VALUTAZIONE IMDb
5,9/10
1558
LA TUA VALUTAZIONE
Aggiungi una trama nella tua linguaAn American family moves into Canterville Chase, a stately countryside mansion that has been haunted by the ghost of Sir Simon De Canterville for 300 years.An American family moves into Canterville Chase, a stately countryside mansion that has been haunted by the ghost of Sir Simon De Canterville for 300 years.An American family moves into Canterville Chase, a stately countryside mansion that has been haunted by the ghost of Sir Simon De Canterville for 300 years.
- Regia
- Sceneggiatura
- Star
Hugh Laurie
- Mephisto Monster
- (voce)
- …
Emily Carey
- Virginia Otis
- (voce)
Meera Syal
- Lucretia Otis
- (voce)
David Harewood
- Hiram Otis
- (voce)
Jakey Schiff
- Louis Otis
- (voce)
Bennett Miller
- Kent Otis
- (voce)
Bill Lobley
- Lord Monroe
- (voce)
Giles New
- The Colonel
- (voce)
- …
Lynne Seymour
- Mrs. Borsakov
- (voce)
- …
Recensioni in evidenza
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Lo sapevi?
- QuizStephen Fry (Sir Simon de Canterville) previously played Oscar Wilde, the author of the short story on which the film is based, in Wilde (1997).
- BlooperIt's clear from his gravestone that Sir Simon lived and died during the seventeenth century. His ghost, however, is dressed in sixteenth century style.
- Citazioni
[repeated line]
Louis Otis, Kent Otis: [pointing to each other] It Was Him
- Curiosità sui creditiAfter 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
- ConnessioniFeatured in The 7PM Project: Episodio datato 12 gennaio 2024 (2024)
I più visti
Accedi per valutare e creare un elenco di titoli salvati per ottenere consigli personalizzati
- How long is The Canterville Ghost?Powered by Alexa
Dettagli
- Data di uscita
- Paesi di origine
- Sito ufficiale
- Lingue
- Celebre anche come
- The Canterville Ghost
- Luoghi delle riprese
- Aziende produttrici
- Vedi altri crediti dell’azienda su IMDbPro
Botteghino
- Lordo Stati Uniti e Canada
- 192.310 USD
- Fine settimana di apertura Stati Uniti e Canada
- 150.041 USD
- 22 ott 2023
- Lordo in tutto il mondo
- 3.874.170 USD
- Tempo di esecuzione1 ora 29 minuti
- Colore
- Proporzioni
- 1.85 : 1
Contribuisci a questa pagina
Suggerisci una modifica o aggiungi i contenuti mancanti
Divario superiore
What is the Italian language plot outline for Il fantasma di Canterville (2023)?
Rispondi