REVIEW: Unfunny Arthur Mistakes Aggressive Whimsy for Charm

Movieline Score: 4

arthur_rev_2.jpg

Arthur has his work cut out for him: He must find a way to wriggle out from beneath all these oppressive mother figures, so he can be fun-loving and happy with fun-loving and happy Naomi. But Brand's Arthur is so unbearable, the last thing you want is for him to find happiness -- that might only make him worse. Brand's aura of entitled insouciance worked beautifully in Get Him to the Greek and Forgetting Sarah Marshall -- he's great at playing the scrawny, spoiled rock star who begs for our adoration but doesn't want our love. But he's begging for that love in Arthur, and the effect is repellent. Brand himself doesn't seem comfortable with the whole thing: His jokes don't sail; they merely snap. He always looks aggravated and annoyed, even when he's supposedly in the throes of enchantment. He greets his ice-queen mother with the tepid line, "Hello, Vivienne -- I remember you from when I used to live in your womb." But deep down, they seem to be two of a kind. This Arthur is less a gentle, wounded soul than a petulant brat who insists on getting his way.

The whole enterprise reeks of desperation. This is Winer's feature debut (though he's previously directed numerous episodes of Modern Family), and he appears to have mistaken aggressive whimsy for charm. He also seems to fear that he'll lose the attention of a modern audience if he doesn't throw in the occasional frenetic chase scene, either on foot or by car. And there isn't a single actor here who doesn't look constrained, confused or frozen. Gerwig, especially, suffers: The picture's forced comic rhythms have her in a death grip, and for her interplanetary-travel style of timing to work, she needs to float free. Even Mirren looks exhausted, trudging through dreadful gags about how, as a child, Arthur became addicted to her breasts. She also falters when she's dressing down Arthur's lower-class pals. Gielgud could make this kind of cruelty funny; coming from Mirren, it has too much of an icy chill.

Some of the jokes in Arthur try to be pointed: At one point Vivienne dismissively refers to "the coffee-colored gentleman who runs this country." The line is supposed to tip us off to how clueless and racist she is (gosh -- d'ya think?), but in the context of the deadweight comic swill around it, it just comes off like a cheap shot.

With id-gone-wild movies like The Hangover, comedy has supposedly become more daring in recent years, more transgressive. But in reality -- or perhaps in the ways that really matter -- the parameters have become more constrained. The original Arthur is laced with jokes you couldn't do today: When Moore's Arthur listens to a prostitute's sad tale of how her mother died when she was seven and her father raped her when she was thirteen, he responds, in a sympathetic, well-meaning slur, "So you had six relatively good years, then?"

Oddly enough, the funniest, freest moment in this new Arthur comes when our sort-of hero makes an early, aborted attempt to attend an AA meeting (while wearing an unfunny phony beard, so no one will recognize him). As he listens to an attendee's heartfelt confession, his eyes grow bigger and wilder. He can't keep it in any longer: "This is like unhappy hour! This makes me want to drink more!" That joke is funny until, at the end of the movie, our permission to laugh at it is revoked. Talk about unhappy hour.

Pages: 1 2



Comments

  • SunnydaZe says:

    From the moment I saw Russell Brand dressed as Batman driving the Batmobile I knew this would suck. Actually, to be more specific, from the moment I saw Russell Brand as Arthur I knew this would suck.

  • Slugwriter says:

    When they announced that Russell Brand was going to play Arthur in the remake, I told myself, "Well, self, there's $50 we'll save."
    Now, had I re-wrote Arthur, I would've figure out 1. how NOT to get Russell Brand involved, and 2. figured out a clever way to merge the remake with another movie from the past, something like Arthur meets Nightshift maybe...
    It would've been brilliant. Instead this is the garbage we get.

  • Spencer Cain says:

    Maybe this new Arthur is just the beginning. Imagine how many other pictures can be remade — or, rather, be made safe — for the modern era: Scarlett, after her night of confused bliss with Rhett, hightails it over to a rape-crisis center. Lorelei Lee, having decided her obsession with diamonds is shallow and materialistic, adopts an African baby. Stanley Kowalski orders a copy of Rage: A Step-by-step Guide to Overcoming Explosive Anger from Amazon. The possibilities are endless.
    THIS PARAGRAPH WAS F*CKING AMAZING

  • Martini Shark says:

    Steph has nailed one of Hollywood's main problems with contemporary films: the promotion of anti-social acts while at the same time holding the over-riding need to be society's nanny. The original "Arthur" was an unapologetic drunk -- and I'm talking about the film, not the character. Now he's in AA; brilliant.
    This is the same studio mentality that feeds us the horrors of female exploitation while giving us new rom-coms that are all about casual sex; they call for edgier comedy and then blink when various groups are offended by the jokes; and they openly develop scripts around pot use but strain to keep cigarette smoking out of their storylines. It is like what happens when a hippie becomes a parent -- "Don't do drugs son, do you know where I left my bong?"

  • Remy says:

    I can't be bothered to check out the movie to find out, so I'll just ask: does the film explain why a billionaire's son speaks with a Cockney accent? Are his parents nouveaux riches?

  • j'accuse! says:

    This Arthur looks like a cocaine and opium...hangover. That good. Yeah.

  • The Winchester says:

    Should've known when they used the Batmobile from Schumacher's Batman films that this film would suck.