur, the remake about a millionaire with lots of toys and lots of empty glasses. When I first saw the trailer for this movie I rolled my eyes and thought, "Great date movie to have teens make out in." Fortunately I was wrong and instead was very pleased with the results I saw in this remake.Let's start with the positives: The first positive was how dynamic Russell Brand was in this movie. Up until now I had only seen Brand act as a wise cracking rabbit, a computer graphic dork, or an insane party boy that <more>
liked drugs, booze, or acted strange. In this movie he still had a lot of alcohol involved in his character and played the same part the same way we have seen him do a hundred times. However this time, we get to see Brand take on a character that is truly in love, which is quite often in this movie. The director of this film brilliantly integrated the drunk nature of Arthur with the true love side, which forced Brand to have to explore his acting dynamics in this film. I'm happy to say that he did this quite well and really made Arthur a believable human being. However, this movie would not be nearly half as good without the talents of Hellen Mirren and Greta Gerwig who played the nanny and love interest respectively. The group dynamics played between these three was fantastic and formed an interesting relationship. The constant struggle Arthur faced to listen to his heart and to his nanny, really made the situation seem real. Although it was a little extreme, the choice Arthur had to make is similar to the crucial decisions the typical human has to make. It's not always easy and there are times where you may think everyone else is correct, but in the end you have to figure out what is right. Thus, the characters were very believable. The acting was also great in this movie, which further added to the believability of this movie and made the movie feel real. It wasn't overacted as we have seen in a lot of recent romance and drama movies as of late, and it wasn't all about touching and caressing as Twilight constantly does. Another positive was the quirky nature of the dialog, the large quantity of one liners, and the constant spoutings of Mirren's character. Other positives about this movie were the fast pace of the movie, the dynamic toys and settings that Arthur dwelled in and the rest of the cast having great support.Weaknesses: Perhaps the biggest weakness of this movie is the predictability of the story. It's another romantic comedy where the protagonist pines after one girl and you can probably guess the ending. Other things that were not expected from the trailers were quickly predicted by the dialog and hints given by the scenes. Another weakness was the whole Garner drunk scene where her hammered nature had using sloppy, slutty dialog that reminds me a lot of some of my friends. It was really not my kind of comedy, and reminded me more of a big budget glee scene. However, others may like it. Other people may also get tired of the constant alcohol usage in the movie. It seems that the source of Arthur's comedy is being drunk and eventually it can get a little tiring, of seeing him stumble or sound like he is in ecstasy. Other than that there was little I could think of that really made this movie weak.To sum it all up, Arthur was a fun remake that I thoroughly enjoyed and laughed at. I felt the group dynamics were well played, the acting was for the most part solid, and the story was pretty well driven and fast enough to not bore you. There are a lot of one liners and alcohol humor and again depending on what makes you laugh and your tolerance for one liners you may or may not get annoyed. Overall I would probably give this movie an 8.5, but I'll give it a nine at most. Until next weekend enjoy and email me at [email protected]noke.edu to help me become a better editor.
I loved it. I thought it was funny and very entertaining. I laughed and I cried...Helen Mirren was great as the butler. Making the butler was a great touch. They had tremendous chemistry together. I was not thrilled with the choice for Naomi. I thought they should have had someone funnier or at least better looking. Her outfits were ridiculous. Jennifer Garner cannot pull off a bad guy in a romantic comedy. It is not in her range of acting. Russell Brand is great as Arthur. He is my new favorite actor. He did a great job at the funny moment and the touching ones too. I hope to see more of him <more>
After seeing this remake, I was interested in seeing the original. Just finished the original, and the remake is way better! Brand is a fantastic Arthur. Honestly, if I had seen the original before the remake, I probably wouldn't have seen the remake. My vote goes for the new and updated version. I can't remember a time I laughed so hard at the movies. A great way to spend an afternoon or an evening. The cast is amazing. Brand's childish outlook as Arthur is classic. A few similarities, and a few differences as far as the plot and starting story line, but all in all I would go see <more>
the movie again. Very rarely do I talk about buying a movie after walking out of the theater, but Arthur is a movie that will be in my collection when it comes out on DVD.
