ironhorse_iv
While, I was never a huge fan of the 1950's Famous Studios theatrical animated cartoon series of the same name. I have to say, at least that had some heart. This movie directed by Brad Silberling is nearly soulless. It's child-unfriendly humor and an overly-dark tone, with completely pointless backstory is something, this beloved cartoon didn't need. It was too grim. I don't know why, I gave this movie, a try, when it first came out. Maybe, it's because it had Christina Ricci as the main lead, Kathleen "Kat" Harvey searching why the ghosts, haunt their house, while also looking for buried treasure. She was one of my celebrity crush, when I was growing up in the 1990s. However, I wasn't as obsess with her, like Casper (Voiced by Malachi Pearson) was here. He was borderline creepy in this film. The way, he says 'Can I keep you?' is chilling, not in a good way. Also, the way, he find her, attractive in his dead mother's dress is kinda gross. I thought, he was supposed to be a friendly ghost, not an obsessive serial stalker. I really don't like, the necrophilia type relationship between the two. Another thing, I hate about the film is how annoying and mean-spirited Casper's uncles, are. Are we sure, this movie is based on the Harvey Comics by Seymour Reit and Joe Oriolo of the same name? I don't really, remember, the ghost that Casper hang out with, being so ugly-headed and obnoxious. I would rather have the original, Fatso, Lazo, and Fusso than these new Ghostly Trio, Stretch (Voiced by Joe Nipote), Stinkie (Voiced by Joe Alaskey) and Fatso (Voiced by Brad Garrett). They are the worst thing about this movie. Their use of vulgar language and toilet humor was indeed too jarring for me. Not only that, but they try to kill the main characters of the film, throughout the film. How are we supposed to cheer for these folks!? Not only that, but this movie's illogical use of pointless celebrity cameos, and several weak plots is another trouble with this film. As much as I love seeing, cameos by Don Novello as the exorcist, Father Guido Sarducci, and Dan Aykroyd as Ghostbusters' Dr. Ray Stantz as good in-jokes. I really don't get, the film's logic, here. The particularly scene where the Ghostly Trio goes inside Dr. Harvey (Bill Pullman) and changes him into Clint Eastwood, Rodney Dangerfield, Mel Gibson, and the Crypt Keeper was odd. It is never mentioned again throughout the rest of the film, nor do the trio ever use their apparent morphing-abilities again. Honestly, what is the rules of this film afterlife!? Supposedly, in this movie; ghosts are the spirits of people who had some important business left unfinished due to their death. So, what the hell is Casper's unfinished business? He says in the film that he became a ghost so that his parents wouldn't be alone since he died, but this makes no sense given the plot, since his parents died afterwards. So, if his original unfinished business was just that. Why is he still, on earth!? I get that, maybe, Casper's unfinished business was his entire life. Dying at such a young age, he never had the chance to live, and thus he remains earthbound until he experiences enough to allow him to pass on. Still, it doesn't explain, what happen to Casper's dead parents!? Did they go to heaven without him!? It's not like them, to abandon Casper! After all, when his father was alive, he built a resurrection machine just to be with his son, again. The worst possibility is that, the parents did become a ghosts, but forgot who they were and ended up leaving the manor without their son, or God punish his parents for 'playing God' and sent them to hell. Even that, doesn't make sense, since the villain of this film, was sent to heaven. The film is full of inconsistent. Way too much of it, like why does the ghosts in the film able to walk through walls, but not through something simple like vacuum bags!? How are they able to pick up some items, yet not others? Why are they able to leave, their place of haunting? Also, isn't it a bit odd, that some of the ghosts look ghostly, cartoonish of their self, while Casper looks nothing like himself, when was alive? I get that, he might be dead for a long time, and forgot what his features looks like, but this forgetting plot doesn't quite work out, since other recent ghost appears to have lost all their memories and still looks like their former selves. It get more confusing, when, Dr. Harvey's dead wife comes into the picture. She looks pretty normal, despite being dead. Also, if a ghost did use the machine, where does the body, come from, and what happen to old body? Also, why didn't Casper's parents used it? Despite all those jarring questions, the CGI work is still very convincing for 1995. Most of the acting was alright. The music by James Horner was ghoulish fun, haunting and emotional touching as well. There's also a musical number by the Ghostly Trio called 'Lucky Enough to Be a Ghost', which was cut because the special effects needed to create it, was too expensive. The rough drafts can still be found on the DVD. In my opinion, the film would work more, if they cut out, other scenes like the whole bullies trying to ruin the Halloween party, sub-plot. Movie has way too much filler as well. Overall: Despite all that, it nevertheless gained a bit of a cult following and was a success at the box office. It gained a few DTV sequels. However, I agree with Russell Harvey, heir to the Harvey Comics legacy, who hated this film. This film is unfunny and very unpleasant to watch, because of that. I can't recommended watching this 1990s kid movie at all.
slightlymad22
I'll admit right from the off I'd never heard of 'Casper The Friendly Ghost' until 1993 when I went to my local multiplex to see the Kevin Costner and Clint Eastwood movie 'A Perfect World' in which a child steals a Halloween costume. So I didn't know much going into this movie. I believe this is the first feature film with a computer-animated title character, and for me the effects are outstanding. Eric Idle and Cathy Moriarity are splendidly devious, if under used, whilst fresh from pairing with Sandra bullock in 'While You Were Sleeping' Bill Pullman is a lot of fun as the Dad.As for Christina Ricci, following on from her awesome performances in the Addams Family movies, it was around this time I thought, she had the potential to be a good Demi Moore type actress, once she grew up. Things haven't quite panned out that way, but she is still a working actress. Coincidently she would costar with Moore in 'Now & Then' the same year, but she was not playing a younger Moore, as I expected, but a younger version of Rosie O Donnell. Poor casting in my eyes.There are some nice cameos from Clint Eastwood, Mel Gibson Rodney Dangerfield, but it's the appearance of Dan Aykroyd as Dr. Raymond Stantz (from Ghostbusters (1984)) who runs out of the house frantically and says, "Who you gonna call? Someone else!" That brought the biggest smile to my face.
