IMDb-BEWERTUNG
5,9/10
1593
IHRE BEWERTUNG
Eine amerikanische Familie zieht in Canterville Chase ein, ein stattliches Landhaus, in dem seit 300 Jahren der Geist von Sir Simon De Canterville spukt.Eine amerikanische Familie zieht in Canterville Chase ein, ein stattliches Landhaus, in dem seit 300 Jahren der Geist von Sir Simon De Canterville spukt.Eine amerikanische Familie zieht in Canterville Chase ein, ein stattliches Landhaus, in dem seit 300 Jahren der Geist von Sir Simon De Canterville spukt.
Stephen Fry
- Sir Simon de Canterville
- (Synchronisation)
- …
Hugh Laurie
- Mephisto Monster
- (Synchronisation)
- …
Freddie Highmore
- Henry Duke of Cheshire
- (Synchronisation)
Emily Carey
- Virginia Otis
- (Synchronisation)
Imelda Staunton
- Mrs. Umney
- (Synchronisation)
Meera Syal
- Lucretia Otis
- (Synchronisation)
David Harewood
- Hiram Otis
- (Synchronisation)
Miranda Hart
- Algernean Van Finchley
- (Synchronisation)
Toby Jones
- The Reverend Chasuble aka The Vicar
- (Synchronisation)
Jakey Schiff
- Louis Otis
- (Synchronisation)
Bennett Miller
- Kent Otis
- (Synchronisation)
Bill Lobley
- Lord Monroe
- (Synchronisation)
Elizabeth Sankey
- Eleanor de Canterville
- (Synchronisation)
- …
Keiron Self
- Professor Borsakov
- (Synchronisation)
- …
Giles New
- The Colonel
- (Synchronisation)
- …
Lynne Seymour
- Mrs. Borsakov
- (Synchronisation)
- …
Georgia Small
- Marjorie Fairfax
- (Synchronisation)
- …
Empfohlene Bewertungen
If you like to see a good adaptation of this family Oscar Wilde story best to watch 1944 Jules Dassin version still the best.
In this animation version they have changed the characters to be more socially correct as per Hollywood standards, at the cost of entertainment and a good family time. It is sad that one can not enjoy a simple 2 hours of an old story in form of a new movie these days without being exposed by the legion of revisionist that have to ruin every story to suit their social view. The movie has no likable characters, its not funny. Avoid this and go back to the older versions. Best one is 1944 version mentioned above.
Summary: Terrible adaptation 2 dimensional and not likable.
In this animation version they have changed the characters to be more socially correct as per Hollywood standards, at the cost of entertainment and a good family time. It is sad that one can not enjoy a simple 2 hours of an old story in form of a new movie these days without being exposed by the legion of revisionist that have to ruin every story to suit their social view. The movie has no likable characters, its not funny. Avoid this and go back to the older versions. Best one is 1944 version mentioned above.
Summary: Terrible adaptation 2 dimensional and not likable.
One of the worst, if not the worst, animation films I've ever seen. They probably used a Pentium 4 PC from the early 00s for the animation. I mean, come on, TV cartoons look much better. The story is equally bad. Too many unnecessary dialogs saying the same over and over again (we heard the prophecy a hundred
times; got it, thank you very much). And what's with the winter scene that came out of blue? A random sequence in a randomly made film. There are so many times that you feel something is missing or has gone really wrong or does not fit in. I wonder how such a product made it to the theaters. It shouldn't. Total waste of money and time.
The animation evokes the aesthetics of early 2000s video games, but not in a way that adds nostalgic value. Rather, it appears as if constrained by the same limitations that plagued those older games-resulting in choppy and disjointed visuals. A reviewer's perfect 10 out of 10 score for the film raises further concerns. This suspicion is heightened by the fact that the review was published a month before the film's official release. Such an anomalously high rating strongly suggests a self-serving agenda, likely from someone affiliated with the production team. Despite a compelling story, the film ultimately fails to deliver a visual experience that matches the quality of its narrative.
I see a lot of criticism of the animation here. Apparently, I am not so jaded that I cannot enjoy something animated that looks... oh, I don't know... animated? Obviously, the others are so spoiled by "modern" tech that they demand their animation more akin to computer generated AI, completely indistinguishable from reality. That's fine... as for me and mine, we enjoyed this. And trust me, I have seen some really bad computer animation. We thought this was really well done.
