Movies: 16445 | TV Series: 2353 | Added today: 22 | Storage: 56846 GB
|IMDB Rating:||5.5 out of 10 (5454 votes)|
|Arthur (iPod)||Resolution: 480x272 px||Total Size: 392 Mb||
|Arthur (HD)||Resolution: 852x480 px||Total Size: 803 Mb||
|Arthur (HD 1080)||Resolution: 1920x1080 px||Total Size: 8938 Mb|
|Arthur (HD 720)||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|
A drunken playboy stands to lose a wealthy inheritance when he falls for a woman his family doesnt like.
If Helen Mirren is on stage or in film, then it is well worth the scratch to go to see whatever it is she is in. Helen Mirren is simply a truly great actress and should never be missed in anything she does.
Ms. Mirren plays Prospera the female version of Shakespeares Prospero the true Duke of Milan who with his daughter is exiled to drift at sea for eternity, eventually they crash land on a mostly deserted island where they remain stranded for more than a decade. This action was done by his brother Antonio aided by the King. Ms Mirren as Prospera takes over this same role, the true Duchess of Milan. Prospero is a magician so, so is Prospera. Prospera obsesses and plans the retaking of her position in Milan giving her daughter Miranda to the spot of Duchess.
The film begins with the hurried upheaval of Prospera and her daughter. With the help of one of her aides, Prospera is secretly given food and water for survival along with her books and a magic staff for her craft before they are sent to sea adrift, left for dead. Later the day arrives when the King along with Antonio and others are sailing near the island where Prospera lays in wait. Prospera whips up a storm, her Tempest crashing the ship so that all survivors reach her shores where the bulk of the story is delivered.
The film. Director Julie Taymor strips and sculpts this version of the Tempest to its soft core but delivers the more important scenes from the play by William Shakespeare. This is not an insult or a too diluted version, just a more slender shape, a young womans shape if you will. Ms Taymor is known for her visuals and in The Tempest she is up for the challenge. Prosperas grotto is spare but eye appealing, furnished with burlap, a wizards laboratory and fractured dory used as a bed. Shakespeare was not much for production but was big on words and characters, as is this production. Taymor delivers a fast paced enactment and enchantment by some talented actors who deliver valid if not dull performances. David Strathairn is reunited with Ms. Mirren from their days of starring in Strindbergs Dance of Death with Sir Ian McKellen on Broadway. Here Mr. Strathairn, as the King, is out of his league with Shakespeares words as he was with Strindbergs in Dance of Death but he remains somewhat credible just the same. One of my favorite actors in American film, Chris Cooper as the evil Antonio, too is out of his depths and drags this work down unnecessarily delivering a mostly dead wood character. Russell Brand, comedian/singer/actor works well with the material as Trinculo working well with Alfred Molina who has the role Stephano. Molina works very hard here to keep up with the character and it shows. The love birds, Prosperas daughter Miranda played by Felicity Jones along with the Kings son Prince Ferdinand played by Reeve Carney are smooth and carry on with ease. Ariel, played by Ben Wishaw holds up well and with all the CGI that goes along with the character, he is the most fun.
One item that this version misses is the idea of one woman, Miranda a young woman who only knows her father, is involved in seeing only a mans world and how she could possible fit in it should she ever leave the Island the only home she has ever known. Having Helen Mirren as Prospero distorts the view of some of the language and story line.
This is a decent production for easily distracted American film goers to go see. The language is utterly Shakespearian and the production is simply modern and fantastically realized even if a little light.
Well, if you are a fan of a remake movie, you are gonna love this. Theeffort is exemplary and i could not ask for more.
I usually love American remakes because of its evident detailconcerning the plot works best the second time around, but giving theclassic comedy Authur! a try is something never seen before and handsoff to Hollywood for pulling that off.
The only problem with such a film would be as to how much detail canthey go into as not much is there. It is highly unlikely to drawaudience if the content is not substantial and relevant as many of youmight agree that the latest sequel to the Resident Evil series wasundesirable and off.
Well, it too soon to point that out but to what the trailers and thefirst episode looked like, i would suggest you to watch the thing assoon as you can because its awesome. The actors are good, the plot isgreat, the CGI is pretty cool and appears real, suspense and thrill isall over me, can't stop to watch next remale.
I am very glad I got to see Helen as Prospera. Just a wonderful movie visually and skillful working of the great English playwrite. The use of Lana'i here in Hawai'i (I was told) really brought home the magic aspect, as the 'aina here is sacred. Now, scarred in many places by the US occupation, but that's another story. Pity, I read several reviews that panned the movie. I believe they'd thought they came to see another Tron and got a serious adult play instead...a play with a lot of adult fun and sensibilities. Just loved the movie!!!!
