The Canterville Ghost (1944) User Reviews

Safe and inoffensive fun.

[hitchcockthelegend · 7/10 · 19 April 2008]

Sir Simon of Canterville gets roped into fighting a duel for his cousin, realising he faces certain death he flees the field awash with cowardice. His father is so enraged as to this stain on the family honour - he walls Simon up in the castle without food and water until death does strike him down. He is doomed to haunt the Canterville castle until a fellow member of the family can commit an act of bravery and thus lift the cowardly stain that has besmirched the Canterville name.

Doesn't sound much like a comedy does it!, but it is, and a very amiable one at that. Loosely based on Oscar Wilde's story of the same name, The Canterville Ghost benefits from a couple of charming performances from Charles Laughton as Simon, and from a young Margaret O'Brien as Lady Jessica de Canterville. Laughton is clearly enjoying himself as the ghost, heavy on the "woe is me" theatrics coupled with gusto comedy, it's a very enjoyable performance from the big man. O'Brien is here enjoying being the center of attention and she positively lights up every scene she is in with youthful exuberance. The story follows a well trodden path to the rewarding ending, but it's a fun ride getting there regardless. Things really pick up a pace once a platoon of American soldiers are billeted at the castle and we are introduced to Cuffy Williams (Robert Young), a descendant Canterville of course, but he himself is showing a line in cowardice, so we are then left wondering if Cuffy can indeed show bravery and thus free Simon from his ghostly duties?. 7/10

Amusing, Family-Friendly, And Lots of Charm

[gftbiloxi · 7/10 · 24 April 2005]

Very, very loosely based on a short story by Oscar Wilde--so loosely that he is probably turning in his grave--THE CANTERVILLE GHOST is a charming bit of 1940s Hollywood fluff about an English ghost who runs afoul of American pragmatism. In the film version, the Americans arrive in the form of WWII soldiers, including Robert Young, who are billeted at a notoriously haunted castle where they encounter a legendary spectre much given to theatrical materializations.

Although the story is very, very slight, the cast makes it enjoyable. Child star Margaret O'Brien gives a typically enjoyable performance as the unwilling heiress to the castle, and Robert Young and his fellow actors mug their way through the script with entertaining aplomb. The greatest pleasure, however, is Charles Laughton as the ghost, which he plays most delightfully. The emphasis is on comedy rather than ghostly thrills, and although the comedy is quite mild it is expertly done. THE CANTERVILLE GHOST will never make any one's short list of "great cinematic art," but both grown-ups and kids alike will have a good time with it; recommended for an old fashioned family night.

Gary F. Taylor, aka GFT, Amazon Reviewer

delightful story of a tired ghost and his cowardly family

[blanche-2 · 8/10 · 24 November 2006]

Margaret O'Brien tries to help one of her long-dead ancestors in "The Canterville Ghost," a 1944 film also starring Charles Laughton, Robert Young, and Frank Faylen. Jessica de Canterville's (O'Brien) family owns a castle which is being used to house soldiers during their stay in the area. The castle has a very famous ghost named Sir Simon de Canterville (Charles Laughton) whose father had him imprisoned inside a wall for cowardice centuries earlier. Simon roams the castle, looking like the Cowardly Lion in royal costume. The only way he can rest for eternity is if a relative performs a courageous act in his name, i.e., by taking his signet ring and wearing it when he does the brave thing. Alas, the entire family for centuries has run the other way when danger appears, so Simon isn't having any luck. When six-year-old Lady Jessica de Canterville realizes that one of the soldiers is related to her, she begs him to help poor, tired Simon.

This is a wonderful movie, buoyed by the presence of Margaret O'Brien, surely one of the most adorable children to ever hit the screen. She's a fine actress, too - very sincere and natural. Although Mary Astor wrote in her diary that she was terrified of O'Brian during the filming of "Meet Me in St. Louis," it's kind of hard to believe. Charles Laughton turns in another masterful performance as Simon, who scares people because he thinks that as a ghost, it's what he should do. He's a riot. As Cuffy Williams, the soldier related to Jessica and Simon, Robert Young is very good as a man who begins to doubt his own courage.

