IMDb RATING
8.6/10
687
YOUR RATING
A young girl arriving in a new neighborhood, enters the world of spirits, and when her parents are turned into pigs she must go on a quest to rescue them.A young girl arriving in a new neighborhood, enters the world of spirits, and when her parents are turned into pigs she must go on a quest to rescue them.A young girl arriving in a new neighborhood, enters the world of spirits, and when her parents are turned into pigs she must go on a quest to rescue them.
Kotaro Daigo
- Haku
- (as Kotarô Daigo)
Tomorô Taguchi
- Kamaji
- (as Tomorowo Taguchi)
- Director
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Storyline
Did you know
- TriviaMari Natsuki reprises her role as Yubaba, having voiced the character in the original film.
- Alternate versionsThere are two nearly identical versions that feature two different casts. One features Mone Kamishiraishi as Chihiro, the other features Kanna Hashimoto. The Hashimoto version also features Mari Natsuki who reprises her role as Yubaba and Zeniba from the original 2001 film.
- ConnectionsRemake of Spirited Away (2001)
Featured review
There was no innovation or creativity to be found in this adaptation. Studio Ghibli was so hell-bent on creating "Spirited Away incarnate" that they forgot they needed to make it into a good play first. They didn't, and it was never going to land on its feet with that philosophy. The movie was one of the most stylistic animes ever made, an already hyperbolic genre of film. There isn't a production team on the planet who could accurately "bring it to life" on stage. It needed a different vision or approach, even if it meant at the expense of fan service. Unfortunately, they were never going to take that risk. This was clearly a shameless cash grab, attempting to sell more DVDs rather than create anything with artistic autonomy.
So what specifically went wrong? With the exception of the leading lady, the acting was generally over the top or grating, better at producing unintentional laughter rather than any form of immersion. The costumes, puppets, and makeup were clearly not made for closeup shots. They were cheap and cartoonish with very obvious seams, literal and figurative. What puzzled me the most was, despite their faithfulness to the source material, the producers still found a way to insert heaps of random music and dance breaks. These served no purpose to the plot other than to pad an already lengthy runtime. The plot as a whole was incomprehensible, both due to poor pacing and inconsistent design choices. Half the costumes and stage effects were impossible to decipher the meaning behind. That's rather poor form for a script so heavy on supernatural happenings and beings.
Credit where credit is due: The staging was excellent. The set pieces moved around so fluidly, a necessary choice when scenes jump around like they would in a movie. Overall, I do understand why so many fans of the movie love this production. I'd compare it to an Elmo mascot at a toddler's birthday party. It may not be as good as the original, but at least it's nostalgic and familiar. However, if members of the unintended audience were to sneak in, those unfamiliar with the 2001 film, this adaptation would give them the wrong impression that the original was too cheap, too confusing, too long, or too silly. Call me crazy, but I don't think that's fair to one of the best animated movies in history.
So what specifically went wrong? With the exception of the leading lady, the acting was generally over the top or grating, better at producing unintentional laughter rather than any form of immersion. The costumes, puppets, and makeup were clearly not made for closeup shots. They were cheap and cartoonish with very obvious seams, literal and figurative. What puzzled me the most was, despite their faithfulness to the source material, the producers still found a way to insert heaps of random music and dance breaks. These served no purpose to the plot other than to pad an already lengthy runtime. The plot as a whole was incomprehensible, both due to poor pacing and inconsistent design choices. Half the costumes and stage effects were impossible to decipher the meaning behind. That's rather poor form for a script so heavy on supernatural happenings and beings.
Credit where credit is due: The staging was excellent. The set pieces moved around so fluidly, a necessary choice when scenes jump around like they would in a movie. Overall, I do understand why so many fans of the movie love this production. I'd compare it to an Elmo mascot at a toddler's birthday party. It may not be as good as the original, but at least it's nostalgic and familiar. However, if members of the unintended audience were to sneak in, those unfamiliar with the 2001 film, this adaptation would give them the wrong impression that the original was too cheap, too confusing, too long, or too silly. Call me crazy, but I don't think that's fair to one of the best animated movies in history.
- How long is Spirited Away: Live on Stage?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Release date
- Country of origin
- Official site
- Language
- Also known as
- Sen to Chihiro no kamikakushi: Butai
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
- Runtime2 hours 50 minutes
- Color
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content
Top Gap
By what name was Spirited Away: Live on Stage (2022) officially released in India in English?
Answer