I enjoyed this movie very much! Of course it is very difficult to topan original with a remake, this being said, I viewed it on opening daywith 11 friends, all of which had slightly different tastes in movies,and we all enjoyed it. The witty humorous lines that Russel Brand isable to bring to the table makes the movie very enjoyable. Hischemistry with the other actors is incredible, and he is truly "Theworlds only lovable billionaire" in this film. I am not usually a fanof Russel Brand, but this changed my opinion entirely. An awkward manhe may be, but he is able to stir up a laugh when needed, and jerk atear or two as well. If you enjoy actors like Adam Sandler, or if youenjoyed "Get Him to the Greek", or if you have a liking for wittylines, and use of vocabulary, I highly recommend "Arthur" This moviemade me laugh, cry, and really consider buying it as soon as it isreleased on DVD. 9/10 stars, for a wonderful movie!
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.
Last night, I went to see ARTHUR. Even though I'm normally stand-offishtowards remakes, I decided to give this one a chance. And I must admit,I was thoroughly entertained. Russell Brand's version of Arthur isplayed with a Michael Jackson-esque innocence that you don't see muchin movies anymore. And that's what we like about the character, he'schildish, irresponsible, but well-meaning to a fault. When he gets intotrouble and makes the difficult choice to grow up, you want to see himsucceed. In contrast, Helen Mirren (as Hobson) is the perfect foil-she's stern, sarcastic and doesn't put up with any of Arthur's antics.And even though Arthur's REAL mother is cold and distant, you can tellthat Hobson raised and loved him. Which only reinforces what I firstlearned in BATMAN BEGINS with Michael Caine's Alfred. Sometimes, thehired help are the actual parents of the rich and well-to-do children.And in ARTHUR, there is a real chemistry between Arthur and Hobson. Sothe movie is heartwarming and funny in equal doses, without beingcloying or contrived. One funny scene in particular (spoiler alert!)involves Brand, Garner and a bed. Overall, if you're looking for a fun,relaxing and entertaining show, please go and see the new ARTHUR. Ohand one other kudo, thank God the filmmakers had the good sense to havekids acting like kids!
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.
Hey kids when you do homework assignment make sure, you read the play and not see a movie. It discredits Shakespeare. This is Shakespeare's last play and don't let him down. This isn't Constantine. Movies have to use gender appropriateness wisely. Nothing against Helen...it just doesn't work. Sorry!
Having scene the original film and being a huge fan of Russel Brand, myheart was set on seeing this movie at the theatre. I wasn't quite surewhat I was going to be served going into this remake or if it wouldlive up to the original, but I wanted to give it the benefit of thedoubt. In all honesty, I was expecting them to make Arthur kind ofridiculous, look stupid, or just throw in the type of stupid comedythat many of the comedies are turning into these days. If I was judgingit based on some of the trailers, especially the "wash your winky"scene, then I shouldn't be far off right? Wrong! Instead while watchingthe film I was pleasantly surprised and even exited. I think thisremake did what any remake should do and give the story a new life andtake it above and beyond the original. There was many parts in theoriginal that skipped through scenes or ideas too fast, where in thisone they chose to deal with it (for example Arther's mother and hisalcoholism). Even Arthur's love interest is a lovable character thatdoesn't seem as needy or off track as the original character. It wascharming, witty and heartfelt. I think it even went to a deeper levelthen the original. At one moment I was even a bit teary-eyed. If youwant a movie that is funny, real and tells a great story definitely seeArthur.
Although this remake of Arthur, 30 years after the original came outplaced a lot more emphasis on physical comedy. That's more RussellBrand's shtick, but I think Dudley Moore did a whole lot more withArthur Bach using character development.
Regardless it's still the same futile drunken playboy who can't standon his own two feet. Filthy rich, but without any kind of skills tosurvive in the real world, Arthur just drifts night to night gettingstupidly drunk and causing all kinds of grief.
There's not much you can do with him and his widowed mother who lefthim in the care of nanny Helen Mirren has a plan to merge a pair offortunes. Nouveau rich Jennifer Garner and her father Nick Nolte who isa self made millionaire want a little of that respectability that oldmoney brings. In Europe you marry a title, in America you marry a Ford,a Rockefeller, or a Bach in this case.
The fly in the ointment is that Brand has fallen for middle class girlGreta Gerwig who wants to write children's stories. Whatever heart thatBrand's mother Geraldine James has and it ain't much, Brand is about tobreak.