"The Canterville Ghost" is loads of fun for the entire family, with plenty of comedy and some nice lessons, one of which is, when you really want something, you often need patience until you achieve it.

A long time to go without sleep

[utgard14 · 7/10 · 16 January 2014]

The ghost of cowardly Sir Simon de Canterville (Charles Laughton) is cursed to haunt an English castle until one of his descendants performs an act of bravery. It's World War II and his current descendant, six year-old Jessica (Margaret O'Brien) has opened the castle up to American soldiers. One of those soldiers (Robert Young) turns out to be a long-lost descendant of de Canterville. Now all he has to do is perform an act of bravery and the ghost will be freed.

Nice family-friendly movie with MGM gloss and quality production. Laughton has a great time and it shows. O'Brien is charming and precocious. Young is solid and likable. A fun movie that should please all but the most miserable among us.

You silly ghost

[Movie_Palace · 7/10 · 15 January 2010]

Is this a faithful adaptation of the Oscar Wilde classic? Don't know, never read it. This is though, a silly and entertaining movie that can be enjoyed by the whole family.

This was my first introduction to Margaret O'Brien and she won me over with her sweet charm. As a platoon of U.S. soldiers hold up in the haunted Canterville castle, they are excited by the news that they are to be welcomed by Lady Jessica de Canterville herself. The boys are surprised when Lady Jessica happens to be a 3-1/2' tall 6-year-old. She plays hostess to the GI's and tells them of the residing ghost. Their disbelief is soon tested by the late night antics of Sir Simon (Charles Laughton), who has inhabited the castle in his ghostly form for over 300 years. He has been condemned to this state of purgatory for his cowardice which can only be relieved by a blood descendant performing an act of bravery in his stead.

Having seen Charles Laughton in 'The Private Life of Henry VIII', 'Mutiny on the Bounty' and 'The Hunchback of Notre Dame', I was surprised to see him in this role as a clumsy, silly ghost. As usual, he is wonderful. A master thespian who can handle comedy as well as drama.

I highly recommend this film to anyone young or old who just wants an hour and a half of amusement.

Canterville's timid ghost

[bkoganbing · 7/10 · 2 March 2005]

Charles Laughton who made a career of playing tortured and twisted men goes one better here as Sir Simon de Canterville who haunts stately Canterville Manor until another Canterville performs a heroic deed and frees him from being earthbound.

The first part of the film shows the incident where Sir Simon turns tail and runs from a duel he got involved in. Out of shame and embarrassment, his father bricked him up in a room in the manor and pronounced the aforementioned curse upon him.

Breaking that curse is easier said than done because the cowardice was passed down several generations from Stuart England to World War II.

Enter a platoon of American rangers quartered at the manor house where the current lady of the manor, Margaret O'Brien is like so many in Great Britain in those years, playing host to American GIs. One in that platoon is a distant cousin from America, Robert Young. Will he perform the deed that frees Charles Laughton? Watch the film and find out.

Robert Young and Margaret O'Brien are fine, but it is the multi-talented Mr. Laughton who carries this film. This is a difficult part and only an actor of real talent and skill could carry it off. The comic elements are nicely done, but Laughton also has to project an air of resigned sadness at the fate he's been cursed with. And Mr. Laughton bares the tortured soul of Simon de Canterville for all to see.

This is a story originally written by Oscar Wilde and nicely updated for World War II moviegoers. And it's still a fine piece of film making for today's audience.