I honestly would have given this a higher rating, were it not for the "modern day" re-imagining. I've never read the original, but after looking at some Cliff's Notes, my suspicions were confirmed. Virginia was not the strong-independent-don't-need-no-man heroine she is depicted as here. Not that I really needed to research that to know it. Wilde, nor anyone from his time period would have written this in this "modern" way.
Having said that, were there no other source material to which it could be compared, I would be more than willing to give this an 8. It really was good. It was funny. It was entertaining. It was, aside from the re-imagining of the main heroine, lacking the standard PC elements. Well... aside from the fact that the Duke is a bumbling idiot. But that has been standard fare for decades, so...
Look, if you are looking for something that the entire family can enjoy without being beat of the head with modern day writing, you should give this a watch.
I honestly would have given this a higher rating, were it not for the "modern day" re-imagining. I've never read the original, but after looking at some Cliff's Notes, my suspicions were confirmed. Virginia was not the strong-independent-don't-need-no-man heroine she is depicted as here. Not that I really needed to research that to know it. Wilde, nor anyone from his time period would have written this in this "modern" way.
Having said that, were there no other source material to which it could be compared, I would be more than willing to give this an 8. It really was good. It was funny. It was entertaining. It was, aside from the re-imagining of the main heroine, lacking the standard PC elements. Well... aside from the fact that the Duke is a bumbling idiot. But that has been standard fare for decades, so...
Look, if you are looking for something that the entire family can enjoy without being beat of the head with modern day writing, you should give this a watch.
1. There's nothing interesting about the choppy animation, in fact it's worse than 2000's animation movies somehow, wich makes this kinda boring to watch.
2. The plotline in most cases is completely unrealistic, making this movie even more unwatchable.
3. The scenes that try to make you laugh, cry or make you feel anything else fail miserably, with the dialogues being exaggerated, bland,or useless, 90% of the sounds effect in the movie just being:"huh?""woah" or any kind of overused interjections.
4. The characters dont have a lot of developement, making them very boring and uninteresting.
5. Why is half the cast morbidly obese?? Seriously,barely anyone was obese in the 20th century.
Overall this movie wasn't funny, interesting or scary at all, and i don't even know what it's supposed to be.
2. The plotline in most cases is completely unrealistic, making this movie even more unwatchable.
3. The scenes that try to make you laugh, cry or make you feel anything else fail miserably, with the dialogues being exaggerated, bland,or useless, 90% of the sounds effect in the movie just being:"huh?""woah" or any kind of overused interjections.
4. The characters dont have a lot of developement, making them very boring and uninteresting.
5. Why is half the cast morbidly obese?? Seriously,barely anyone was obese in the 20th century.
Overall this movie wasn't funny, interesting or scary at all, and i don't even know what it's supposed to be.
Wusstest du schon
- WissenswertesStephen Fry (Sir Simon de Canterville) previously played Oscar Wilde, the author of the short story on which the film is based, in Oscar Wilde (1997).
- PatzerIt's clear from his gravestone that Sir Simon lived and died during the seventeenth century. His ghost, however, is dressed in sixteenth century style.
- Zitate
[repeated line]
Louis Otis, Kent Otis: [pointing to each other] It Was Him
- Crazy CreditsAfter the credits there is a sound of something breaking followed by the Otis Twins blaming the ghost until it's pointed out their home is no longer haunted leading them to blame each other
- VerbindungenFeatured in The 7PM Project: Folge vom 12. Januar 2024 (2024)
Top-Auswahl
Melde dich zum Bewerten an und greife auf die Watchlist für personalisierte Empfehlungen zu.
- How long is The Canterville Ghost?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Erscheinungsdatum
- Herkunftsländer
- Offizieller Standort
- Sprachen
- Auch bekannt als
- Das Gespenst von Canterville
- Drehorte
- Produktionsfirmen
- Weitere beteiligte Unternehmen bei IMDbPro anzeigen
Box Office
- Bruttoertrag in den USA und Kanada
- 192.310 $
- Eröffnungswochenende in den USA und in Kanada
- 150.041 $
- 22. Okt. 2023
- Weltweiter Bruttoertrag
- 3.874.170 $
- Laufzeit
- 1 Std. 29 Min.(89 min)
- Farbe
- Seitenverhältnis
- 1.85 : 1
Zu dieser Seite beitragen
Bearbeitung vorschlagen oder fehlenden Inhalt hinzufügen