Of course the big change in this version is Helen Mirren becoming ananny and taking the place of John Gielgud who won an Academy Award asHobson the butler. Sad to say I knew at least one Arthur in my own lifethough he was a gay version of the character. Whether you're raised bydistant parents or a hired nanny at some point in your life you have totake control. Nobody let's him grow up and sad to say that includes hisclosest confidante Mirren.
If you've seen the first version than you know what's going happen inthe film. This version of Arthur does have its merits, but I reallyrecommend seeing what Dudley Moore did with the part before judgingthis one.
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. =)
Arthur is a boozing, partying, carefree billionaire. With a nanny totuck him in at night, 950 billion dollars at his disposal, and the lawenforcement of Manhattan on his side what could go wrong? Russell Brandwas probably the best choice for this role. Even so, I was not over themoon about his performance. Anyone can be witty with scripted lines,but timing and delivery are what make the character truly funny andendearing. I'm not saying I didn't enjoy Brand, there was justsomething not quite right about his performance.
Arthur claims that having fun is his calling and he does it very well.He crashes a batmobile, destroys a beloved landmark, and thencelebrates when he finds that he's finally going to be put in jail. Ireally felt that I would be laughing a lot more during this movie.Someone behind me thought it was hilarious, but I did not share herfeelings on the matter. Admittedly, I laughed aloud a few times. Thereis a scene in a candy shop involving a gummy bear costume that isparticularly amusing, but overall the frequency with which Arthur comesup with on the spot witty remarks is a bit much. So the story goes thatArthur's mother ? who is only present in his life to control the fundsthat he has access to ? wants him to stop being such a buffoon and getit together so that he may run the Bach company someday. The companyhas never been run by anyone without the Bach name. If Arthur can't doit, then who? Enter the radiant Jennifer Garner. It is rare to seeJennifer Garner in a role where she isn't likable. Except, of course,Daredevil. But that wasn't her fault. The whole movie was a trainwreck. But I digress.
Garner plays Susan Johnson. Her intention is to marry Arthur so thatshe will have the Bach name and can take over the company for Arthur'smother. Arthur doesn't like Susan and ends up falling for Naomi (GretaGerwig). Naomi's down to earth factor is a little extreme. I canappreciate that she wants to be the girl who isn't wooed by money, butcome on. His gestures are grand and I think any girl in her place wouldprobably be thrilled to be doted upon in that way. Says the girl whohaggled the price of a bagel this morning. Fifty cents is fifty cents Itell ya!
A movie so centralized around spending money and drinking heavily is anindulgence in itself. So I take this movie at face value. I accepted itfor what it is, but I did not love it. The plot was often over the topand that wasn't so great, but it has a lot of heart.
Now, onto my two favorite parts of the movie: Helen Mirren and LuisGuzman. The hired help. Mirren as Hobson is charming, intelligent, andsophisticated to boot! She has been Arthur's nanny since he was indiapers. She gives the movie an entirely new level of likability. Ithink she does that with every film she touches though. Luis Guzmanplayed a smaller role, but lemme tell ya, that guy was hilarious! Heplays Bitterman the butler. I can honestly say that he got more laughsfrom me than Brand did.
To reiterate, Brand delivers a punchline well enough, Gerwig is atleast memorable, Garner is adorable even when she's evil, Guzman bringsthe funny, and Mirren is? well, Mirren. She is gorgeous and lovelydressed in frumpy garb and that is something that few can pull off.
I say, go ahead and see Arthur. It's good for a couple of laughs. Themovie's heart is in the right place and the message is actually areally great one. The delivery is just a little wacky. But hey,sometimes we all need a little bit of wacky in our lives.
- Ms. Silver Screen founder of mssilverscreen.com
This is my first review for IMDb so please excuse it if it is not whata typical film review is like.
Arthur is not a film with substance but it has a sparkle to it becausethere are real life lessons that can be drawn from it. It mirrors thelife of Russell Brand in some ways, who has himself lived quite a lifeand I admire him for being able to portray a likeness of himself in thefilm.
Helen Mirren and Greta Gerwig did well in the film. It is the firstfilm I have seen with Greta Gerwig who reminds me of the late BrittanyMurphy and it was a huge surprise to read her biography and discoverthat she is multi-talented.
The film has quite good punchlines and made me laugh. There were somecrass bits but they were excusable because they helped to bring out thestory. There were parts that were rather predictable but I enjoyed thefilm as a whole notwithstanding. I liked the way Russell Branddelivered his lines in his accent which was clearly distinguishablefrom Helen Mirren's despite both of them being English.
Just because you got together a bunch of decent English and American actors and made them recite Shakespeare on some desolate rock in the middle of the ocean, doesn't make it a great movie.
