Full Article Text
JANUARY 8, 2011
FRONT PAGE POLITICS BUSINESS MEDIA ENTERTAINMENT COMEDY SPORTS STYLE WORLD GREEN FOOD TRAVEL TECH
LIVING HEALTH DIVORCE ARTS BOOKS RELIGION IMPACT EDUCATION COLLEGE NY LA CHICAGO DENVER BLOGS
Michael Giltz
Freelance writer and raconteur
Posted: August 31, 2010 04:40 PM
BIO
Become a Fan
Get Email Alerts
Bloggers' Index
8
9
views
0
51Inspiring Funny Hot Scary Outrageous Amazing Weird CrazyA Toast to Dudley Moore's Arthur
What's Your Reaction:
Read More: Arthur , Dudley Moore , Helen Mirren , Liza Minnelli , Remake , Russell Brand , Entertainment News
I've been wary of the remake of the classic comedy
Arthur ever since it's been announced. And now that
I've read the comments of the artists involved in aNew York Times feature, I'm even more worried. They
don't seem to have a clue as to what Arthur was
about.
MOST POPULAR ON HUFFPOSTBIG NEWS: Bristol Palin | Celebrity Skin | Jersey Shore | Ellen Degeneres | Energy Debates | More...
LOG IN | SIGN UP
SHARE THIS STORY
Get Entertainment Alerts
Email Comments 51
Elizabeth Edwards' Will
Revealed
Comments (599)
Camille Grammer's Porn
Past Comes Back To Haunt
Her
Comments (969)
Thousands Of Birds Found
Dead In Italy
Comments (3,228)
Intestinal Parasites May Be
Causing Your Energy
Slump
Comments (175)
Should The Leader Of The
Free World Dress Like
THIS?
Comments (549)
What Not To Say When
Your Loved One Is Upset
Comments (259)
GOP Congresswoman
Caught In Sexually
Suggestive Photos
Comments (1,283)
Betty White: 'I'm Going
Away For A While'
Comments (605)
'Chupacabra' Mystery
Solved?
Comments (1,278)
SPOILER: If you've never seen the 1981 gem about a drunken playboy who finds true love, by all means
rent it now. It won an Oscar for the great John Gielgud, features Liza Minnelli in her best performance
outside of Cabaret and boasts one of the smartest screenplays around. The following comments detail the
plot at length and will spoil the film if you aren't familiar with it already.
Stars Russell Brand and Helen Mirren and director Jason Winer (of Modern Family success) -- not to
mention the article's author -- all seem to think that the original needs help if it's to be relevant, that
Dudley Moore's character is a drunk at the beginning and a drunk at the end, that Arthur doesn't grow or
change and that above all it celebrates wealth in a wallowing sort of Reagan-era manner. All of this is
patently wrong.
At the beginning of the film, Arthur is a spoiled, sad, lonely drunk who is too cowardly to stand up to his
father. By the end, he is happy, in love, an adult, sober (at least symbolically) and brave enough to toss
aside every penny of his wealth in order to be with the woman he loves. A child could detail the changes
in Arthur, even if Hobson didn't spell it out for us in a crucial scene. How could these artists miss that?
Helen Mirren -- a smart, wonderfully talented actor -- is playing Hobson, who in a clever and wise twist
has been changed from a butler to a nanny. That's the sort of change any remake should follow, since
there's no point in remaking a film without rethinking it. And a nanny is exactly what this pivotal
character is to Arthur.
But Mirren had this to say to the New York Times : "I just didn't think a film about a drunken small guy
was remotely funny. The reality about alcoholics is that they're boring and tedious, and I'd spent enough
nights in pubs with drunken boys to know it was not something I'd ever want to be caught up in. And Iparticularly objected to the way women were depicted -- which was something I felt about most movies I
saw back then -- as kind of slave-enablers."
The NYT article continues: "Mr. Winer shared some of Ms. Mirren's concerns. 'When I rewatched it, it
was as delightful as I'd remembered, but the character never grows. At the end Arthur is just as drunk as
he was at the beginning, and Liza Minnelli's character essentially steps into the role of caretaker.'"
Well Mirren's absolutely right in one respect. But the key word there is "reality." In real-life most drunks
are indeed tiresome and virtually none are remotely as funny as Moore in the movie. But this isn't real
life we're talking about. And movies have a long history of funny drunken scenes, from KatharineHepburn and Jimmy Stewart in The Philadelphia Story to Lee Marvin in Cat Ballou and about a million
other examples. (And what's with the "small guy" crack?) And has she never heard of W.C. Fields? Here'sMarvin stumbling in on a funeral.
So forget "reality" when it comes to romantic comedies about billionaires who marry waitresses. But look
closer to see how the movie views Arthur's drunkenness.
When is Arthur drunk? He's drunk at the beginning of the film and he's drunk when he's ashamed of
1 of 5
Dylan Ratigan
Free Market Fraud
Sen. Jon Tester
Tester Pushes to Reform Senate
Rules With Greater Transparency,
EfficiencyDON'T MISS HUFFPOST BLOGGERS
HOT TRENDS
TOP VIDEO PICKS
Kourtney K.'s Stunning
1 of 8
camille grammer lady
gaga natalie portman
pregnant raven
symone weight
loss snooki nude
More Celebrity News at People.com
More Celebrity News at Popeater.com
Ginnifer Goodwin Reacts to
Uproar over Her Weight
Watchers History
READ MORE
History Channel Won't
Show Katie Holmes
Miniseries The Kennedys
READ MORE
Lindsay Lohan's Post-
Rehab Gift: a $25,000
Necklace
READ MORE
Katie Holmes' New
'Kennedys' Miniseries:
Canceled!
