jc-osms
Oscar Wilde's short story is here updated and given a glossy makeover in this American TV movie co-produced by lead actor Patrick Stewart. Wilde's tale is tweaked somewhat, no doubt for modern consumption, but the story of the lamenting ghost, behind whose bluster lies a desire for redemption and eternal rest still comes through in what was a pleasant and watchable piece of family entertainment.Making good use of its Knebworth House location and employing the services of veteran English supporting actors Joan Sims and Donald Sinden as housekeeper Mrs Umney and her husband, these fustian, traditional components, along with the stentorian, Shakespeare-quoting Stewart as the ghost himself, contrast nicely with the brash youth of Mr & Mrs Otis and their young children. I might have wished for a scarier ghost and better special effects but I guess a TV movie budget is somewhat less than for a full cinematic release.As is usual in tales of this type, there's always one disbelieving sceptic, in this case the father, Mr Otis, who for good measure appears to have seen his relationship with oldest daughter Virginia become strained as she gets older, the situation for the latter exacerbated by the family's move to England from America.After initially encountering Stewart's ghost with to be fair, not much fear and trepidation, the children man (and woman) up enough for Virginia to bond with it and by the end lead it to peace and the expected happy ending. The device of trying to convince the father of the ghost's existence by means of the daughter and Stewart recreating Hamlet's father's ghost scene seems a bit far-fetched for modern audiences, even whilst I appreciate it is in the book. Neve Campbell does well in her scenes with Stewart depicting a young teenage girl's blossoming into womanhood, aided conveniently by the appearance of a neighbouring handsome young lord. Purists may criticise some of the liberties taken with Wilde's original story, but sufficient respect I believe is paid in what was for me a sprightly and warming retelling of a nice old tale.
Viorica8957
There's a certain irony in a parody of the Gothic genre being turned into a mess of clichés by filmmakers who either had no idea what the story's purpose was, or just didn't care. All of the hallmarks of your average family film are present- rambunctious younger siblings, a grumpy teenager who doesn't want to move, unsympathetic parents who are unable to see the apparition, and of course a romantic subplot. The movie has very little in common with Wilde's original story, which was largely written to poke fun at the melodramatic Gothic novellas that were all the rage at the time. If Wilde saw this version, he'd probably laugh- and then of course, write a parody. One can only hope that the children who watched this bland, mass-produced pap eventually discovered the wit and sparkle of the original version.
GemmaST
I first saw this at a sleepover, so I wasn't in the right state of mind, but I've got to say the first thing I noticed was Daniel Betts as the Duke of Cheshire. Once I saw the film again I realised how great it was, and being a HUGE Star Trek fan it was an added bonus to see Patrick Stewart in a different role, loving the Shakesperian accent! I have it on video and never get tired of watching it! Neve Campbell was also very good but the film was made by Francis, why don't Dukes like that really roam around England?! And Leslie Philips as Lord Canterville was an added bonus. .
Peter Gruendler
as yet. She is congenially to Patrick Steward in this made-for-TV movie, which might have had a good chance on the big screen too.As in so many hollywood movies the film would have been better off without the last sequence.
AD
