The Canterville Ghost (1944)

I can't say for sure how faithful The Canterville Ghost is to Oscar Wilde's story as it's been a while since I read it. What's for sure though is that I have always really liked this film. The story is slight and may get a little too schmaltzy at times, however much more than makes up for it. The costumes and sets are simply beautiful and lovingly photographed and directed, while the music is fitting with the film and story's mood. The script is on the whole delightful, piling it on with the fun and charm. And I can say little wrong about the performances either. Charles Laughton plays the title role with real gusto, and Margaret O'Brien is suitably cute as a button and exuberant. They are well supported by the amiable, charming Robert Young, the characterful Reginald Owen and the suave Peter Lawford. All in all, a lot of good fun. 8/10 Bethany Cox

The current rating for this film (6.7) is too low. A more accurate figure would be between 7 and 8. This is an excellent film, a classic fantasy picture on par with Lost Horizon (1937), Miracle on 34th Street (1947), The Old Dark House (1932), Scrooge (1935), Scrooge (1938), Blithe Spirit (1945), Gaslight (1940), I Walked with a Zombie (1943), The Uninvited (1944), Arsenic and Old Lace (1944), Dead of Night (1945), Death Takes a Holiday (1934), Alice in Wonderland (1933). It's not quite as good as It's a Wonderful Life, A Matter of Life and Death (Stairway to Heaven), Babes in Toyland (1934), Cat People (1944), The Devil and Daniel Webster (1941), Picture of Dorian Gray (1945), Thief of Baghdad (1940), Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (1932).

Margaret O'Brien has earned her place in movieland heaven so far as I am concerned. What I do is keep track of important films, but I might as well be keeping track of important scenes instead. If I were, one of these would be the Halloween prank scene for "Meet Me in St Louis," which is all about this child. In that film, the sweetness and prancing makes a bit more sense than the treacly noble womanchild we have here.But you just cannot watch this without thinking of that, made only a few weeks later. The movie itself is a combination of three things: a story about cowardice made during wartime. All US and UK movies were part of the war effort, absolutely. It also has large room for Laughton to strut about and show us that he is an actor of the old Wilkes Booth tradition. Huffing and puffing.I'll ask you to ignore those parts. They aren't fun.The third part is the O'Brien part, the simple joy of a child sunnily presented. This girl so exceeded Shirley Temple that I wish we had more of her before she burned out.I saw this the same night I saw the Narnia movie (2005) and the night after the 88 version. Oh, what those needed was this critter!Ted's Evaluation -- 2 of 3: Has some interesting elements.

While there are few movies that I wholeheartedly endorse, this is definitely one of them. It has been a favorite since I was a child and it still is. It was a patriotic film in World War II to get our minds off of the horrors in Europe. Charles Laughton gives a superb performance as a 300+ year old ghost. It is very out of character for such a great dramatic actor, but slides into his comedic role effortlessly and flawlessly. The comedy duo of Charles Laughton and Robert Young in this film will never rank as high as Abbott and Costello or Laurel and Hardy or even Hope and Crosby, but I see it as a brilliant discovery of comedy "chemistry". Had Hollywood developed this comedy team, I think we would see some Oscars from their efforts. This movie has a great plot, good character development, and fresh, clean comedy. This is a must for Margaret O'Brian fans. This is clearly her second best film (her best was "Meet Me in St. Louis"). If you are looking for space ships and aliens, you won't find any here. It's just great family entertainment.