I thought this film was simply brilliant. The acting in it was great, the comedic timing perfect, the script well written, and the setting well shown. Yes, once again it is a movie set in New York, but there's a reason why they can't having them there. It's an amazing city. And this movie showcases that very well. I appreciated the range of humor they had in there as well. Some of it was raunchy, and then at other times it was mild and a relief from some of the over the top jokes. The climax was well done, humorous yet tasteful at the same time, and the conclusion was very <more>
appropriate. I heard some people complaining about how this movie was showcasing how rich people have it made and it wouldn't be received well today because of the economic climate. That was ridiculous. If anything, it shows how money really can't buy happiness, and that the most important thing in this world is that we have each other. Overall, very enjoyable film that one should go into with an open mind and just have a good time.
Arthur was a good movie, coming from someone who hasn't seen the original (by rob-a-mcclellan)
Let me start this off by saying that I have never seen the original Arthur. There is also no sense in me going over the plot or the differences between this and the original because that is covered in so many different reviews and I am guessing this isn't the only review that you will read. I am 29 years old and I wouldn't even consider myself a Russell Brand fan but after seeing this movie that is starting to change. I went into Arthur with an open mind. I did not have another movie to compare it to, since I didn't see the original, and I throughly enjoyed the movie. Russell <more>
Brand was OK in 'Forgetting Sarah Marshall' and I really didn't enjoy his movie "Get Him to the Greek" but Arthur was a different type of comedy compared to his typical work. The best thing I can compare this movie to is "The Wedding Singer". Not because of the plot or the actors but because "The Wedding Singer" put Adam Sandler in a slightly toned down more caring/romantic version of things had done before. There was less slap stick and I actually ended up liking Adam Sandler more because of it. The same can be said about Arthur. This isn't OVER THE TOP Russell Brand like most of his other movies. I wouldn't say it's 'down to earth' Russell Brand either, more like some place in between.Even if you have seen the original try to go to see this movie and not compare it to the original. It's the same as The Dark Knight vs Batman with Michael Keaton. Both were good movies but you couldn't really compare them. What surprised me at the end of the movie was my brother 32 years old saying he actually liked this better than the original, which he watched last weekend. He said the one liners were better and Russell Brand made a more convincing drunk. My guess is because Russell is probably always this drunk when he isn't filming movies!Arthur made me laugh out loud, which is something I typically don't do. The story was decent typical romantic comedy and even though the movie slowed down about 3/4 of the way in, it had to because of the story. Do yourself a favor and see this movie at some point. It doesn't have to be in the theater since there aren't any eye popping sound effects or state of the art 3D in it... though the city of New York was a GORGEOUS back drop Go see it. Turn your brain off for a bit and enjoy the movie for what it is. Don't compare it to the original but compare it to the other things Russell has done and you will see that he might actually have a great future at comedy ahead of him. Final Verdict: 8 out of 10
Helen Mirren, a smart script and nuanced direction make this a great remake (by Rick_Gershman)
I can't say I was particularly looking forward to the remake of Arthur. I'd seen the original on HBO at some point as a teen, and it didn't do much for me. I didn't understand the Oscar wins for John Gielgud Supporting Actor and Best Original Song win for Christopher Cross' "Arthur's Theme Best That You Can Do ." I never really got Liza Minnelli's appeal, either.The film fared considerably better when I watched it on Netflix Streaming earlier today. Gielgud's sandpaper dry wit impressed. Liza was more likable than I'd recalled. The song--well, <more>