Excellent Family Film

[tomcnewman · 10/10 · 7 August 2005]

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.

lots of fun

[skiddoo · 7/10 · 15 August 2010]

Peter Lawford's part in the beginning of the movie was unusual in that he first seems to be an effeminate young fellow picking flowers rather than joining in with the manly deer hunt and then we find he has a lady in there with him, and not his lady. Conveniently, he says his sword arm is sliced to the bone, although it doesn't look all that bad, and he passes the duel on to his unfortunate kinsman who is later walled up by his father. When we learn that the entire family line was made up of cowards it puts a different complexion on everyone's actions and makes for an adult sort of kids' movie. (It seems that cowardice was either common in that region or the other party in the duel was some sort of relative, too.)

What we and O'Brien and Young's characters learn in this movie is that courage is mind over matter not genetics and that anyone old or young can be terrified but not everyone folds like a cheap card table, whether confronted by a ghost or the enemy. Young teaches it to O'Brien and she later has to remind him of it. That is good to keep in mind in any era but especially in wartime when frightening rumors could send people into hysterics rendering them not only useless but dangerous. If the poor ghost had, when alive, stood up to his relatives he could have avoided the dire events. Instead, he ended up cowering in a corner in shame and allowing himself to be bricked in. This story and the Wizard of Oz have a common theme--the way you perceive yourself alters your actions.

An Entertaining Ghost Story

[sddavis63 · 8/10 · 26 March 2007]

The veteran Charles Laughton and a very young Robert Young team up in this entertaining fantasy about the ghost of Simon de Canterville - condemned to haunt the halls of his family's castle until a descendant performs an act of bravery on his behalf. What's the catch? Simon was condemned by his own father for being a coward, and the Canterville line ever since has been a long line of cowards. (The greatest irony of the movie is that Simon has developed a reputation as the most fearsome ghost in all of England!) Finding a hero among this family won't be easy. Then along comes Cuffy Williams (Young), an American soldier whose platoon is billeted in the castle during the lead-up to D-Day. It turns out that Williams is a very distant descendant of the Cantervilles, and D-Day, of course, will provide the ultimate opportunity to show his bravery and to release Simon from his torment. The question is whether he'll be able to work up the courage to do it!

Laughton and Young offer excellent performances, and the very young Margaret O'Brien (who would have been about 7 when this was made) is convincing as Lady Jessica de Canterville. Some of the scenes as the American soldiers try to chase down the ghost to get a picture of him to prove that he exists to their commanding officer are also quite funny. 8/10

Smooth, leisurely-paced charmer...

[moonspinner55 · 6/10 · 20 March 2008]

Jules Dassin directed this adaptation of Oscar Wilde's story, a charming fantasy about the ghost of a coward haunting an English castle, aided by a relative who must perform a heroic deed to save the spirit from eternal misery. Despite a reportedly troubled production, the cast (including big scene-stealer Charles Laughton and little scene-stealer Margaret O'Brien) glides through it blithely, and Dassin's handling of the material is efficient, if perhaps a tad colorless. Robert Young and Peter Lawford are interchangeably bland, but there are some pleasurable moments. Perhaps not the most memorable apparition-laden comedy, but an enjoyable entry in the genre. **1/2 from ****

An excellent comedy with heart tugging dramatic moments.

[timewing · 8/10 · 19 July 2005]

This review is somewhat biased, as I am an avid Robert Young fan, and have yet to see him in a less than stellar performance. Margaret O'Brien is also splendid, and it is hard to believe so much talent projects out of a six year old girl. Charles Laughton is memorable in his fine delivery of both pathos and comedic skills.

A highlight of the film for me is the music played by the G.I.s. at a local party. Music is classic 40's 8 to the bar, visually punctuated with awesome jitterbugging by the soldiers. A proper female British spectator comments to an incredulous priest, "I believe they call it woogie boogie." It is unknown what what the song title or who the recording artists may have been, however credits list original music for the film as provided by George Bassman.

not bad

[kyle_furr · 7/10 · 27 January 2004]

What a pleasant surprise. I usually don't watch too many movies like this, or comedies in general. I'm glad i watched this one. Charles Laughton, Robert Young, and Margart O'Brien are all good. You should watch it, it's pretty good.

