Monday Morning Talkback: Let's Hear About Arthur
Not that we here at Movieline expected much more from the Russell Brand-led remake of Arthur, but the film is being looked upon as a disappointment this morning after finishing a distant second at the box office. What happened? Pour yourself a Monday morning eye-opener, and click ahead to discuss Arthur around the virtual watercooler.
· Animated tales about jelly bean-pooping bunnies notwithstanding, can Russell Brand actually open a movie or is he doomed to drift through his Hollywood life as a second banana?
· Is Greta Gerwig too "kooky" to be a mainstream leading lady? Should she search out a Zooey Deschanel-like (500) Days of Summer-y script and try to thread the needle between indie goddess and romcom queen?
· Was Arthur sunk by the real world? With the economy still in dire straits, does the idea of watching the consequence-free lifestyle of a careless millionaire seem like bad taste?
· Did you feel that Jennifer Garner's character was too broadly drawn and too mean-spirited?
· How much did Universal opening Your Highness against Arthur hurt its box office performance?
· Was this simply a case of remaking a movie that didn't need to be remade in the first place?
The floor is yours, dear reader; let's get to the bottom of Arthur before last call.
Subscribe to the new Movieline on YouTube
Comments
1. I don't think Brand can open a movie, and as for Hop they could have cast anyone in the part of the rabbit and done the exact same business. His appeal is basically within Hollywood, who seem to love his "comedian acting like a 70s rock star" schtick, but it doesn't carry water with the great unwashed. They won't stop trying to cram him down the audience's throat though.
2. I think it might be a case of being in the wrong movie.
3. We were in a bad recession in 1981, and the original Arthur made money. Maybe because Dudley Moore was more likeable.
4. Probably, but from what I've seen all the characters seem that way.
5. Probably not as much as you'd think.
6. That pretty much sums it up very well. It wasn't broke, so they didn't need to "fix" it. The studio's reasoning was trying to find a vehicle for Brand, asked their execs what did they have that fit a Brit with the image of having no impulse control, someone piped up with "Arthur" and the rest is history.
I dunno....sometimes he just resembles Lon Chaney's 'Phantom' and it freaks me out...