El fantasma de la ópera

This version of the Phantom of the Opera is by far one of the stranger films in its genre. Mixing elements of 80 slasher and old time horror this movie works on many levels and fails on a few. Now, everyone knows the story of the Phantom of the Opera, Right? Well, this story is basically the same except for a few differences. For one, a late 80's version of Christine is trying out for the lead role in an opera. During her addition, she is hit over the head and knocked out. When she awakens, she is back in time in late 1800's London. She seems to have no recollection of even going into the past. The rest of the story is traditional Phantom except for name changes and how disturbed this Phantom is and his origin. I really have to hand it to Robert England as the Phantom or Eric. This is by far one of the best roles I have ever seen him in. And the make-up job for him is astonishing. The fact that this Phantom makes a mask out of human flesh is actually quite creepy. And physically, he makes his character of Freddy look like a silly mess.

Now, for fans of the musical and the original versions of the movie, I don't know if you would really like this version. But, for fans of 80's slasher mixed with some atmosphere, a good soundtrack, and good acting, I would have to recommend this. I give it an 8/10.

Often forgotten after it's release because it was critized as being a takeoff of Andrew Lloyd Webber's then current Broadway musical version of the same title. Actually, Dwight H. Little's film version isn't bad and Duke Sandefur's script actually has more originality than some of the earlier versions. Robert Englund is probably the most terrifying phantom yet, he probably can't pull it off like Lon Chaney did in the 1925 film version, but he certainly did a terrific job at playing a more darker and scarier phantom. Jill Schoelen also did a pretty amazing job playing Christine, as she is taken from present day New York to 1881 London were she is the star of the opera and stalked by the phantom and he kills anyone who gets in his way. My favorite death scene is probably were the phantom takes on three thieves and also kills an opera critic in a sauna. In addition to the originality, the phantom is cursed by the devil and his face mutilated in a Faust tradition. He is then forced to sew on pieces of skin to save his face. The production is luxurious and the costumes are authentic. But the most greatest thing about this 1989 remake is the music. This is probably the best music I have ever heard for any Phantom film. It's more malvolent and suspensful and also at the same time magicial. Misha Segal certainly did an amazing job at creating a difficult score, and it's a shame that I don't hear his music in today's films. I guess the film could have been a little better if it had a little less gore and a good falling chandlier scene, but even though this is the only Phantom film without a chandlier it was still an amazing picture. Also look for Saturday Night Live star Molly Shannon in a small role in the New York City sequences.

Being a great fan of the story, I have seen most film versions of Phantom of the Opera I'm aware of and this is truly one of my absolute favorites.

If you're interested in this movie because you're in love with ALW's musical and you just want more Phantom, approach this movie with caution. If you're madly in love with every detail of the novel and want to cry every time you think of anything not in the novel, approach this movie with caution. While it remains the same tale of a disfigured man desperately doing what he can to spend his life with the woman he loves in a world that won't except him, it seems people are often put off by the fact that this film takes greater artistic liberties in telling the story than others, but I think that's what should be appreciated about this movie. I am unaware of any takes on The Phantom like this one and feel it is worthwhile for that reason alone if you are interested seeing a variation on the story.

This is the story of a much more brutal Phantom reaching out to a great singer who otherwise wouldn't be given a chance in a much more brutal setting. While it is indeed a horror movie, it's a unique one, featuring creative death scenes and an interesting story. It can be enjoyed as a good horror movie and an enjoyable different Phantom story.

Robert Englund's committed portrayal of a man devoted to the beauty of music and love of a woman is greatly admirable. While I'm sure many will jump to disagree, I feel his performance in this film, while different, is far more believable and powerful than Gerard Butler's (2004) performance. As the Phantom, he is intimidating and passionate.

The real star of this movie is its oh-so-underrated score. So often is the music of a Phantom film not brought to the forefront enough. One of the great things about this movie that set it aside from other films based on the same story is that it is as much about Christine's love for The Phantom's music as it is about his love for her. In a film where the score plays such an important role, Misha Segal does a brilliant job, keeping the audience in suspense, making them cringe in horror, giving a haunting, addictive voice to The Phantom's desperate longing and giving Christine good reason to show interest in a man so ugly.

See it for the story, see it for the music. Enjoy.

Let me start out by saying that I'm a horror fan. I love all forms of horror from the silent classics to the new-age shocker films. It's a genre that is near and dear to my heart, so when I stumbled across this version of the great Lon Chaney classic (screw that french dude, his story didn't even tap the potential of the story) I HAD to see it.

