Posted 04.08.11 by reelz
Critical consensus on the Arthur remake is that it's OK, and Russell Brand is not leading man material.
"This Arthur is not as laugh-out-loud funny as the earlier one... But the dialogue is well-written — witty and quick and not clunky."
— Roger Ebert, Chicago Sun-Times
"...blobby and a bit of a mess but offers a fair number of laughs..."
— Michael Phillips, Chicago Tribune
"There are moments here that are genuinely funnier than the 1981 Dudley Moore original, but the movie as a whole is less cohesive and overly melodramatic."
— Luke Y. Thompson, E! Online
"One's enjoyment of Arthur — and its box office chances — may depend on a new audience having little if any knowledge of the earlier work. As a Russell Brand Show, fans and followers may enjoy his extravagant mugging and nuttiness. Those with any memory of 1981's Arthur will be severely disappointed."
— Kirk Honeycutt, Hollywood Reporter
"...insipid when it should be infectious..."
— Peter Travers, Rolling Stone
"...seems to exist only to zap the original of its minor pleasures."
— Karina Longworth, Village Voice