Phantom der Oper

1990 two-part Brit film, made for TV to take advantage of the interest in the then hit Broadway musical. This one is not a musical, but has numerous excellent operatic scenes. A young Comte, patron of the opera, hears a beautiful singer at a country fair, sends her to the impresario of the opera house to arrange for singing lessons. That manager has just been dismissed, succeeded by a scurrilous couple played by jealous, demanding soprano Andréa Ferréol and her husband, fawning Ian Richardson. He's in a very different role for him, which couldn't keep out his usual officious nature behind a very strange semi-Italian accent! I imagine he relished every second of it. Ferréol demands the leading roles in every opera, refuses to give lovely ingenue Teri Polo lessons, but lets her stay on as her costume girl and dresser to lesser players. Veteran character actor Charles Dance does a fine job as Erik, the Phantom, as does Burt Lancaster as the ousted manager. Unlike that famous organ scene in the Lon Chaney 1925 silent, we never see Erik's face. When he is unmasked, his back remains to the camera. I've seen most if not all of the film "Phantoms" and deem this the finest of all. Direction, sets, locations are all absolutely outstanding. The TV film originally ran on two different nights, with complete, long opening titles and closing credits run both times. The first installment ends suddenly with the huge chandelier crashing down on opera patrons. Tres abrupt! Viewers must fiddle around with controls to jump to the "next scene", the film's concluding half, and sit through those titles again. Should have been re-edited for home viewers. But the performance itself is well worth it, after one figures all this out. A very strange trailer is included as the third CD "scene".

I watched this movie because I wanted to see what Andrew Lloyd Webber was up against. I honestly thought it was going to be horrible. After, I saw the movie not only was I very impressed, but I couldn't get enough of it. I loved the cast. I was extremely pleased not none of Yestin's and Koppit's songs were used.(Now, I saw the Yestin's and Koppit's play long before I even knew a movie of it had been made.)I didn't like what they did with Eric's background story. I felt that it took away from his character. I hated that they didn't make Philippe more of a hero and that he had scenes in which he smoked!!! I was disappointed that we only saw Eric's face once and that it wasn't more believable. His face also really wasn't scary. I also thought that young Philippe, young Christine,and young Eric should have, at least, some dialogue.

Beautiful Adaptation of the Phantom of the Opera. This is NOT the musical Broadway version. The only music here is the Italian operas the opera house is performing. This version based on a stage version of the book, by noted playwright Arthur Kopit, is beautiful and well performed. I love this movie because of its character development and lack of individuals breaking into song for absolutely no reason, what so ever. The use of the Phantom's various masks to convey his mood is a very unique approach, in this film. The climatic duet between Christine and Eric and a beautiful scene with Burt Lancaster and Charles Dance (Carriere and Eric) are both very moving.

A beautiful, and tragic love story.

This version of "The Phantom of the Opera" (which was obviously written for the stage and carries that atmosphere throughout the movie) seems to have been made for those who savor a lush, epic feel- the music, framed around the operatic bits which are central to the story, is gliding and hypnotic (the "Angels Pure" finale may well have been badly dubbed, but I was too entranced to notice) and the sets are appropriately opulant and surrealistic (my favorites being, of course, the catacombs, as well as the scene at the Bistro). And it's rare that I see a movie that has succeeds so well in making almost every single actor, usually under candlelight or a faint bluish glow, look as ethereally beautiful as their surroundings. These two factors alone make the movie worth watching and, when it's all said and done, was probably what was most strongly impressed on me at the end of the four hours. It's very deliberately paced, forcing the viewer to drink in all of the movie slowly and, I think, reshaping the traditional way this story has been told--this movie is character-driven, not action driven, a way of storytelling that appeals to me. When the action finally does happen, we get a clear understanding of why.

The characters, though, weren't necessarily the most believable bunch I've ever seen, a fact that owes some to the writing, which gives them poetic but improbable dialogue, and the woe-is-me soliloquies, particularly on the part of Erik, start to wear. But of course, I can't complain too much--"Phantom" is played as either as a horror story or a melodrama, (or both), and thanks to the (overdone?) effort to make the viewer sympathise with the tragic antihero Phantom, it's not much of a horror story. The acting, too, is a little over-the-top...though a lot of that is probably intentional (and fun to watch!). I wished Christine was a stronger, less wishy-washy character (of course she really isn't shown as anything but, no matter which version, including the Lloyd-Webber "Phantom") and I wished that Phillipe was more of a presence, more of a deserving rival to the gloomy phantomized Erik. I also thought that the fact that Christine not simply sounded like, but also LOOKED like Erik's mother (prompting him to fall in love with her, the old Oedipean twist), shot down one of the main themes of the movie, voiced in Erik's complaint that Phillipe came to the opera for the wrong reason: the love of faces rather than the love of music. Much better if they would have used a different actress in the flashback scenes with Gerard (Burt Lancaster) and Belladora (?), the mother. Still, there are scenes which seem to shrug off the need for realistic dialogue or flawless acting in the beauty of their execution. Some of my favorite parts, the flashbacks, are more-or-less mimed, and to me, the movie is most effective either when the characters are singing or when scene is taking place without much dialogue. The movie is fantasy-oriented, after all, not gritty realism, and after a while you DO grow attached to the characters. All-in-all, the movie is best enjoyed in a dark room and a thick blanket, with a mentality open to fantasy and escapism and cynicism pushed off to the side.

I have seen all other film version of this story, and have read the original novel, and I can say this is absolutely the best adaptation. It surpasses the original story, it is presented with A-list actors, superb mounting, flawless film-making savvy across the board, but most importantly the changes to the original story, and the ignoring of every previous film effort, have made this TV production of The Phantom of the Opera the Classic cinema adaptation! I assume the fact of my missing this film in 1998 is due to it being an overseas TV production but the DVD I viewed is available in at least two of the giant rental chains in the U.S. And I found the soundtrack CD on Amazon.