Nick Lachey, Vanessa
Minnillo Cast on 'Hawaii
Five-O'
Salma Hayek's Red Bikini
Stands Out in St. Barts
himself -- notably he's drunk when he gets engaged to a woman he doesn't love, he's drunk when he tries
to apologize to the waitress he's abandoning and asks her to be his mistress and he's drunk on the day of
his arranged marriage. Arthur may be hilariously funny, but his drunkenness is always seen as anoutward sign of his sadness. For me, the most heartbreaking moment in the film is when Arthurdrunkenly tells his fiance not to romanticize his alcoholism. "Not everyone who drinks is a poet," says
Arthur. "Some of us drink because we're not poets."
When is Arthur sober? He's ALWAYS sober around Hobson, the one person at the beginning of the film
that he loves and respects. Arthur is sober when he first meets the love of his life, the shop-lifting Linda
Marolla. Arthur is sober when they go on dates together, to dinner and an arcade. Arthur is sober whenhe stands up to Hobson and defends Linda. Arthur is sober at his public engagement party to the blandSusan where he and Linda bond even more, despite believing their romance is over. And most
importantly, Arthur is sober when Hobson falls ill and Arthur steps into manhood to take care of him.
Arthur is sober when it counts.
Does the movie celebrate conspicuous consumption? Hardly. Arthur is a prince, in many ways, and Linda
is the commoner he whisks away to his castle. Yes, there are classic Hollywood films where the madcap
heiress or wealthy playboy gives up their money. But plenty more of them -- indeed most of them -- show
the commoner coming into that magical world of privilege...but only because they earn it by showing the
money doesn't matter to them. Often, they fall for a prince or millionaire who is in disguise as just an
average Joe.
When Linda first describes Arthur to her dad, she doesn't even think to mention that he's rich beyond
belief. A running joke is that her unemployed dad cares a lot more about the money than she does. When
Arthur tells Linda that he's engaged to another woman, the scene ends with Arthur sitting alone and sad
in his home. Then we cut to Linda's home...where she is comforting her weeping father. It's a clever wayof acknowledging the audience's desire for a life of ease and luxury without spoiling the romance.
Arthur -- out of guilt and a sincere desire to help -- later offers Linda a huge check. She throws it back in
his face. His drunkenness in this scene is a source of embarrassment and Linda even chides him for it. IsLinda a "slave-enabler," as Mirren puts it? I'd be hard-pressed to say how. Linda is a strong independent
woman who can take care of herself (and her father!), thank you very much.
Only two other women have roles of any note in the movie. Arthur's fiance is a bland, tiresome daddy's
girl -- and the film explicitly rejects her as a suitable woman for Arthur specifically because she is soweak. And then there's Arthur's grandmother, a strong-willed eccentric woman every bit as hard-nosed a
figure as the fiance's homicidal father, Burt Johnson. She's no one's pushover.
At the finale, far from wanting both money and love, Arthur specifically rejects his inheritance to break
off the wedding and marry Linda. She accepts him happily, believing they'll both be just regular working
people. In the final moments, when Arthur is on the steps of St. Patrick's Cathedral, he is sober, at least
symbolically. (The earlier scene of him being drunk at the church and finally passing out might have beenan hour or so ago.) Arthur rejects the money again and says goodbye to his grandmother and his
chauffeur. At the last moment, the grandmother insists he take the money back, Arthur goes over to talk
to her and we're genuinely uncertain of what is happening. Yes, he takes the money. He's not an idiot, asArthur says. But he and Linda go off to have a tuna fish sandwich rather than go sailing on thegrandmother's yacht.
In that final moment of true love and genuine maturity for Arthur, the idea that he's going to remain a
hopeless drunk and get tozzled four or five nights a week is simply ludicrous. He doesn't need to get
drunk anymore. He's happy. How anyone can fail to see that is beyond me.
The original movie was a fairy tale itself. It was the first film from writer-director Steve Gordon, after
years of decent work in TV. The movie was a left-field hit and Oscar winner, all of which Gordon was able
to enjoy to the fullest before dying suddenly of a heart attack the following year. I love the movie somuch I never went to see the sequel Arthur 2: Arthur On The Rocks, a 1988 film the late Gordon had
nothing to do with. Why spoil a wonderful movie with something like that? Plenty of movie characterscan be reborn from Robin Hood to Superman to Sherlock Holmes. But some are perfect just the way theyare.
I hope the artists behind the remake of Arthur somehow capture the sweet, endearing essence of the
original, even though they seem blind to its charms and the true message of the movie. They're too
talented (especially Mirren) not to give it a go. And clearly they must have liked it a little, or why remake
it? But me, I'm just glad it's coming out because I feel certain it means the original classic will finally be
released on DVD in a letterboxed format. Until then, you can (very rarely) find the letterboxed format onTCM or download the movie from iTunes. If you do, you'll enjoy one of the cleverest scripts in Hollywood
Bikini Bod
Jane Krakowski Reveals
Baby Bump
Bristol Palin's New RadioGig?
MOST DISCUSSED RIGHT NOW
HOT ON FACEBOOK
HOT ON TWITTER
Natalie
Portman
Television
Afghanistan
Iran
Foreclosures
Celebrity Skin
Twitter
Royalty
Extreme
WeatherHUFFPOST'S BIG NEWS PAGES
MORE BIG NEWS PAGES »Natalie Portman: I Was
'Barely Eating' During
'Black Swan'
420 Comments
PHOTOS: Ellen DeGeneres
& Portia de Rossi's Exotic
Vacation
201 Comments
Camille Grammer's Porn
Past Comes Back To
Haunt Her
965 Comments
PHOTOS: Olivia Wilde
Dons See-Through Bikini
100 Comments
PHOTOS: Natalie Portman
Reveals Engagement Ring
34 Comments
Ashton Kutcher: Training,
Paranoid About Real Life
'End Of Days'
904 Comments
Camille Grammer's
Porn Past Comes
Back To...
