Il fantasma di Canterville

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.

Man, it was such a Magnificent Film, from Start to Finish.

Granted, the Source Material is of Oscar Wilde.

But you still have to Execute.

Elements -

1. Again the Filmmakers already have the Upper Hand with Such Material as this Particular Oscar Wilde Story but the Effective Execution was also There.

2. The Dialogue was Excellent, Forwarding the Plotline Consistently. A Few Good Quips too. "Somehow Cucumber Sandwiches are a Thing, But I don't know why" - or something along those lines, It was Funny to me.

3. The Animation Style, I love this Style. It's Nothing Out of this World, but it had this Charm that Suited this Particular Story.

4. Virginia Otis is Great, she has the Charisma to Lead this thing. Canterville was Ok. And the Rest of the Supporting Cast were Good too.

5. It Hits the Emotional Beats Well.

Overall, Excellent Narrative Storytelling, Great Dialogue, Emotional Beats, it was just a Delightful 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.

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.

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.