Entertaining Show

[dig · 29 December 2000]

I saw this film when it first came out in the movie form in 1945.

I was very young then. Have just watched it again. I still love this movie.Better than the junk that is out there now. Good viewing for young children. Enjoy it.Maybe even buy it for your grandchildren in years to come.

Worst adaptation ever!

[CountVladDracula · 1/10 · 28 September 2007]

This is the worst adaptation of The Canterville Ghost I have ever seen. It was turned into Wartime propaganda with a little girl befriending not so much the ghost but an American soldier, which I guess was the fashion of the time.

In Oscar Wilde's original short story an American family moves into the haunted castle and the teenage daughter had to help him to find peace.

This version, though listed as comedy, is much darker than Oscar Wilde's original and witty tale of love and forgiveness. There were so many flaws to this one I can't begin to list them all I couldn't even recognize it as being The Canterville Ghost if not for the name of the ghost! In the original short story the ghost had felt accountable for his wife's death and that's why he haunted his castle. In this version the ghost was walled up in a room to starve to death by his own father because he wouldn't fight in a duel that wasn't really his to begin with! Instead of an American family moving in, it's American soldiers during world war two and a sugary sweet little girl girl owns the castle! It turns out, in this horrid adaptation, that one of the soldiers is a descendant of the ghost and he must prove himself by committing an act of bravery so that the ghost may move on.

That's right, kids, he has to beat a Nazi to help the ghost find peace even though the original story was written in the late nineteen century! The original story was timeless and had a female protagonist but apparently the story regressed into the sexism of the era in that the manly soldier had to save the day! Though many consider this version to be a classic I feel it is an insult to Oscar Wilde's original classic.

And to add to my horror at this so-called morality of this adaptation the ghost begged for forgiveness near the end before he found peace. He wanted forgiveness for not fighting in a duel that wasn't actually his to begin with and dying a slow agonizing death at the hands of his own father! What the?!? This was a shameful exploitation and it was a cruel lie to claim it had anything to do with Oscar Wilde's original and beautiful short story. This was, in my opinion, horrible.

If you love the original The Canterville Ghost story by Oscar Wilde or want to see a version that... actually makes sense... Seek out the 1996 made for TV version with Patrick Stewart as the ghost. Though set in the 1990s it's very true to the original, heart warming and fairytale-like quality of the original story. Don't waste your time with this version simply because it was the first. It's almost unrecognizable.

charming in its own way, yet morally repugnant..

[AlsExGal · 6/10 · 31 August 2021]

... IF you look at the details. Especially the set-up of the story. In England in 1632, a Canterville (aptly cast as Peter Lawford) is caught in the bushes making out with a fellow nobleman's fiancee. The cuckolded nobleman demands satisfaction. But the philandering Canterville is wounded, so he in turn calls upon his brother Simon (Charles Laughton) to "honor the family name" by risking his life in a duel with the cheated upon nobleman. But the nobleman, much smaller than Simon, shows up to the duel at the appointed time with a superficial pinky finger wound and thus has made his "second" some giant boulder of a cousin of his. Simon runs from the scene and hides behind some drapes in the family castle. The nobleman goes to the castle in hot pursuit and tells Simon's father that Simon ran from a duel defending the family name. Simon's father responds by having the door that the drapes cover sealed with bricks. Before the last brick is placed, sealing him inside, Simon cries out revealing his presence. His dad seals the tomb anyways AND curses him to not have eternal rest until a kinsman does a brave act in his name. And leaves him there to starve. And die. And rot. Some family!

Now really. The brother really WAS making out with somebody else's fiancee. This was not Simon's problem. The offended nobleman fakes a wound and sends out a cousin who would most certainly have sent Simon to his death. But that is not necessary because his dad sends him to his death instead AND curses him. Meanwhile Simon's younger brother is free to continue philandering. Does anybody else find anything remotely unfair and morally repugnant about this story? Did Beau and Hunter ever have these problems? Well maybe if they had lived in 1632 apparently. But I digress.

