Judging from the critical consensus about Arthur, you might want to tie one on in advance of seeing this apparently tepid remake. Currently rocking a 24 percent rating on Rotten Tomatoes, the Russell Brand-led film has the worst reviews of the weekend -- and that's saying something, considering Your Highness is busy getting batted around as well! Click ahead for the nine most scathing reviews of Arthur.
9. "There are two signs that the new Arthur is a badly slurring shadow of the 1981 mini-classic starring Dudley Moore. The first is a small but notable difference on the movie poster. On the original, the 'a' in Arthur is leaning precariously against the 'r,' as if recovering from a tough night out. The new logo is straight-ahead, boring, typical. The second and more crucial alteration is that this Arthur is missing a soul." -- Joe Neumaier, New York Daily News
8. "[T]here are no commercial breaks in Arthur (though they might have come as a welcome relief) and the action and narrative interplay are not strong enough to hold up the sheer weight of a film. Instead, there are sags so deep they would defy the scalpel of even Beverly Hills' plastic surgery best. Director of photography Uta Briesewitz, perhaps sensing a catastrophe in the making, tends to keep a distance from the proceedings. There are lots of wide shots, which dilute the emotional moments so necessary to balance Arthur's excessive debauchery, particularly in a modern day grown tired of substance-abuse-induced tabloid train wrecks." -- Betsy Sharkey, Los Angeles Times
7. "Remaking Arthur wasn't automatically a bad idea, and some of the dialogue in the almost completely rewritten script might be funny from someone mugging half as much as Brand. Unable to relax, Brand is unable to charm. Without coming near a ukulele, he manages to be as odious as his doppelganger, the '60s novelty singer Tiny Tim." -- Kyle Smith, New York Post
6. "Worse still, the remake sells out Arthur's blue-blood fiancee, who in the '81 version was a bright, attractive, good-natured young woman who became collateral damage in his pursuit of Liza Minnelli's working-class wisecracker. This Arthur cravenly turns Susan into a monstrous status-seeker, making her less of a human being and thus much easier for Arthur to trample over in securing a meaningful adult relationship. In a particular low point, Garner should have received hazard pay for a humiliating sequence in which she throws herself at him only to be unexpectedly diverted -- clang! -- when her metal bustier is drawn to the underside of his magnetically charged hoverbed." -- Scott Tobias, NPR
5. "Why?" -- Joanna Langfield, The Movie Minute
4. "Arthur is not a did-it-all-go-wrong calamity. Its basic design flaw is clear: Russell Brand doesn't have much talent for vulnerability. As Arthur Bach, perpetually sozzled heir of a dragon-lady businesswoman, he is presented as a poor little rich boy using booze as a shield against a life of alienation. This is a bit like casting Jason Statham as a sensitive Nobel Prize winner." -- Colin Covert, Minneapolis Star-Tribune
3. "Maybe the 1981 film isn't exactly a sacred cow, but from the temperance subplot that replaces the original's unrepentant celebration of Arthur's obliteration to the sh*tty up-tempo cover of Christopher Cross's karaoke classic "Arthur's Theme," this remake seems to exist only to zap the original of its minor pleasures." -- Karina Longworth, LA Weekly
2. "The whole enterprise reeks of desperation. This is [Jason] 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." -- Stephanie Zacharek, Movieline
1. "What is supposed to be Arthur's maturation is actually regression, as if he were trading in the whiskey bottle for the baby bottle. He rejects the corruptions of adulthood imposed by his ruthless mother and his sexually predatory fiancée in favor of a relationship characterized by unthreatening, childlike innocence. He and Naomi eat Pez candy on their first date and share their happy-ending kiss in a room full of kindergartners. Never have I needed a drink so badly." -- A.O. Scott, New York Times