I still hate the song. But the screenplay and direction by Steve Gordon is solid throughout, and Dudley Moore is perfect in the lead role.Which brings us to the new Arthur and the trepidation I felt even more strongly after watching the original. The commercials and trailers have focused on Russell Brand's Arthur as an even-more cartoony playboy than Moore's version, including over-the-top adventures such as dressing as Batman and driving around in the Batmobile. I've also never been completely sold on Brand, who at 6-2 stands about a full foot taller than did Moore. I've liked him in small portions, as in Forgetting Sarah Marshall, but found him a bit tiring in larger doses. The casting of Jennifer Garner--and her prominent billing on the poster--also seemed strange: This is the role of Susan, the bride in Arthur's arranged marriage, not the female lead. Instead, indie queen Greta Gerwig who is so "art house" she actually starred in a film entitled "Art House" would be playing the Liza Minnelli role Linda then, Naomi now of Arthur's working-class true love.Only the presence of Helen Mirren, taking over for Gielgud in the gender-switched role of Hobson, left me feeling much hope that the new Arthur wouldn't be a complete wreck.I was way off. This movie's actually quite good. And if you're factoring in it being a remake most suck and a romantic comedy most suck , the new Arthur is especially impressive. The commercials are doing it a disservice: The new Arthur is very funny throughout its running time, updates the story to modern-day sensibilities in an intelligent fashion, and manages to broaden and expand upon the more dramatic aspects of the original. In some ways, quite honestly, it's a better film. Hats off in particular to screenwriter Peter Baynham, who handled this tricky assignment with aplomb. His script actually is fairly reverent to the 30-year-old original, selectively using plot lines, scenes and even occasional dialogue where it fits. But he also brings the relationships and sexual/class politics into the 21st century, and finds an intelligent way to address the elephant in the room: in both films, Arthur is an alcoholic.The original film, for example, has Moore swigging from a bottle of rum in a paper bag while driving on the highway... without any consequences. His alcoholism is treated simply as an aspect of his immaturity. Brand's Arthur never drives drunk--his chauffeur, Bitterman Luis Guzman in the remake handles all the driving--but his drinking causes real consequences, and he's forced to address them.Does that sound too heavy for a romantic comedy? It doesn't play that way, thanks to Baynham's script, savvy performances by the leads, and nuanced direction by Jason Winer making his feature film debut . It's not surprising that Winer is the co-executive producer and a regular director of Modern Family, because Arthur replicates that show's mix of believable character interactions and laugh-out-loud humor.Anyone who's seen the original will know all the major plot points, because this truly is a remake in that sense. You reach the same destination, you just take a few different roads including a couple of gender twists .Arthur, an immature playboy who has never worked a day in his life, will be cut off from the family fortune--close to $1 billion--unless he marries Susan Garner , whose family ties can be beneficial to the corporation run by Arthur's mother father in the original . Unfortunately, Arthur has fallen in love with another: Naomi, who runs illegal albeit popular tours of Grand Central Station and other NYC landmarks. The casting is mostly on point. Mirren is pitch-perfect in the plum role of Hobson, giving the relationship with Arthur an intriguing maternal slant absent from the original. Gerwig finds just enough grit in her character to keep Naomi from becoming too pixie-like. And Garner fits perfectly in a role right in her range, providing the toughness and attitude the character of Susan desperately needed in the original.As for Brand... he's really not too bad. The comic scenes are his forte, of course, and he's a blast throughout those--funny, smart, charismatic, appealing. He's a bit less successful in the dramatic scenes, but still not too bad. We don't quite get a peek into the darkness we know is dwelling deep inside Arthur, but Brand certainly goes a few places he's never gone before and shows promise.A few small problems hurt the film. It runs a bit long at 110 minutes; an even 100 would have worked better, especially near the end. Those trims would have been welcome in a few scenes around the film's middle where Arthur tries his hand at gainful employment; they felt like studio-mandated bits of broad humor that don't play well with the drier wit and general smarts of the rest. Finally, Nick Nolte appears in a couple of scenes as Susan's tough-guy father, and he's frankly hard to understand.Despite those issues, the new Arthur really is a lot of fun. Compared to most romantic comedies, it's funnier, smarter, sharper and even occasionally touching, and Mirren's performance is worth at least an Oscar nomination of her own.