Il fantasma dell'opera

Yes, I am indeed one of those "Phanatics" as they're called (though I'm almost starting to think we have a bad reputation...), and I personally would like to say that I found this movie rather enjoyable. I think it could have done without the modern sequences altogether and stayed in the one time period, and yes, a few scenes are a bit cheesy or cheap. But believe it or not, I think that Robert Englund did a fairly good job. My favorite Phantom will always be Michael Crawford, but when one compares Englund to Gerard Butler's Phantom (even using Crawford as the standard), he practically blows that little pansy-ass out of the water. It's refreshing to see an old, decrepit Phantom again, with more subdued, majestic style than Butler's gaudy, emo character. Also, this time the Phantom isn't scared to spill some blood, restoring some respectable fear for Erik that the 2004 version kills. Englund's voice--at least when he isn't screaming--seems surprisingly perfect for the part, and all film critics alike will see that he can indeed act, but has merely been restrained by his previous Freddy typecasting. All in all, I'd say this film makes an excellent counter-balance to the 2004 film, and both those who like like Chaney's Phantom and Crawford Phanatics alike will definitely enjoy it.

Yes, folks, I am a PotO fan. I can listen to ALW's soundtracks all night and day. I also am a huge fan of Freddy's series. The Nightmares are my favorite of the slasher genre.

That said, let's continue into the commentary, shall we? The thing that struck me most about this movie is the music, Don Juan Triumphant. It's a haunting melody that just sticks in your mind. For me, it stayed for years. I was lucky enough when with friends (who were working, leaving me alone in their off-campus housing bored for several hours) to find a copy at the corner video store. It was a delight.

Christine is NOT what you expect--she has no accents, doesn't look much like Sarah B, and I haven't a clue if that was really her singing. They did play fast and furious with the book. This does not mean it's a bad movie! I can count if I thought for three minutes ten other movies that deviated from the books they were based on? *S*

Basically, the movie, to me, deals with reincarnation. When Christine locates and brings the lyrics and melody for Erik's inspired masterpiece to an audition, she is struck on the head by a sand-bag in mid verse. This has her traveling back in time to the days of the setting of the book, but in England rather than France. I actually don't mind the changes; they make the story fresher in my mind. There, we learn that this 19th century Christine has been learning from a mysterious stranger who has taught her singing and plans to make her a star. Jill is a lovely woman, and in the role, she shines as she dones the jewels of Faust's love interest in the opera. Robert as Erik is as usual a wonderfully mysterious, sinister, yet humorous "bad guy", if you can call Erik that.

After the climax of the 19th century, Christine awakens to find herself in modern times again (hence my belief that it was a tale of reincarnation rather than actual-time travel--the 19th century Christine was established well before the incident!) and assisted by the show's patron.

I adore the synthesized versions of the music, and was extremely pleased when the library was able to locate a copy of the CD OST for me to check out. It's just as good as I remembered. Amazon had the VHS, and I am good to go now! :)

If you're seeking consistancy, accuracy towards the novel, or something resembling Michael Crawford, you're in the wrong place. If you're looking for a good tale that sends shivers up your spine (it did me as she placed money in the hat!), then this is the place.

Enjoy!

Now to just collect the rest of the NoES series....

I am a huge horror movie fan and also a big Phantom of the Opera fan. I remember this film when it came out in 1989 but did not get the chance to see it until years later. I love the 1943 version and also love this one as well. Robert Englund proves in this film that he is a great actor and has moved far beyond his Freddy Kreuger days. This film is also very haunting as a horror film where the 1943 re-make is more of a drama/horror film. Robert is also very haunting as Erik Desller / The Phantom. Tha main thing i loved about this film is the dark and frightening atmosphere that it set out for the viewers. well the rank this film from 1-10 i give it a 8 for sure... Great film for both Horror movie fans and Phantom of the Opera fans.

Highly recomended!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This is not just Robert Englund being Freddy yet again. The music, storyline, and direction are just awesome. The music for one is outstanding (hint try finding the soundtrack though) It is available but hard to get. But I disagree with Tim, this isnt just Englund playing a suave Freddy. Theres a lot more to the whole Phantom of the Opera storyline, and this movie, than Freddy will ever have hands down. Just ask Jason hahahah

I like this movie. I'm a purist, which may be surprising, but I am and still like this movie. Why? Because it gives Erik his edge back. True, they give him a good bit extra, but in the novel, Erik could have cruel moments, he had an edge, a threat to him. Ever since the Lon Chaney (which is still the closest to the book version), Erik has lost his edge and become a sort of disfigured James Bond. While I don't have much of a problem, this is a nice beak from that. Robert Englund is one of my favorite actors, and this was the first or second movie I saw him in (the first, if it wasn't this one, would have been Urban Legend, decent movie on TV). He plays Erik with a sinister sensuality. His lanky frame and Kruegeresque swagger are fine qualities, he comes of confident. Erik was like that in the book many times, though he did become a lovesick puppy with Christine. Yes, it's a slasher, yes they make Erik quite cruel in it, but it does have many little tidbits from the book. Plus, it has the masked ball scene, which helps it score high with me!! Go in with an open mind and acceptance of a crueler Erik (or a sickness of a lovey-dovey Erik) and you should enjoy it. At least it's better than the Julian Sands version.