Very very predictable, including the post credit scene !!!

The film makes a home in your brain and the only cure is to see it again.

A story that's too fascinating to pass by...

This is one of the best movies I’ve seen in a very long time. You have to go and see this on the big screen.

Russell Brand is a questionable character at the best of times, but here he follows in Ricky Gervais' footsteps by being another Brit given their crack at a Hollywood comedy.And it's a right mess, not a patch on the original. Brand and co try their best, but its a weak script, and Brand tries and fails to make anything out of it.The only plus points are Helen Mirren and Jennifer Garner.A dud comedy.

I'm unsure why Russell Brand was cast in this role, yes he's English but he's not the lovable character Dudley Moore manufactured in the original film, nor could I warm to him. The moment you see Duddly Moore in the original film his energy just pulls you in and you really want him to find love and happiness. I couldn't give two hoots about sleezy Russell Brand.The original film was beautifully crafted and each character played a part that screamed 'classic', John Gielgud steals many a scene with tremendous delivery and typically 'dry' British wit that ties the whole film into such a wonderful package.Sadly the sloppy false bravado that Russell Brand throws out makes him seem arrogant and unlikeable.This 'reboot' of a truly great film should be quickly forgotten and the smile return when you put the original DVD on.

The original Arthur came out in 1981 and starred Dudley Moore. Remember him? It was funny. It was poignant. It was believable in an "out of your own reach" sort of way. I walked out of the new Arthur after an hour, came home and immediately watched the Dudley version on Netflix's Instant Watch. It was as fun as I remembered it, even though rich then is so not rich now. Remember 1981, when there were only a handful of millionaires? Who knew? It really made me feel good about walking out and honoring the first version.The problem with the new Arthur is that Russell Brand is silly… but only silly. Doing a silly movie with a silly actor means it can be silly and still not be not funny or believable. Arthur is not funny, and it's an embarrassment to Helen Mirren, who should have run after reading page one of the script. She is such a great actor; what was she thinking? Much has changed in the thirty years since the original Arthur came out. Liza Minnelli has turned out in real life to be as crazy as she appeared to be in Arthur and The Sterile Cuckoo. She always made me so uncomfortable in those roles. I just knew it was the true her, and that she could not possibly have a great life. I was right, alas. But Arthur needs to play opposite someone as nutty as him in order to make it believable, and no one in the new Arthur comes close to really being his soul mate. Dudley Moore's real life had a sad ending; he was always just a bit embarrassed by his own lack of seriousness.So I have put to rest here the need to discuss the movie at all.It reminds us all that watching old versions of movies can be a fun thing to do on a Sunday afternoon. 'Night Dudley.

I have been a fan of Russel Brand for years, as a person and as an actor. I have loved every single film I've seen him in because they are great comical feel good films and this is no exception.Having not seen the original I have nothing to compare this too.Mr Brand plays a very witty, astute character who is made to grow up and become and adult. The humour in this film is first class, and some of jokes were very cleverly said, and would take someone with some degree of intelligence to understand.All in all he basically played himself, which is a great character. I would have no problem watching this film again, nor recommending it to others.