Le fantôme de Canterville

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.

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.

Well there's never going to be a better version of this than Charles Laughton's 1944 iteration, but this is still actually quite a watchable adaptation of Oscar Wilde's short story. It centres around an American family who relocate to creaky and spooky old "Canterville Chase" - a stately pile that is reputedly haunted by a menacing spectre. The "Otis" family have three children and after the odd eerie visitation, they become distinctly unafraid of their haunting buddy - indeed they are soon trying to find some way of helping "Sir Simon" to lift the curse that has trapped him in limbo for some three hundred years and also to reunite him with his long lost love before the Grim Reaper wins the day. The animation is adequate and there are plenty of whimsical goings on - it's just that the story is over-stretched, there's way too much dialogue and I actually find this works better with real people/scenarios. Animation offers too few limitations on the creative ghostliness and so at times this looks a little too much like an episode of "Scooby Do". Maybe daft to write, but it isn't quite real enough for me! Still, it's good that this story is still doing the rounds - it's a fun tale of true love that's stood the test of time well.

This Oscar Wilde story has been filmed a dozen times, but as far as I know this is the first time it is presented as a CGI film. The CGI is not the very best we've seen, but it is more than watchable.

An American family move into an old stately home to find it is haunted by the ghost of it's former owner. Only the teen daughter of the family, Virginia, strikes up a friendship with the ghost, Sir Simon de Canterville, and together they plot how he can be laid to rest finally. I can't imagine this film scaring many kids so it is perfect for a family watch. It may even serve to make smaller kids less afraid of ghosts as Sir Simon is an utterly nice fellow.

The pace is spot on, the story is good, the voice acting is very good from everyone, and the CGI is enough to satisfy the vast majority of people.

All in all a very healthy and fun film for all ages. I give it a solid 6.

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.