The basic premise is that love and music live forever. The movie starts in the 80's where Christine is looking for a fresh new audition piece and stumbles upon Don Juan Triumphant, a great unfinished musical. While in the audition a freak accident flashes her back to what appears to be a past life in which she is an under-appreciated actress in the shadow of a great diva. True fans of the world of the Phantom can guess where the story goes from here.

The acting in this movie is above average. While it isn't the best you'll see, you have to respect the classical training of many of the actors. Jill Schoelen plays the best Christine I've seen in a film, and Bill Nighy is (as always) great... even though his role is pretty small. Robert Englund, better known to slasher fans as Freddy Krueger, does moderately well. He plays the sadistic side of the phantom very well. While he is no Lon Chaney (who is, really?!) His performance is equally haunting and captivating.

The sets are very well done, especially considering the time it was made. Many other 'classic' films made circa this time had horrendous sets and visuals (Kenneth Branagh's Frankenstein was great but had TERRIBLE sets, can I get an amen?) So I had to throw some Kudos for them.

The sense that the film was made to cater to two separate audiences is clear with the added psychotic nature of the phantom and the decent death sequences, but any true horror fan can appreciate the film for it's very decent adaptation of an over-done story.

For those who are familiar to the previous films of the story, this movie is based on a novel by Gaston Leroux. Leroux is best known as a Poet, Journalist and Novelist. Everyone knows the Story from Leroux's novel, which is about a man who lurks underneath the opera theater. He waits for a greater talent to come, one who could act and sing in the opera house. Once he sees that talent from afar, this man would does anything in his power to turn that talented singer into a big star. But this man is also a mysterious figure and he keeps everything into himself hiding from the world.

Unfortunately this 1989 feature turned to a near-slasher movie (But the original story still remains). Like the previous films about the phantom. It is still a horror movie. The Phantom of the Opera is played by Robert Englund (Who is better known his role as Freddy Krueger in the Nightmare in Elm Street Series). Englund does some of his best work as the phantom. He plays a man who was talented as a musician but once sold his soul to the devil so that his music would be immortalized, but instead he becomes an immortal, and his music remains unheard or simply unfinished masterpieces. The film starts in 1989 as an ambitious young female singer (Jill Schoelen) finds music notes in the basement at a New York Public Library. She is hoping to find great music to impress her next audition in any famous theater in the city. When she surprised people at the audition, when she nearly got killed in the stage by accident. She mysteriously finds herself transported back to Victorian-Era London 1881.

Then she becomes fascinated by a mysterious man who never shown his face to her. This stranger helps her sing and in order become a major star in the opera. Unfortunately this talented young star is overshadowed by a mean-spirited diva (Stephanie Lawrence) who doesn't want her to co-star in the play with her. Then trouble being when the Phantom starts committing murder in her honor so that nothing gets in her way. He will never stop committing these crimes until she become a star, his possible chance at redemption and to complete his music with her. Maybe even a second chance in love.

This film is directed by Dwight H. Little, who directed a successful film the previous year:Halloween 4-The Return of Micheal Myers. Which it was a pretty good sequel. Little has a decent film career who went on to direct:Marked to Death, Rapid Fire (Starring the late:Brandon Lee), Free Willy 2, Murder at 1600 and just recently the sequel to Anaconda. This film is nicely well directed and it does deliver the goods (Especially in the horror sequences). For a low budget production is well produced but the film has a few obvious mistakes. At times the production values could have been much better if the film had larger budget. But what makes up for some fatal flaws are the Cast, Terrific Make-Up effects work by Kevin Yagher and a good music score by Misha Segal.

This film was briefly released in the fall of 1989. Once it was released in theaters, the film was too slow for the true horror audience yet too much for the larger audiences. Several film critics really hated this film, because of the graphic violence. Which caused a problem with the rating boards before the film's release. The film originally received an X-Rating. It was a year before the new rating NC-17 existed. Furthermore the film had a limited release because of an independent distribution.

The Phantom of the Opera found an audience, when it came out on video and it sort of lived on ever since to become a cult-classic. Well, i liked this film maybe because the horror elements in it. It is certainly One of the Fascinating Horror Movies of the late 1980's. It was also a little different than most horror movie back then. It is also a very unusual movie because it was shocking, beautiful and elegant at times.

Since it came out on DVD recently, it has been revamped with better picture quality and sound. It may find more life like in this format. The film isn't perfect but to me, It is a worth a look. Centainly Horror Fans may like it also. You know there is something odd happens in the film's credits. When the producers credit this 1989 version as This motion picture is not associated with any current or prior stage play or motion picture of the same title. Isn't that weird ? I guess The Producers didn't want to get sued from the previous films or especially Andrew Lloyd Webber's Musical Play of the Phantom ! (***/*****).