Next we cut to "present day" which is 1944 England, and the Canterville castle is occupied by WWII American troops who behave like the Bowery Boys. Except Robert Young. From the beginning you know he is different because he seeks out the ghost who is attempting to scare the soldiers AND Young doesn't talk with a thick Brooklyn accent.

Well it turns out Young IS a kinsman. He and Simon both have the same birthmark. But when Young finds out that all Cantervilles are cowards and he is a Canterville too, then suddenly he doubts his bravery. This is the first psychologically interesting thing to happen in the film because bravery is, to a large extent, a frame of mind. Just like confidence is and often, in turn, competence. If you are told you are worthless enough times you will internalize it.

But this is WWII Hollywood so the moral of the story has to come down to something along the line of - You are not brave unless you are willing to do a stupid act that is very likely to mean your own death. Homefront audiences would have tolerated nothing else.

Margaret O'Brien hangs around to add a cuteness factor that might just be strong enough for you to forget all of the weird morals in this story. And the script is padded out with what amounts to a bunch of disjointed skits about cutting up and comradery among soldiers and culture clash America versus England style. You could have made this film about half as long and it would have had the same comedic and dramatic impact. There are really fine performances by Laughton (as always) as the cursed Canterville and Robert Young as his American cousin, so that is where it gets its six stars from me.

Charles Laughton hams it up as a delightful cowardly ghost...

[Doylenf · 6/10 · 18 June 2009]

I cringe when I read all these comments gushing over little MARGARET O'BRIEN, as if she was a thespian of great talent when she was six or seven years old. Personally, I never got her charm as a child actress, but I am willing to say that she is at her most tolerable in THE CANTERVILLE GHOST. But still, her acting always seemed stilted and self-conscious, like a little girl who knew she was good at reciting lines and making them sound reasonably convincing.

However, nothing she can do to distract me is really worth commenting on because the film belongs almost exclusively to a mostly delightful script (except for the last sequence) that gives CHARLES LAUGHTON the chance to play--with his usual gusto--the role of a cowardly ghost who has been haunting a castle in England for over 300 years and must keep on doing so until a distant relative can redeem him by a single act of bravery.

ROBERT YOUNG is that relative and he's genuinely attractive and amusing in a role that is less bland than usual for Young. He does show a nice bit of chemistry with his little co-star. A bunch of American soldiers, in 1943, are well cast with RAGS RAGLAND doing most of the funny business while other soldiers like WILLIAM GARGAN and FRANK FAYLEN do their best to give the cast some class. All of the scenes involving the antics of these servicemen--including a fun party scene featuring the jitterbug dance of two soldiers--are pleasant to watch.

For light entertainment with an unusual slant, this is one of the better vehicles MGM found for Margaret O'Brien and her particular brand of child actress. As stated above, I found her more tolerable than usual in this one.

Kind of schmaltzy, but still quite fun

[planktonrules · 7/10 · 28 November 2008]

The film begins in the 17th century. In an odd bit of casting, portly Charles Laughton (age 45) is the younger brother of Peter Lawford (age 21 at the time of the making of this film). Charles is expected to fight for the honor of his noble family but instead turns and runs. As a result of this infamy, he is cursed to remain a ghost until a relative can perform a brave deed--a tough order to fill because the next 300 years saw coward after coward pass down the family line! Now, cut to 1943 and a regiment of American soldiers in the UK is stationed in Canterville Castle--the place haunted by the sad ghost. Through some coincidences only possible in movies, American soldier Robert Young discovers he's related to the nice ghost and realizes he can break the curse by performing gallantly at war.

THE CANTERVILLE GHOST is an enjoyable film--thanks mostly to a rather saccharine-like yet enjoyable performance by young Margaret O'Brien. On one hand, she's so adorable that the cynical out there might just dismiss the whole thing. But on the other, at age 6, she was already a better actress than many adult professionals and only a true curmudgeon could hate her! When I was younger, I was not a particular fan of Margaret's (hence, I was more of a curmudgeon) but over the years I have really come to appreciate her charm and talent.

