once again, "Hollywood" shows no imagination...

[acroyear]

And has decided that something 25+ years old will always be better than anything anybody might come up with today...so they'll clone it.

Russell Brand developing "Arthur" remake - Yahoo! News UK:

The controversial comedian is developing a remake of "Arthur," the 1981 comedy that starred Dudley Moore, as a potential starring vehicle. He is meeting with scribes to write the screenplay for Warner Bros.

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.

Comments

[ladyprivy.livejournal.com]

OH GOD NO!!!! NOT HIM!!! *head desk*

[acroyear70.livejournal.com]

that's nice. i've never heard of him before this. doesn't look like much in the picture, of course.

There are just some things that cannot be improved upon....

[celtink.livejournal.com]

Arthur is one of those things. You cannot improve upon Dudley Moore's performance in that film. NOR Sir John Giulgud's for that matter.

I was just saying this same thing when i heard a remake of John Lennon's "So this is Christmas". No one can do that song better than he did.

*roll eyes*

[spicyapplegirl.livejournal.com]

Oh please... *sigh* I wish Hollywood would stop remaking films and get some ideas of their own!

~Apple

[thelongshot.livejournal.com]

I don't mind remakes in general, since some stories are timeless and can use the exposure to a new audience. But remakes of comedies are a dicey prospect, particularly if the movie was dependent of the actor in the film. Either you are doing a bad parody of the original actor, or you are going to be endlessly compared to the original actor. It is why redoing "The Pink Panther" without Peter Sellars is a bad idea and why doing "Arthur" without Dudley Moore is also a bad idea.