In fact, it's a real pain to watch, it's full of its own greatness and is a major waste of talent and everybody's time. There have been great intense adaptations of Shakespeare's plays that looked modern even with the antiquated language, but this one is just morbidly bad. People (who were fans of the play, btw) were leaving the theater in large packs after the first 10 minutes.
Who cares about the original, this movie can't even stand on it's ownfeet. The acting was no where near believable, Helen Mirren could noteven be believable and that is saying something. Her last scene waslaughable and it was suppose to be a serious moment in the movie.
The good reviews that you read here are obviously written by teenagegirls that have a crush on Russell Brand. I like him and think he is abreath of fresh air in Hollywood, but this was a bad movie in justabout every way.
If you just have to see it, do yourself a favor and wait for it to comeout on DVD...it will be just as meaningless on the small-screen.
Totally utterly mind numbingly awful.
Russell Brand is about as funny as a burning orphanage - quite why thisgangly, massive faced idiot is popular is frankly beyond belief. I amled to believe his fans like the way he speaks in that mockney poeticnonsensical kind of way believing he has some kind of intellect.
Well yes I can understand if he speaks fast enough and uses x number ofbig words he is seemingly intelligent to the average sheep.
The film is a remake of an 80s film and also stars the endless borethat is Helen Mirren. The second 'queen' of england has the ability inany interview to talk a glass eye to sleep. She outright dismisses theoriginal (normally the kiss of death) as 'boring' as alcoholism is nota funny subject. Anything is a funny subject - if its funny. Get itHelen? I seem to recall around the time the original was made MrsMirren was busy getting her kit off in every film she made so leave itout love.
Anyway stay well clear unless you are a fan of Brand in which case I amobviously a 'hater'. However the opinion of anyone who would use thatword wouldn't really matter to me anyway.
I found this movie to be appealing. It seems a lot of reviewers wentinto the theater already knowing they were not going to like this filmbecause they are fans of the original. Well then - why go at all? Youhave to approach this film as something new; then you will enjoy asimply entertaining film. Not a blockbuster; but entertaining. RusselBrand is very good, but I did find some of his lines hard to hearbecause they were very soft spoken. There are a number of funny, "underthe breath" comments that I think were missed by some in the audience.Helen Mirren was excellent. Jennifer Garner seemed out of place in thisfilm; she did not fit her role. I'm not familiar with Greta Gerwig'sother work. I thought she presented a new, fresh face among young.actresses. I look forward to seeing more from her.
I loved it. I thought it was funny and very entertaining. I laughed andI cried...Helen Mirren was great as the butler. Making the butler was agreat touch. They had tremendous chemistry together. I was not thrilledwith the choice for Naomi. I thought they should have had someonefunnier or at least better looking. Her outfits were ridiculous.Jennifer Garner cannot pull off a bad guy in a romantic comedy. It isnot in her range of acting. Russell Brand is great as Arthur. He is mynew favorite actor. He did a great job at the funny moment and thetouching ones too. I hope to see more of him in the future. I wouldrecommend this movie.
Was this remake horrible? No, but it also wasn't that great. In only acouple of scenes did this film lift itself above mediocrity. Incomparing this update to the 1981 version, the original is simplybetter on every point. Russell Brand is probably the best choice theycould make for the lead, but he doesn't measure up to Dudley Moore'sArthur. And the wonderful Helen Mirren does her best, but she justcan't match John Gielgud's witty portrayal of Hobson. The writing fellparticularly short of the mark. The one bright spot for me was GretaGerwig, whom I had not previously seen. She did a fine job of making athinly-written character become real. I look forward to seeing her inthe future.
This movie was unfunny from the very start. All the gags (Arthur'sBatmobile crashing into the famous Bull stature on Wall Street)wereforced and unrealistic (in the movie when they crashed they onlyknocked it off its foundation rather than be smashed and killed aswould happen in reality when they hit such an heavy object). There'salso a scene where somehow he manages to clear Grand Central Station ofevery single person so he can have a romantic dinner in the middle ofthe place for an hour.
Helen Mirren is completely wasted. She's a grand actress worthy of goodparts. In this movie is doesn't even have to act. She just has to lookstodgy, cold, and indifferent to Arthur's shenanigans. This part didnot require her to call upon here skills.
Greta Gerwig (who plays Arthur's girlfriend)is annoying in herrole...she can't act and she's not particularly good looking. She playsa person who dreams about writing children's books...and the one thatwe get treated to sounds really lame...but, of course, in this movie,it unrealistically becomes a best seller.
Most of the movie is predictable and trite. I don't recall much of theoriginal Arthur, but I do remember being more entertained with thatearlier version.