O'Brien is supported by Charles Laughton (as the ghost) and Robert Young. Laughton was often the scene stealer in films with his acting (and occasional over-acting) but here his blustery style was just fine for the ghost. As for Young, he had a typical "nice guy" performance. Considering how well he worked with O'Brien in this and other films, it's not surprising that he was later cast as "America's Dad" on television.

So with some wonderful performances, most of the movie is lovely--typical MGM family fare with nice directing, writing and the full glossy treatment. The only problem is that towards the end, the film switched gear and became a kooky film--something that tended to cheapen the film significantly. While only a few minutes earlier Young was off bravely fighting the Nazis and the tension was great, just a bit later he was dragging a time bomb across the field in a scene that looked more at home in an Abbott and Costello film. Seeing the jeep jumping about wildly while towing a bomb through the middle of the regiment just looked dumb (and, by the way, this is NOT the best method of bomb disposal). This scene was a sad decision because the rest of the film was delightful. Still, even with this dumb finale, the film is solidly entertaining and you may just find your heart-strings tugged by sweet Margaret. And, if not, you'll still probably enjoy the movie.

Oscar Wilde as a World War II morale booster

[critic-2 · 8/10 · 16 July 2001]

This, the first film version of Oscar Wilde's short story "The Canterville Ghost", was made by M-G-M during World War II, and, like some other films of that period based on literary or theatrical works, tries to incorporate some good old American (and British) flag-waving into its charming original story, which, as in all the TV versions (this is the only theatrical one) updates it to the twentieth century; when will someone do a good film version of the story in its original, nineteenth-century setting?

Fortunately, the story isn't tampered with enough to ruin it, and one of the film's virtues is Charles Laughton in the title role.

Proving what a great actor can bring to an average screenplay, Laughton hams it up outrageously in his comical first scene, in which his character, Sir Simon de Canterville, is still alive, but he later shows a deep sensitivity in the later scenes in which he expresses terror during his murder and quiet despair at his fate.

In order to incorporate some war heroics, a platoon of American soldiers has been incorporated into the story, and Laughton's descendant (Robert Young) must perform a heroic deed in order to break the curse that Laughton has been placed under. Some rather broad serviceman comedy has been incorporated into the story as well, courtesy of "Rags" Ragland and Frank Faylen (Dobie Gillis's dad on the TV series). It is Faylen who gets to deliver the film's most topical line--not having seen the ghost yet, he asks his fearful platoon, "What are you going to do when you have to face Nazis?" (What would Oscar Wilde have thought?)

Robert Young is his usual pleasant self as Laughton's descendant, and child star Margaret O'Brien isn't nearly as revoltingly syrupy as you might fear.

But it is Laughton's way with both sentiment and comedy that really makes the film worth watching, and it is worth watching.

Cute film, not what I was expecting.

[Starscoffeecats · 6/10 · 7 October 2020]

It's a good little ghost story, but disappointing if your expecting a movie more closely based on Oscar Wilde's story. The original story is a clever satire with a much more interesting reason for the ghost being trapped in the house. The basic frame of the story remains, but it's been made family friendly and polished up to be a feel good film that won't offend anyone. That said it is a good funny ghost story, and not scary so you can watch it with your kids.

An absolute for all movie lovers!

[maxvaughn · 10/10 · 2 October 2005]

Okay, I'm the first to admit this movie has almost nothing to do with Wilde's original story, but I can't help loving it. Like most versions of the story, this one is adapted for the time it was made in, so this one revolves around war and bravery. When I was eight years old I forced my entire birthday party to watch this movie and every year after they all always wanted to watch it. It's been a long time since I 've had a birthday party like that, but some of those friends have even gone out and bought the movie since then. We all had a little crush on Robert Young in this. Margaret O'Brian is fabulous sneaking around the Ghost's room and doing her bob of a curtsy. And of course Charles Laughton spitting in at the portraits of his cowardly kinsmen. The comedic timing is wonderful and there are great one liners. Best line: "I believe they call it woogie boogie".