Olivia Wilde Dons
See-Through Bikini
(PHOTOS)
Raven-Symone
Shows Off Dramatic
Weight Loss,
Talks...
Natalie Portman: I
Was 'Barely Eating'
During...
Comments 51 Pending Comments 0View FAQhistory. And the drinks are on me.
*****
Thanks for reading. Michael Giltz is the cohost of Showbiz Sandbox, a weekly pop culture podcast that
reveals the industry take on entertainment news of the day and features top journalists and opinionmakers as guests. It's available free on iTunes. Visit Michael Giltz at his website and his daily blog.
Download his podcast of celebrity interviews and his radio show, also called Popsurfing and alsoavailable for free on iTunes. Link to him on Netflix and gain access to thousands of ratings and reviews.
Follow Michael Giltz on Twitter: www.twitter.com/michaelgiltz
Related News On Huffington Post:
10 Of The Bloodiest Bedtime Stories
Most modern versions would have you believe that a passing woodcutter
heard the little girl's cries and slashed open the wolf with his axe to...
Read more from Huffington Post bloggers:
Rabbi David Wolpe: The Game's Afoot Anew
Classic or modern, we love our detectives, and reading the best of them, from
Poirot and Wimsey in the last century to Harry Bosch and Harry Hole today, they
belong to us.
More in Entertainment...FOLLOW HUFFINGTON POST
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
31 Fans
45 Fans
13 Fans
25 Fans
65 FansWow, Mirren wishes to star in the 'Arthur' remake, because she thinks the original is pathetic? That's
pretty pathetic of HER. If she hated those guys, in all those pubs, she hung out in; what was SHE
doing there?
A toast to Michael Glitz for a well written post on the greatness of the original Arthur and the folly of
the impending remake. The fact that this remake is being made at all speaks volumes about thetimes we're living in. Every suggested story line change sounds like Tea-party think tank revisionism. The new philosophy is of the how life should be, as opposed to the how life is school of selfrighteous superiorit y. The producers of this remake seem to feel compelled to fix the perceived
failings of the original movie by retelling the story as though it was a promo for AlcoholicsAnonymous. Unfortunat ely the makers of this new Arthur fail to understand the beauty of the original
movie, which was it's no holds barred approach to finding the humor in adversity, being rich doesn'tmake life perfect in fact Arthur was an alcoholic, emotional cripple with perfect timing. The originalArthur was a love story where money was the villain and true love was the hero. The current
producers and actors attached (Mirren) to the new version of Arthur believe that the excess of the
original movie was unnecessar y. What they don't understand is that it served the original story
because it had a purpose, to teach us that redemption through true love and free will is possible. No
amount of pop psychoanal ysis and opinion from the re-makers of this new Arthur will change it's
inevitable outcome. They are playing with fire.
Why then are they remaking "Arthur" - it sounds like its premise will be utterly different - given their
contempt for the original, I can only guess they are "remaking" this so they can capitalize on thename of the original by calling it "Arthur" - when, in fact, it will not resemble it. It is a cynical movefrom what you are saying to bring in more viewers (money) to see the film.
If it wasn't to exploit the name, why then not give it a totally new title since it really is not a
remake?
And, yes, I found Helen M.'s crack about "small guy" really insulting -
I love "Arthur". It brings back so many great memories growing up as a kid. The Screenplay is
outstandin g. I really didn't appreciate these great actors like many others of the past when I was a
kid. I took for granted these great performanc e and quality films would always be around.
Christophe r Cross Arthur theme is still so powerful. They don't even make movie theme songs like
they use to. I rarely watch new films these days. I pretty much stick with the classics. Films likeArthur is the reason why.
If it is honesty Helen is looking for she should not be participat ing in the business of smoke and
mirrors.
Yes Helen we know drunks are tedious. Any more of your sagacious wisdom to share with us?
(What next a remake of Casablanca and your cast oh so cleverly in Claude Rain's role as Capitan.
Louis Renault?). the point? we like it, no we love it exactly the way it is.'
The movie is hilarious, Dudley was spot on for the part. Leave it alone.Recency | Popularity Page: 1 2 Next › Last » (2 total)
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
drxcreatures 10:30 PM on 9/26/2010
Permalink | Share it
Kenny Wolf 12:39 PM on 9/02/2010
Permalink | Share it
waitingforlifeafterbush 12:18 PM on 9/02/2010
Permalink | Share it
laland69 08:53 AM on 9/02/2010
Permalink | Share it
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jeffreygeez 08:37 AM on 9/02/2010
119 Fans
815 Fans
43 Fans
769 Fans
11 FansClassics cannot be remade, or rather should not. When they are it is not to improve the art form,
but to benefit financiall y from the controvers ey of an an attempt to redo something that most would
like to remember just the way it was and is..
Do yourself a favor: take a few minutes to enjoy Moore and his comedy soul mate, Peter Cook, in
one of their famous routines. Watch this, then move on to the "Frog and Peach." Would Monty
Python have been possible without the inspiratio n of Moore, Cook, and their Beyond the Fringe
mates?
http://www .youtube.c om/watch?v =z61e1Hv6g IQ
Russell Brand couldn't carry Dudley Moore's empty wineglass.
Another classic movie given a tiresome and mediocre rehash
Michael, great job! I was reading this with the same, edge-of-yo ur-seat enthusiasm I would have in
a great action film or suspense thriller. When I saw the NYT article a few days ago, I felt sorry for
all involved. I can't and don't want to believe that talented writers with original ideas no longer exist
in our world.
What's next? Jessica Alba in Sophie's Choice? Shia LaBeouf as Vito Corleone? "Imitation Of Life-
3D!"
I can't take it.
OUTSTANDIN G article Michale, one of your absolute best. And you are completely in the right light
with regards to the character of Arthur in the original movie. When he is and isn't drunk and what
the movie is all about.
I lost all hope for the remake when they announced it was Russel Brand. I really like his brand of
comedy and he has been pretty good in the few movies he's made, BUT he is playing Brand in allof the movies. It's hard if not almost impossible to separate Brand from his movie characters .
As him playing a newer version of Arthur I see a huge fail whether or not it makes money.
Helen Mirren will be the only saving grace of this movie which I won't bother to see anyway until it's
on cable.
Loved the original. I have no desire to see the remake. Some things are best left alone.Permalink | Share it
3fingerbrown 08:20 AM on 9/02/2010
Permalink | Share it
PresidentRobertBooth 04:53 PM on 9/01/2010
Permalink | Share it
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Sal Nunziato 04:06 PM on 9/01/2010
Permalink | Share it
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
LiberalBuzz 02:13 PM on 9/01/2010
Permalink | Share it
NRR 02:13 PM on 9/01/2010
Permalink | Share it
11 Fans
256 Fans
11 Fans
13 Fans
12 Fans
181 FansAh, there truly are no more original ideas in Hollywood!
And I used to love Mirren. Humpfff. Utter inanity to remake a movie that was such splendid fun -- I
saw it over and over -- because of the endearing, hilarious performanc e of Moore, and the
wonderful starchy butler (the brilliant Gielgud) and eccentric love interest (Minelli never againmanaged eccentric without being cloying). To criticize it for, and clean up, the ludicrous drunkenness would be remaking Pretty Woman and making her a secretary. It's the movies!! Find life lessonselsewhere.
Has anyone seen the trailers for the new Hawaii 5-O on tv? Eeesh. The original was not just
another cops and babes fest, it was ground-bre aking, for it's dark and odd tone, camera angles, the
way Jack Lord played McGarrett, the use of actual Hawaiians to play Hawaiians. It was a brooding
morality play in an era of happy endings. The new one looks like every other cops and babe fest on
tv. Couldn't they have thought up something new? That's why Mad Men and Breaking Bad are soremarkable : oirginals, not weak imitations .
Because of the new Hawaii 5-O, SPIKE TV has been playing a lot of the original series
episodes - great to watch if you can.
Yeah, I was goofing off before work, had it on the tv, inspired the comment. That
show still holds up.
Also, I keep imagining the fantasy Helen Mirren remake of Pretty Woman -- which,
really, I hated, it was so saccharine -- yeccchh. You just can't make everything PC.The alcohol, as the author of this blog so wisely pointed out, was a metaphor.
hmmm...Jac k Lord. One of my first tv crushes.
was and still is a fun movie. really miss dudley moore. too many good acotrs have gone. the theme
song by cross still gives me good memories of that time when i hear it.
What a treasure filled tribute to an American classic Michael. Thank you. Arthur is a movie I've
enjoyed countless times and own it, firts on VHS, now on DVD. ANYONE who hasn't seen it, must.It's a fulfilling , funny, rollercoas ter little journey with performanc es you don't often get the priveledge
of viewing. I think I need to see it again today. Maybe just for Hobson and Liza's dad. Smashinggreat time!!! And I always shed a tear of two over Hobson. Great, great, classic character.xbrooklyngrrl 02:07 PM on 9/01/2010
Permalink | Share it
ehorth 04:02 PM on 9/01/2010
Permalink | Share it
xbrooklyngrrl 04:46 PM on 9/01/2010
Permalink | Share it
waitingforlifeafterbush 12:27 PM on 9/02/2010
Permalink | Share it
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
napoleon68 12:48 PM on 9/01/2010
Permalink | Share it
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mary896 12:23 PM on 9/01/2010
Permalink | Share it
22 Fans
59 Fans
22 Fans
14 FansOutstandin g analysis in response to the clueless criticism. Why is she doing the remake? Clearly for
the same reason the studio is. Sad but true, they reveal themselves as that which they pseudo-int
ellectuall y criticized - though I wouldn't limit it to the Reagan era; the nineties had its share of
feeding at the trough, balanced budgets notwithsta nding.
Mirren's comments about the original betray her motivation and expose a thinly disguised attempt tojustify a remake. Maybe she believes what she is saying (actor's training?) or is in denial at whatdoing this film means she has become. Otherwise, I find it hard to believe that she is as unintelligent as her words would indicate.
Like you felt about the sequel, I feel about such remakes. Hollywood used to be creative at least.
I agree with a lot of what you say (and I have no interest in a new Arthur); however, I believe that
Arthur is drunk during his first date with Linda?
Nope. Good opportunit y for you to watch it again.
A drunk could never have shot the bear so accurately in that arcade game.
There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All
FRONT PAGE POLITICS BUSINESS MEDIA ENTERTAINMENT COMEDY SPORTS STYLE WORLD GREEN FOOD TRAVEL TECH
LIVING HEALTH DIVORCE ARTS BOOKS RELIGION IMPACT EDUCATION COLLEGE NY LA CHICAGO DENVER BLOGS
Advertise | Log In | Make HuffPost your Home Page | RSS | Careers | FAQ | Contact Us
User Agreement | Privacy | Comment Policy | About Us | Powered by Movable Type
Copyright © 2011 TheHuffingtonPost.com, Inc. | "The Huffington Post" is a registered trademark of TheHuffingtonPost.com, Inc. All rights reserved.
bicycsual 10:47 AM on 9/01/2010
Permalink | Share it
fightorleave2 10:37 AM on 9/01/2010
Permalink | Share it
bicycsual 10:50 AM on 9/01/2010
Permalink | Share it
Fletch17C 10:59 AM on 9/01/2010
Permalink | Share it
Page: 1 2 Next › Last » (2 total)
FRONT PAGE POLITICS BUSINESS MEDIA ENTERTAINMENT COMEDY SPORTS STYLE WORLD GREEN FOOD TRAVEL TECH
LIVING HEALTH DIVORCE ARTS BOOKS RELIGION IMPACT EDUCATION COLLEGE NY LA CHICAGO DENVER BLOGS
Michael Giltz
Freelance writer and raconteur
Posted: August 31, 2010 04:40 PM
BIO
Become a Fan
Get Email Alerts
Bloggers' Index
8
9
views
0
51Inspiring Funny Hot Scary Outrageous Amazing Weird CrazyA Toast to Dudley Moore's Arthur
What's Your Reaction:
Read More: Arthur , Dudley Moore , Helen Mirren , Liza Minnelli , Remake , Russell Brand , Entertainment News
I've been wary of the remake of the classic comedy
Arthur ever since it's been announced. And now that
I've read the comments of the artists involved in aNew York Times feature, I'm even more worried. They
don't seem to have a clue as to what Arthur was
about.
MOST POPULAR ON HUFFPOSTBIG NEWS: Bristol Palin | Celebrity Skin | Jersey Shore | Ellen Degeneres | Energy Debates | More...
LOG IN | SIGN UP
SHARE THIS STORY
Get Entertainment Alerts
Email Comments 51
Elizabeth Edwards' Will
Revealed
Comments (599)
Camille Grammer's Porn
Past Comes Back To Haunt
Her
Comments (969)
Thousands Of Birds Found
Dead In Italy
Comments (3,228)
Intestinal Parasites May Be
Causing Your Energy
Slump
Comments (175)
Should The Leader Of The
Free World Dress Like
THIS?
Comments (549)
What Not To Say When
Your Loved One Is Upset
Comments (259)
GOP Congresswoman
Caught In Sexually
Suggestive Photos
Comments (1,283)
Betty White: 'I'm Going
Away For A While'
Comments (605)
'Chupacabra' Mystery
Solved?
Comments (1,278)
SPOILER: If you've never seen the 1981 gem about a drunken playboy who finds true love, by all means
rent it now. It won an Oscar for the great John Gielgud, features Liza Minnelli in her best performance
outside of Cabaret and boasts one of the smartest screenplays around. The following comments detail the
plot at length and will spoil the film if you aren't familiar with it already.
Stars Russell Brand and Helen Mirren and director Jason Winer (of Modern Family success) -- not to
mention the article's author -- all seem to think that the original needs help if it's to be relevant, that
Dudley Moore's character is a drunk at the beginning and a drunk at the end, that Arthur doesn't grow or
change and that above all it celebrates wealth in a wallowing sort of Reagan-era manner. All of this is
patently wrong.
At the beginning of the film, Arthur is a spoiled, sad, lonely drunk who is too cowardly to stand up to his
father. By the end, he is happy, in love, an adult, sober (at least symbolically) and brave enough to toss
aside every penny of his wealth in order to be with the woman he loves. A child could detail the changes
in Arthur, even if Hobson didn't spell it out for us in a crucial scene. How could these artists miss that?
Helen Mirren -- a smart, wonderfully talented actor -- is playing Hobson, who in a clever and wise twist
has been changed from a butler to a nanny. That's the sort of change any remake should follow, since
there's no point in remaking a film without rethinking it. And a nanny is exactly what this pivotal
character is to Arthur.
But Mirren had this to say to the New York Times : "I just didn't think a film about a drunken small guy
was remotely funny. The reality about alcoholics is that they're boring and tedious, and I'd spent enough
nights in pubs with drunken boys to know it was not something I'd ever want to be caught up in. And Iparticularly objected to the way women were depicted -- which was something I felt about most movies I
saw back then -- as kind of slave-enablers."
The NYT article continues: "Mr. Winer shared some of Ms. Mirren's concerns. 'When I rewatched it, it
was as delightful as I'd remembered, but the character never grows. At the end Arthur is just as drunk as
he was at the beginning, and Liza Minnelli's character essentially steps into the role of caretaker.'"
Well Mirren's absolutely right in one respect. But the key word there is "reality." In real-life most drunks
are indeed tiresome and virtually none are remotely as funny as Moore in the movie. But this isn't real
life we're talking about. And movies have a long history of funny drunken scenes, from KatharineHepburn and Jimmy Stewart in The Philadelphia Story to Lee Marvin in Cat Ballou and about a million
other examples. (And what's with the "small guy" crack?) And has she never heard of W.C. Fields? Here'sMarvin stumbling in on a funeral.
So forget "reality" when it comes to romantic comedies about billionaires who marry waitresses. But look
closer to see how the movie views Arthur's drunkenness.
When is Arthur drunk? He's drunk at the beginning of the film and he's drunk when he's ashamed of
1 of 5
Dylan Ratigan
Free Market Fraud
Sen. Jon Tester
Tester Pushes to Reform Senate
Rules With Greater Transparency,
EfficiencyDON'T MISS HUFFPOST BLOGGERS
HOT TRENDS
TOP VIDEO PICKS
Kourtney K.'s Stunning
1 of 8
camille grammer lady
gaga natalie portman
pregnant raven
symone weight
loss snooki nude
More Celebrity News at People.com
More Celebrity News at Popeater.com
Ginnifer Goodwin Reacts to
Uproar over Her Weight
Watchers History
READ MORE
History Channel Won't
Show Katie Holmes
Miniseries The Kennedys
READ MORE
Lindsay Lohan's Post-
Rehab Gift: a $25,000
Necklace
READ MORE
Katie Holmes' New
'Kennedys' Miniseries:
Canceled!
Nick Lachey, Vanessa
Minnillo Cast on 'Hawaii
Five-O'
Salma Hayek's Red Bikini
Stands Out in St. Barts
himself -- notably he's drunk when he gets engaged to a woman he doesn't love, he's drunk when he tries
to apologize to the waitress he's abandoning and asks her to be his mistress and he's drunk on the day of
his arranged marriage. Arthur may be hilariously funny, but his drunkenness is always seen as anoutward sign of his sadness. For me, the most heartbreaking moment in the film is when Arthurdrunkenly tells his fiance not to romanticize his alcoholism. "Not everyone who drinks is a poet," says
Arthur. "Some of us drink because we're not poets."
When is Arthur sober? He's ALWAYS sober around Hobson, the one person at the beginning of the film
that he loves and respects. Arthur is sober when he first meets the love of his life, the shop-lifting Linda
Marolla. Arthur is sober when they go on dates together, to dinner and an arcade. Arthur is sober whenhe stands up to Hobson and defends Linda. Arthur is sober at his public engagement party to the blandSusan where he and Linda bond even more, despite believing their romance is over. And most
importantly, Arthur is sober when Hobson falls ill and Arthur steps into manhood to take care of him.
Arthur is sober when it counts.
Does the movie celebrate conspicuous consumption? Hardly. Arthur is a prince, in many ways, and Linda
is the commoner he whisks away to his castle. Yes, there are classic Hollywood films where the madcap
heiress or wealthy playboy gives up their money. But plenty more of them -- indeed most of them -- show
the commoner coming into that magical world of privilege...but only because they earn it by showing the
money doesn't matter to them. Often, they fall for a prince or millionaire who is in disguise as just an
average Joe.
When Linda first describes Arthur to her dad, she doesn't even think to mention that he's rich beyond
belief. A running joke is that her unemployed dad cares a lot more about the money than she does. When
Arthur tells Linda that he's engaged to another woman, the scene ends with Arthur sitting alone and sad
in his home. Then we cut to Linda's home...where she is comforting her weeping father. It's a clever wayof acknowledging the audience's desire for a life of ease and luxury without spoiling the romance.
Arthur -- out of guilt and a sincere desire to help -- later offers Linda a huge check. She throws it back in
his face. His drunkenness in this scene is a source of embarrassment and Linda even chides him for it. IsLinda a "slave-enabler," as Mirren puts it? I'd be hard-pressed to say how. Linda is a strong independent
woman who can take care of herself (and her father!), thank you very much.
Only two other women have roles of any note in the movie. Arthur's fiance is a bland, tiresome daddy's
girl -- and the film explicitly rejects her as a suitable woman for Arthur specifically because she is soweak. And then there's Arthur's grandmother, a strong-willed eccentric woman every bit as hard-nosed a
figure as the fiance's homicidal father, Burt Johnson. She's no one's pushover.
At the finale, far from wanting both money and love, Arthur specifically rejects his inheritance to break
off the wedding and marry Linda. She accepts him happily, believing they'll both be just regular working
people. In the final moments, when Arthur is on the steps of St. Patrick's Cathedral, he is sober, at least
symbolically. (The earlier scene of him being drunk at the church and finally passing out might have beenan hour or so ago.) Arthur rejects the money again and says goodbye to his grandmother and his
chauffeur. At the last moment, the grandmother insists he take the money back, Arthur goes over to talk
to her and we're genuinely uncertain of what is happening. Yes, he takes the money. He's not an idiot, asArthur says. But he and Linda go off to have a tuna fish sandwich rather than go sailing on thegrandmother's yacht.
In that final moment of true love and genuine maturity for Arthur, the idea that he's going to remain a
hopeless drunk and get tozzled four or five nights a week is simply ludicrous. He doesn't need to get
drunk anymore. He's happy. How anyone can fail to see that is beyond me.
The original movie was a fairy tale itself. It was the first film from writer-director Steve Gordon, after
years of decent work in TV. The movie was a left-field hit and Oscar winner, all of which Gordon was able
to enjoy to the fullest before dying suddenly of a heart attack the following year. I love the movie somuch I never went to see the sequel Arthur 2: Arthur On The Rocks, a 1988 film the late Gordon had
nothing to do with. Why spoil a wonderful movie with something like that? Plenty of movie characterscan be reborn from Robin Hood to Superman to Sherlock Holmes. But some are perfect just the way theyare.
I hope the artists behind the remake of Arthur somehow capture the sweet, endearing essence of the
original, even though they seem blind to its charms and the true message of the movie. They're too
talented (especially Mirren) not to give it a go. And clearly they must have liked it a little, or why remake
it? But me, I'm just glad it's coming out because I feel certain it means the original classic will finally be
released on DVD in a letterboxed format. Until then, you can (very rarely) find the letterboxed format onTCM or download the movie from iTunes. If you do, you'll enjoy one of the cleverest scripts in Hollywood
Bikini Bod
Jane Krakowski Reveals
Baby Bump
Bristol Palin's New RadioGig?
MOST DISCUSSED RIGHT NOW
HOT ON FACEBOOK
HOT ON TWITTER
Natalie
Portman
Television
Afghanistan
Iran
Foreclosures
Celebrity Skin
Royalty
Extreme
WeatherHUFFPOST'S BIG NEWS PAGES
MORE BIG NEWS PAGES »Natalie Portman: I Was
'Barely Eating' During
'Black Swan'
420 Comments
PHOTOS: Ellen DeGeneres
& Portia de Rossi's Exotic
Vacation
201 Comments
Camille Grammer's Porn
Past Comes Back To
Haunt Her
965 Comments
PHOTOS: Olivia Wilde
Dons See-Through Bikini
100 Comments
PHOTOS: Natalie Portman
Reveals Engagement Ring
34 Comments
Ashton Kutcher: Training,
Paranoid About Real Life
'End Of Days'
904 Comments
Camille Grammer's
Porn Past Comes
Back To...
Olivia Wilde Dons
See-Through Bikini
(PHOTOS)
Raven-Symone
Shows Off Dramatic
Weight Loss,
Talks...
Natalie Portman: I
Was 'Barely Eating'
During...
Comments 51 Pending Comments 0View FAQhistory. And the drinks are on me.
*****
Thanks for reading. Michael Giltz is the cohost of Showbiz Sandbox, a weekly pop culture podcast that
reveals the industry take on entertainment news of the day and features top journalists and opinionmakers as guests. It's available free on iTunes. Visit Michael Giltz at his website and his daily blog.
Download his podcast of celebrity interviews and his radio show, also called Popsurfing and alsoavailable for free on iTunes. Link to him on Netflix and gain access to thousands of ratings and reviews.
Follow Michael Giltz on Twitter: www.twitter.com/michaelgiltz
Related News On Huffington Post:
10 Of The Bloodiest Bedtime Stories
Most modern versions would have you believe that a passing woodcutter
heard the little girl's cries and slashed open the wolf with his axe to...
Read more from Huffington Post bloggers:
Rabbi David Wolpe: The Game's Afoot Anew
Classic or modern, we love our detectives, and reading the best of them, from
Poirot and Wimsey in the last century to Harry Bosch and Harry Hole today, they
belong to us.
More in Entertainment...FOLLOW HUFFINGTON POST
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
31 Fans
45 Fans
13 Fans
25 Fans
65 FansWow, Mirren wishes to star in the 'Arthur' remake, because she thinks the original is pathetic? That's
pretty pathetic of HER. If she hated those guys, in all those pubs, she hung out in; what was SHE
doing there?
A toast to Michael Glitz for a well written post on the greatness of the original Arthur and the folly of
the impending remake. The fact that this remake is being made at all speaks volumes about thetimes we're living in. Every suggested story line change sounds like Tea-party think tank revisionism. The new philosophy is of the how life should be, as opposed to the how life is school of selfrighteous superiorit y. The producers of this remake seem to feel compelled to fix the perceived
failings of the original movie by retelling the story as though it was a promo for AlcoholicsAnonymous. Unfortunat ely the makers of this new Arthur fail to understand the beauty of the original
movie, which was it's no holds barred approach to finding the humor in adversity, being rich doesn'tmake life perfect in fact Arthur was an alcoholic, emotional cripple with perfect timing. The originalArthur was a love story where money was the villain and true love was the hero. The current
producers and actors attached (Mirren) to the new version of Arthur believe that the excess of the
original movie was unnecessar y. What they don't understand is that it served the original story
because it had a purpose, to teach us that redemption through true love and free will is possible. No
amount of pop psychoanal ysis and opinion from the re-makers of this new Arthur will change it's
inevitable outcome. They are playing with fire.
Why then are they remaking "Arthur" - it sounds like its premise will be utterly different - given their
contempt for the original, I can only guess they are "remaking" this so they can capitalize on thename of the original by calling it "Arthur" - when, in fact, it will not resemble it. It is a cynical movefrom what you are saying to bring in more viewers (money) to see the film.
If it wasn't to exploit the name, why then not give it a totally new title since it really is not a
remake?
And, yes, I found Helen M.'s crack about "small guy" really insulting -
I love "Arthur". It brings back so many great memories growing up as a kid. The Screenplay is
outstandin g. I really didn't appreciate these great actors like many others of the past when I was a
kid. I took for granted these great performanc e and quality films would always be around.
Christophe r Cross Arthur theme is still so powerful. They don't even make movie theme songs like
they use to. I rarely watch new films these days. I pretty much stick with the classics. Films likeArthur is the reason why.
If it is honesty Helen is looking for she should not be participat ing in the business of smoke and
mirrors.
Yes Helen we know drunks are tedious. Any more of your sagacious wisdom to share with us?
(What next a remake of Casablanca and your cast oh so cleverly in Claude Rain's role as Capitan.
Louis Renault?). the point? we like it, no we love it exactly the way it is.'
The movie is hilarious, Dudley was spot on for the part. Leave it alone.Recency | Popularity Page: 1 2 Next › Last » (2 total)
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
drxcreatures 10:30 PM on 9/26/2010
Permalink | Share it
Kenny Wolf 12:39 PM on 9/02/2010
Permalink | Share it
waitingforlifeafterbush 12:18 PM on 9/02/2010
Permalink | Share it
laland69 08:53 AM on 9/02/2010
Permalink | Share it
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jeffreygeez 08:37 AM on 9/02/2010
119 Fans
815 Fans
43 Fans
769 Fans
11 FansClassics cannot be remade, or rather should not. When they are it is not to improve the art form,
but to benefit financiall y from the controvers ey of an an attempt to redo something that most would
like to remember just the way it was and is..
Do yourself a favor: take a few minutes to enjoy Moore and his comedy soul mate, Peter Cook, in
one of their famous routines. Watch this, then move on to the "Frog and Peach." Would Monty
Python have been possible without the inspiratio n of Moore, Cook, and their Beyond the Fringe
mates?
http://www .youtube.c om/watch?v =z61e1Hv6g IQ
Russell Brand couldn't carry Dudley Moore's empty wineglass.
Another classic movie given a tiresome and mediocre rehash
Michael, great job! I was reading this with the same, edge-of-yo ur-seat enthusiasm I would have in
a great action film or suspense thriller. When I saw the NYT article a few days ago, I felt sorry for
all involved. I can't and don't want to believe that talented writers with original ideas no longer exist
in our world.
What's next? Jessica Alba in Sophie's Choice? Shia LaBeouf as Vito Corleone? "Imitation Of Life-
3D!"
I can't take it.
OUTSTANDIN G article Michale, one of your absolute best. And you are completely in the right light
with regards to the character of Arthur in the original movie. When he is and isn't drunk and what
the movie is all about.
I lost all hope for the remake when they announced it was Russel Brand. I really like his brand of
comedy and he has been pretty good in the few movies he's made, BUT he is playing Brand in allof the movies. It's hard if not almost impossible to separate Brand from his movie characters .
As him playing a newer version of Arthur I see a huge fail whether or not it makes money.
Helen Mirren will be the only saving grace of this movie which I won't bother to see anyway until it's
on cable.
Loved the original. I have no desire to see the remake. Some things are best left alone.Permalink | Share it
3fingerbrown 08:20 AM on 9/02/2010
Permalink | Share it
PresidentRobertBooth 04:53 PM on 9/01/2010
Permalink | Share it
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Sal Nunziato 04:06 PM on 9/01/2010
Permalink | Share it
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
LiberalBuzz 02:13 PM on 9/01/2010
Permalink | Share it
NRR 02:13 PM on 9/01/2010
Permalink | Share it
11 Fans
256 Fans
11 Fans
13 Fans
12 Fans
181 FansAh, there truly are no more original ideas in Hollywood!
And I used to love Mirren. Humpfff. Utter inanity to remake a movie that was such splendid fun -- I
saw it over and over -- because of the endearing, hilarious performanc e of Moore, and the
wonderful starchy butler (the brilliant Gielgud) and eccentric love interest (Minelli never againmanaged eccentric without being cloying). To criticize it for, and clean up, the ludicrous drunkenness would be remaking Pretty Woman and making her a secretary. It's the movies!! Find life lessonselsewhere.
Has anyone seen the trailers for the new Hawaii 5-O on tv? Eeesh. The original was not just
another cops and babes fest, it was ground-bre aking, for it's dark and odd tone, camera angles, the
way Jack Lord played McGarrett, the use of actual Hawaiians to play Hawaiians. It was a brooding
morality play in an era of happy endings. The new one looks like every other cops and babe fest on
tv. Couldn't they have thought up something new? That's why Mad Men and Breaking Bad are soremarkable : oirginals, not weak imitations .
Because of the new Hawaii 5-O, SPIKE TV has been playing a lot of the original series
episodes - great to watch if you can.
Yeah, I was goofing off before work, had it on the tv, inspired the comment. That
show still holds up.
Also, I keep imagining the fantasy Helen Mirren remake of Pretty Woman -- which,
really, I hated, it was so saccharine -- yeccchh. You just can't make everything PC.The alcohol, as the author of this blog so wisely pointed out, was a metaphor.
hmmm...Jac k Lord. One of my first tv crushes.
was and still is a fun movie. really miss dudley moore. too many good acotrs have gone. the theme
song by cross still gives me good memories of that time when i hear it.
What a treasure filled tribute to an American classic Michael. Thank you. Arthur is a movie I've
enjoyed countless times and own it, firts on VHS, now on DVD. ANYONE who hasn't seen it, must.It's a fulfilling , funny, rollercoas ter little journey with performanc es you don't often get the priveledge
of viewing. I think I need to see it again today. Maybe just for Hobson and Liza's dad. Smashinggreat time!!! And I always shed a tear of two over Hobson. Great, great, classic character.xbrooklyngrrl 02:07 PM on 9/01/2010
Permalink | Share it
ehorth 04:02 PM on 9/01/2010
Permalink | Share it
xbrooklyngrrl 04:46 PM on 9/01/2010
Permalink | Share it
waitingforlifeafterbush 12:27 PM on 9/02/2010
Permalink | Share it
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
napoleon68 12:48 PM on 9/01/2010
Permalink | Share it
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mary896 12:23 PM on 9/01/2010
Permalink | Share it
22 Fans
59 Fans
22 Fans
14 FansOutstandin g analysis in response to the clueless criticism. Why is she doing the remake? Clearly for
the same reason the studio is. Sad but true, they reveal themselves as that which they pseudo-int
ellectuall y criticized - though I wouldn't limit it to the Reagan era; the nineties had its share of
feeding at the trough, balanced budgets notwithsta nding.
Mirren's comments about the original betray her motivation and expose a thinly disguised attempt tojustify a remake. Maybe she believes what she is saying (actor's training?) or is in denial at whatdoing this film means she has become. Otherwise, I find it hard to believe that she is as unintelligent as her words would indicate.
Like you felt about the sequel, I feel about such remakes. Hollywood used to be creative at least.
I agree with a lot of what you say (and I have no interest in a new Arthur); however, I believe that
Arthur is drunk during his first date with Linda?
Nope. Good opportunit y for you to watch it again.
A drunk could never have shot the bear so accurately in that arcade game.
There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All
FRONT PAGE POLITICS BUSINESS MEDIA ENTERTAINMENT COMEDY SPORTS STYLE WORLD GREEN FOOD TRAVEL TECH
LIVING HEALTH DIVORCE ARTS BOOKS RELIGION IMPACT EDUCATION COLLEGE NY LA CHICAGO DENVER BLOGS
Advertise | Log In | Make HuffPost your Home Page | RSS | Careers | FAQ | Contact Us
User Agreement | Privacy | Comment Policy | About Us | Powered by Movable Type
Copyright © 2011 TheHuffingtonPost.com, Inc. | "The Huffington Post" is a registered trademark of TheHuffingtonPost.com, Inc. All rights reserved.
bicycsual 10:47 AM on 9/01/2010
Permalink | Share it
fightorleave2 10:37 AM on 9/01/2010
Permalink | Share it
bicycsual 10:50 AM on 9/01/2010
Permalink | Share it
Fletch17C 10:59 AM on 9/01/2010
Permalink | Share it
Page: 1 2 Next › Last » (2 total)