New at BOP: Review: Matrix Resurrections Movie Review: Moonfall Movie Reviews: Scream The #1 Movie in America November Forecast The Many Saints of Newark October Forecast New Trivia Question All site updates Share & Save   Tweet Print this column

I'm a big fan of the BOP Book vs. Movie column, but I've often found that it has one major flaw: it's about books. If you live in America, you probably don't like books. Why would you? You have to read them. I hate reading, which is why I don't read anything. In fact, I've never even read any articles in the BOP Book vs. Movie column. So what's the solution? Compare movies to other movies. And considering all Hollywood makes anymore are sequels, remakes, and movies that are blatant rip-offs of older movies (did anyone not immediately think of Rear Window when they saw the trailer for Disturbia?), there are plenty of movies to compare to other movies.

For the inaugural edition of this series, I decided to compare Arthur, the Dudley Moore vehicle that was one of the biggest hits of 1981, won multiple Oscars and is considered one of the greatest American comedies of all time, to Arthur, the 2011 Russell Brand vehicle that was critically reviled and is proving to be a box office dud. Think this one will be a blowout? Actually, it might be closer than you think...

ARTHUR (1981)

Arthur tells the story of alcoholic billionaire Arthur Bach, heir to a fortune, who spends his time wasting his money, boozing, and being driven around New York City by his driver, Bitterman. We first meet Arthur picking up a prostitute, taking her to a fancy restaurant attached to the hotel where he lives, and generally making an ass out of himself. This seems to be de rigueur for our hero, who always has his butler Hobson around to clean up his messes for him. Conflict arises when Arthur's father and grandmother arrange his marriage to a wealthy socialite in whom Arthur has no interest, but upon whom the inheritance of his fortune depends. At the same time, Arthur meets a waitress named Linda, of whom he becomes utterly enamored, and he is forced to choose between the love of his life and $750 million.

Arthur is #53 on the American Film Institute's list of the Greatest American Comedies of all time, and it's not because of the story. The conflict isn't what drives the film, and the resolution feels lazy - which is not to say that this is not a great movie. The greatness of Arthur rests, rather, on three things: the brash appeal of Dudley Moore's Arthur, the deadpan hilarity of John Gielgud's Hobson, and the sassiness of Liza Minelli's Linda. Of course, as the title character, it is up to Dudley Moore to drive the movie, which he does superbly. Yes, he can be an obnoxious ass, but the key is that he always remains likeable. He is good-natured and benign, his jabs light-hearted and never cruel. And in the scenes when he is sober, such as when he first meets Linda, he is downright charming. He also has some truly wonderful one-liners, which he delivers with superb timing (“You're a prostitute? I'd forgotten! I thought I was doing great with you!). Really this is Moore's movie, and everyone else is just helping to lift him up.

Continued:       1       2       3       4