The Amazing Mr Blunden

Having not yet seen the original version. I can only take the Mark Gatiss version on its own terms.

Gatiss is an aficionado of period horror. He might just be the right man to adapt The Amazing Mr Blunden and make it family friendly.

Simon Callow looks just right as Mr Blunden, a lawyer haunted by his failure to protect two orphans placed in his care.

The story starts with newly widowed Mrs Allen trying to claim benefits just before Christmas.

She and her two children Lucy and Jamie get an offer to be a caretaker of a huge mansion by the mysterious Mr Blunden.

The house is regarded as being haunted. Lucy and Jamie come across the ghosts of two children who are going to be murdered. The ones Mr Blunden let down.

It is for Lucy and Jamie to make sure that history doesn't repeat itself.

I found the story to be rather charming. Mark Gatiss and Tamsin Greig bring the right amount of Dickensian grotesque as Mr and Mrs Wickens.

It does feel rather low budget given it is a Sky production. Then again Gatiss is used to low budgets for his BBC4 ghost story adaptations.

There are some nods to Doctor Who as Gatiss tries so hard not to use the phrase timey-wimey. He replaces it with the wheels of time.

I am a huge fan of Mark Gatiss and I've been following his career since The League of Gentlemen. I loved Sherlock, his Dr Who work, and even his Dracula was interesting.

Unfortunately, this is a real misstep. Unlike some reviews, I don't have a problem with the colour blind casting. Nor do I mind the present day setting, although I felt the 200 years time shift too much. My issues are it's just badly paced and poorly directed.

The original had the luxury of setting the back story much better, particularly regarding the Wickens. Instead, we get some serious exposition by means of a puppet show. The whole thing is just too rushed. We know barely anything about Thomas, and it's obvious from our first meeting what the true nature of Mr Blunden is. Maybe this was all done make it more accessible to younger viewers, but I saw the original at a young age and understood it.

The acting? Tamsin Greig chews scenery, the kids are ordinary, Simon Callow is Simon Callow and Mr Gatiss himself? Ah. Oh dear. He is basically channeling Mickey from the Job Start scheme in The League of Gentlemen. Pretty...Pretty....awful.

If you have to watch one, watch the original.

Adapted almost scene for scene from the original but with pantomime villains and a loss of charm and mystery. Whilst the young actors do their best and Callow is an acceptable Blunden the move to modern perood detracts from the timelessness of the Lionel Jeffrey's version. Watch the original and give yourself a treat.

I really wanted to see this as I loved the original. However, although this was watchable and modern kids may like it, it didn't have the magic of the original.

I found that the script was almost identical to the original but the acting was poorer. I thought Mr Blunden was well cast and so was Sara. Mrs Wickens was OK as well and Bella. The rest, not so much. To be fair, Lynne Frederick would be a hard act to follow as was the original actress who played the mother. There was just something about the original family that was missing in this adaptation.

I didn't like the fact that it was set in modern times, except when the children went back to 1821. The original was set in the early part of the 20th century and there was a magic to the Xmas scenes even though they were poor. The original had atmosphere. This one didn't. There was nothing new about it other than setting it in modern times. It was also too PC. Casting for the sake of it rather than what would have been more appropriate.

Overall, this was simply a cheap, lazy copy with no originality. I recommend the original 1972 version and the book. I believe the original book is being released again. If it's still in it's original format that will be fine. If it's been edited to suit the PC agenda then I recommend getting an old copy from somewhere.

As a child of the 1960's, the original film was like many a part of my childhood. Unfortunately, the remake is a pale shadow of the original.

Its puzzling to have seen ratings for the remake giving 10's and 8's - even the greatest Hollywood films in history never scored 10's.