This movie suggests that human traits such as . . .

[pixrox1 · 7/10 · 24 July 2021]

. . . cowardice, bullying, irresponsibility, conservatism, miserliness, hoarding, elephantine stomping, childishness, mercantilism, selfishness, misanthropy, draft dodging, tax cheating, pedestrian bone spurs, prevarication, yellow streaking, psychotic projection, bleach injection, nonsensical blathering, raving and ranting, frothing at the mouth, pathological lying, rabble rousing, insurrection, treasonous trash talking, environmental pollution and a tendency for demonic possession all are hereditary, as lamented by THE CANTERVILLE GHOST. This film suggests that the only fitting end for such miscreants is to chain them to "blockbuster bombs" and hope that they go off!

It was a Margaret O'Brien treat!

[kill-the-boxtrolls · 10/10 · 16 April 2009]

I don't know what rating to rate my movie for 9.5 or 10.0 it was a just too great of a fantasy movie for me to rate such a low rating. Margaret O'Brien was charming, adorable, and a nice little treat to watch even though she is not in the movie all the time, but still, she was nice with the crying and the acting that I'll will just wait a ten for. She was great in Meet me in St. Louis and she was great in this one. I would really desire for this movie to be released on DVD in Amazon or something because 3-4 weeks ago, I have just finished this movie on VHS tape and I thought it was a really good movie to recommend to old movie fans. I would have to say Margaret O'Brien is probably great in all her movies although I haven't seen all of them yet, but I am looking forward to checking all of her child stars movies out before checking her when she was older like The secret garden-older. Margaret O'Brien has just been great acting like every time she cried, I started tearing up and started sobbing a little like MMISL she was really great playing "Tootie" and her little cry at the end. Margaret O'Brien is just a great character to adore as much as little Bailee Madison or Judith Barsi. They were really close to tearing up the audience near Margaret O'Brien but if Judith Barsi was still here, I would be very happy about that that she will be great as an Adult and teenanger.

Adorable!

[kimbpaul · 7/10 · 16 August 2021]

So sweet & fun. Margaret O'Brian was the sweetest child actor. Glad I recorded it bc I missed the first 15 minutes and now I can enjoy it again.

you can do better!

[postmanwhoalwaysringstwice · 15 February 2003]

this version of "the canterville ghost" does not know what it wants to be... wartime yarn or supernatural comedy. it does not succeed fully at being either. it is impossible not to enjoy this film, at least marginally, however. charles laughton certainly appears to be having a fine time, so his screen time alone won't kill the flick. then there's 8 year old margaret o'brien, acting ever so cute, leaving me wishing she were a young natalie wood, though. there's even a scene where she's dancing with robert young in a room full of soldiers that reminded me of a scene in "bright eyes" where shirley temple is doing her good ship lollypop routine. yet, again, i feel this film doesn't know where it wants to be. it's good for a few laughs, but on the funny ghost stories of the era, i'd recommend "topper" or "the ghost and mrs. muir" or "blithe spirit".

Charming story changed to potboiler, but rescued by atmosphere and acting

[sdp242 · 5/10 · 16 December 2011]

After watching it recently, my reaction to the film is mixed at best. On the plus side are the setting and atmosphere, the cast and acting - primarily of the three main characters Sir Simon - the Ghost, Lady Jessica and Cuffy). On the minus side - and to me it is a big minus, is the total departure from Wilde's original story. Even a film made during war era need not necessarily have soldiers and flag-waving. In the film, the only result of these departures, combined with the artificial ups and downs in Cuffy's behaviour, is to destroy the charm of the original story and convert it into an inane potboiler. However, the atmosphere and the acting do rescue it to some extent and make it possible to enjoy the film - though only after one decides to forget about Wilde.