Dec 4 2008Let's Remake 'Arthur' Too

russell-brand.jpg

Speaking of remaking '80s movies with unbearable theme songs, British comedian Russell Brand is reportedly looking for writers to develop a new take on 1981's Arthur:

The British comedian is developing a remake of "Arthur," the 1981 comedy that starred Dudley Moore, for Warner Bros. as a potential starring vehicle.

Brand is meeting with scribes to write the screenplay, which will be produced by MBST's Larry Brezner, whose credits range from "Good Morning, Vietnam" to HBO's recent "Little Britain USA."

The original movie followed a boozy playboy rascal who is set to inherit a fortune if he marries an heiress his family thinks will make something out of him. However, he falls in love with a working-class woman and turns to his valet for help when his family makes him choose between money and love.

How is it everyone but the person remaking a movie realizes it's a terrible idea? Is this really what every person with money, celebrity, or some sort of media influence thinks when they finish watching a movie? "Hmm, that was pretty good, but I could have done it better. Let's give it another go, but with me. Arthur, only I'm Arthur." Meanwhile, some producer is, for whatever reason, watching Romancing the Stone and thinking, "It would be great if this exact same scenario were again played out but in a slightly more modern setting." That borders on deranged.

Russell Brand eyeing 'Arthur' redo [THR]

Reader Comments

Not that I haven't said it before, but... We are witnessing the death throes of cinema. Let's get on with it already.

I agree. Let's just make a remake of Breakin 2: Electric Boogaloo, except in this one the movie ends with all the major movie studios blowing up at the end. Best and most deserved ending ever. Except any studio handling Tom Cruise's next movie. They get blown up. Twice.

Watch: Michael Caine or Anthony Hopkins as Hobson. After all, they've both played butlers before.

"Arthur 2: On the Rocks" aired repeatedly on HBO when I was a kid, but I never realized what it's about until now.

His hair...

Who was it that defined insanity as performing the exact same action under the exact same conditions and expecting a different result? Works in politics and business, too.

LOL! Well, who better to play a boozy playboy rascal, than a boozy playboy rascal.

Hollywood is dead.

But who could they possibly cast that could capture all the acting brilliance and sex appeal of Liza Minnelli?!

I was thinking the same thing. Arthur was a great movie for it's time (for those of us old enough to actually remember it when it first came out), but a lot of that was due to the performances of the actors involved. I'm going to have to disagree with most of you and say that this might actually be a good idea. I think Russel Brand would be a perfect choice as a modern Arthur, but the casting of the Liza Minnelli character would be crucial. They'd also have to somehow avoid the cheap gags that ruin so many other modern films and assume that all audiences these days have the mentality of a twelve-year-old. I'm sure that I'm probably being overly optimistic and that they're going to end up making a complete disaster of it, but I'm going to remain curious about this one until I see a preview that ruins it for me. So there.

you're totally right that song is unbearable.
it's exactly the kind of music they play on my mother's (and every other mother in my country) radio. softy soft shit.

Come on, that song isn't unbearable. Sheesh. There's much much much worse.

Music is a highly subjective thing, but I really don't see how Arthur's Theme (written by Peter Allen, Burt Bacharach, Carol Bayer Sager, and Christopher Cross) is anywhere close to the worst theme song of the era. After all, it did win an ASCAP, Golden Globe, and Oscar!

My eight year old daughter was able to improve the lyrics though. "When you get lost between the moon and New York City; the best that you can do; the best that you can do; is keep calm."

As for the remake: if anybody was going to reprise Dudley Moore's role I guess Brand is a good choice. I just don't have much faith that they could do it any better. Moore was wonderful, Gielgud was hilarious (another Oscar) and the dialog was much better than what we've come to expect from current romantic comedy.

This is such a bad idea that I can't believe anyone involved has even spoken it aloud. Even if this clown could pull off a performance as good as Dudley Moore's who are they going to get to play Hobson?

I think he'd be good in it. However as a whole it's not a good idea @_@.

I usually don't wish people harm but if I found a genie right now this world would be short one Russell Brand. And I would have two burritos...cause wishes come in threes.

i don't know, I kinda like this guy.. so weird, he's very interesting O_o
I don't know if that's good but what the hell..

If this HAS to happen (and it doesn't), a better choice for Arthur: Dylan Moran.

This Russell Brand guy is a giant toolbox.

Post a Comment

Please keep your comments relevant to the post. Inappropriate or promotional comments may be removed. Email addresses are required to confirm comments but will never be displayed. To create a link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments.