While aimlessly flipping channels, Arthur caught my attention, and I watched most of it. What I found most engaging was the dialogue. I would rate it as superb, in these days of mediocre use of the language. As Wodehouse has demonstrated countless times, language itself can be great fun, when you know what to do with it.
Of course, it is a remake of the 80s phenomenon (in India at least, among college students of my ilk) starring Dudley Moore as the rich brat and John Gielgud as his butler, friend and philosopher (Jeeves?). It was a very good film, and Prakash Mehra promptly remade it, adding songs et al, as Sharaabi, which was not bad too.
This one stars Russell Brand (I saw him for the first time, but I am told he is a comic), and he was Ok. The nanny's role is the most powerful, and is played well by Helen Mirren. Though it's a predictable plot (which one isn't?), it's a fun watch, if only to recall your college years as a side-effect. The other hot movie of those times with Dudley Moore in it was '10'. That also starred Bo Derek (!).
Of course, it is a remake of the 80s phenomenon (in India at least, among college students of my ilk) starring Dudley Moore as the rich brat and John Gielgud as his butler, friend and philosopher (Jeeves?). It was a very good film, and Prakash Mehra promptly remade it, adding songs et al, as Sharaabi, which was not bad too.
This one stars Russell Brand (I saw him for the first time, but I am told he is a comic), and he was Ok. The nanny's role is the most powerful, and is played well by Helen Mirren. Though it's a predictable plot (which one isn't?), it's a fun watch, if only to recall your college years as a side-effect. The other hot movie of those times with Dudley Moore in it was '10'. That also starred Bo Derek (!).
2 comments:
You just don't see people naming their kids Pelham anymore. Wonder why?
Maybe the latter half reminds them of a certain edible cheez.
Post a Comment