5 Bewertungen
This little known animated adaptation of Gaston Leroux's The Phantom of the Opera is possibly the most accurate to the original book. For that alone, it is of interest to phans who prefer versions closer to Leroux like myself.
The story is condensed into little under an hour, changing or cutting few details, and taking a lot of word-for-word dialogue from the book. Lots of aspects which other versions overlook are kept intact- the Persian, Box 5, and the torture chamber to name a few. Christine's character is also given the somewhat feisty nature she had originally- most other versions keep her a stock ingénue. I must also commend the Phantom's voice actor; the character is given a great voice: dramatic, smooth, and even kind of sexy (okay, I find it sexy anyway).
Alas, for all its accuracy, the animation is terrible, making Scooby Doo look like Fantasia. The characters' movements are stiff and you could make a drinking game based off how many times animation is reused. However, I will say that the character designs aren't eyesores and the backgrounds are good.
All in all, it's a decent version. If you liked the book and the Chaney Phantom, you might want to watch this one, if only once. It's no masterpiece, but it's entertaining and might interest children who have not been introduced to the story.
7/10
The story is condensed into little under an hour, changing or cutting few details, and taking a lot of word-for-word dialogue from the book. Lots of aspects which other versions overlook are kept intact- the Persian, Box 5, and the torture chamber to name a few. Christine's character is also given the somewhat feisty nature she had originally- most other versions keep her a stock ingénue. I must also commend the Phantom's voice actor; the character is given a great voice: dramatic, smooth, and even kind of sexy (okay, I find it sexy anyway).
Alas, for all its accuracy, the animation is terrible, making Scooby Doo look like Fantasia. The characters' movements are stiff and you could make a drinking game based off how many times animation is reused. However, I will say that the character designs aren't eyesores and the backgrounds are good.
All in all, it's a decent version. If you liked the book and the Chaney Phantom, you might want to watch this one, if only once. It's no masterpiece, but it's entertaining and might interest children who have not been introduced to the story.
7/10
- MissSimonetta
- 19. Sept. 2011
- Permalink
When I first heard that there was an animated version of the The Phantom of the Opera, I didn't believe it. It didn't seem like a story that could be adapted to that medium. Then I came across a copy. I was expecting it to be much like the Star Wars Christmas Special; so perfectly awful no one wants to think about it, and even the cast is in denial that it exists. I was wrong! This version is the closest adaptation to the original novel I have ever seen. The plot is kept faithful and there are a number of direct quotes from Gaston Leroux's classic work. I found the dialog and plot very moving, and, as funny as this will sound, by the end I was a bit choked up. I found the animated version almost, in some ways, better than the novel. It was far more emotional in my opinion.
The only thing that took away from the film was the animation itself. It was made on a low budget, and it very clearly shows. If you've ever seen an older episode of Scooby-Doo, you'll understand what I mean. At times I found the images' flaws very distracting. For example, there seemed to be only a few frames of Erik talking up close actually made, so there would always be the same pictures every time he spoke. At times, also, the lip-syncing didn't match up and the characters' faces didn't seem to display any feeling. Sometimes it was better to just ignore the visuals and focus on listening to the sound and dialog.
Despite that, I would recommend this movie. It had a few powerful moments and was overall entertaining. Maybe I'm giving it a bit too much slack since I'm a big Phantom phan, but I thought it was worth watching. So if you get the chance, take an hour and check out this film.
The only thing that took away from the film was the animation itself. It was made on a low budget, and it very clearly shows. If you've ever seen an older episode of Scooby-Doo, you'll understand what I mean. At times I found the images' flaws very distracting. For example, there seemed to be only a few frames of Erik talking up close actually made, so there would always be the same pictures every time he spoke. At times, also, the lip-syncing didn't match up and the characters' faces didn't seem to display any feeling. Sometimes it was better to just ignore the visuals and focus on listening to the sound and dialog.
Despite that, I would recommend this movie. It had a few powerful moments and was overall entertaining. Maybe I'm giving it a bit too much slack since I'm a big Phantom phan, but I thought it was worth watching. So if you get the chance, take an hour and check out this film.
- Scarletquillraven
- 2. Apr. 2007
- Permalink
This could well be by far the most faithful adaptation of Gaston Leroux's Gothic romance "The Phantom of the Opera". Both Christine's and Raoul's characters are presented just as they were in the novel. Erik, the Phantom, appears only as a shadow and two shinning eyes in the beginning and then as the corpse like genius as in the novel. With exception of the latest movie version of ALW's musical this is the only film adaptations that keeps the original ending in which Erik earns his redemption by allowing Christine to leave and marry Raoul. This ending didn't even appear in Lon Chaney's version! And the Persian Daroga is also in here, though his past with Erik is somewhat different, and the torture chamber!
Yet, unfortunately the animation is poor and simply terrible. Same scenes is used over and over again and the characters movements are slow. Also the recorded voice doesn't move along the mouths movements.
Sad that when Leroux's story finally appears as it has been waited for, even using many of the lines directly from the book, it turns out to be so technically poor that you wish to close your eyes. Yet, it can be watch once, if for nothing else than the story. It is only 50 minutes long.
Yet, unfortunately the animation is poor and simply terrible. Same scenes is used over and over again and the characters movements are slow. Also the recorded voice doesn't move along the mouths movements.
Sad that when Leroux's story finally appears as it has been waited for, even using many of the lines directly from the book, it turns out to be so technically poor that you wish to close your eyes. Yet, it can be watch once, if for nothing else than the story. It is only 50 minutes long.
One of inspired versions of the novel by Leroux. In some measure, just surprising . In other, reminding the potential of animation to propose details in area of special effects in the case of film.
The sins are the sins of animation of period.
But the loyalty to the version of 1916, the dialogues and the music are precious virtues in this case. And , sure, the wise crafted tension of this special love story.
You discover, faitful , the atmosphere and the pieces making this psychotronic short film a nice adaptation of one of touching stories of XIX century.
Its seduction has as root not only beautiful drawings but the care to respect the original story becoming just fascinating in few scenes.
The sins are the sins of animation of period.
But the loyalty to the version of 1916, the dialogues and the music are precious virtues in this case. And , sure, the wise crafted tension of this special love story.
You discover, faitful , the atmosphere and the pieces making this psychotronic short film a nice adaptation of one of touching stories of XIX century.
Its seduction has as root not only beautiful drawings but the care to respect the original story becoming just fascinating in few scenes.
- Kirpianuscus
- 13. Dez. 2022
- Permalink
- allyball-63124
- 3. Mai 2017
- Permalink