For modern teenagers Lucy and Jamie, adventure arrives in the form of a mysterious old man with a job offer - as caretakers to a ruined old house that's said to be haunted. With his help, Lu... Read allFor modern teenagers Lucy and Jamie, adventure arrives in the form of a mysterious old man with a job offer - as caretakers to a ruined old house that's said to be haunted. With his help, Lucy and Jamie must travel back in time to 1821.For modern teenagers Lucy and Jamie, adventure arrives in the form of a mysterious old man with a job offer - as caretakers to a ruined old house that's said to be haunted. With his help, Lucy and Jamie must travel back in time to 1821.
- Awards
- 3 nominations total
- Director
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
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.
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.
This is no where near as good as the original film. It's so watered-down the characters are bland and it's just boring.
It doesn't draw you in and the acting just isn't at the same standard of the original film. There wasn't any magic to it like the original. I wish they would just leave these movies alone. If you can't make it better then don't do it!
The original film is the best. It has more emotion and the characters really draw you in making it believable.
No one can replace the original Mr Blunden.
Why they have to take a really good movie and remake it when the original classic was brilliant I just don't understand?
It doesn't draw you in and the acting just isn't at the same standard of the original film. There wasn't any magic to it like the original. I wish they would just leave these movies alone. If you can't make it better then don't do it!
The original film is the best. It has more emotion and the characters really draw you in making it believable.
No one can replace the original Mr Blunden.
Why they have to take a really good movie and remake it when the original classic was brilliant I just don't understand?
For people who want to watch 'The Amazing Mr Blunden' please stick to the original 1972 version.
This modern remake falls short of storyline, acting, atmosphere and direction. Please leave the originals alone, come up with your own stories for today's society!
What's wrong Movie companies/Directors? Running out of original ideas?
A totally out of place movie.
This modern remake falls short of storyline, acting, atmosphere and direction. Please leave the originals alone, come up with your own stories for today's society!
What's wrong Movie companies/Directors? Running out of original ideas?
A totally out of place movie.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Did you know
- TriviaMadeline Smith, who features in this adaptation, played Bella in the original 1972 film.
- ConnectionsRemake of The Amazing Mr. Blunden (1972)
Details
- Release date
- Country of origin
- Language
- Filming locations
- Finchcocks, Goudhurst, Kent, England, UK(Langley Park, manor house)
- Production company
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
- Runtime
- 1h 30m(90 min)
- Color
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content