Le fantôme de l'opéra

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.

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!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

There is no doubt in my mind that the writers of this film were trying to make an enjoyable slasher film to entertain teenagers and attract fans of "The Phantom of the Opera" at the same time. What gives this away is the casting of Robert Englund. It shows that they wanted to attract teenagers by casting Freddy Krueger. However, at the same time the writers include lots of technical stuff from the novel to try and get fans of "The Phantom of the Opera." The result can be one of two things. You can either have teens screaming saying they were fooled because they thought they were going to see Freddy Krueger kill a lot of people and you can have "Phantom" fans screaming saying they thought they were going to see a real "Phantom" film rather then some stupid teenage slasher film. Personally, I am a slasher film fan and not a "Phantom" fan. Not because I don't like the "Phantom" films, but just because I've never seen any of them. My initial reaction to this film was a positive one. It's stylish, has great acting and directing, and it's something different. It's not your typical slice and dice film but rather an interesting look at the "Phantom" and his life. Die-hard "Phantom" fans probably won't truly enjoy this as I think at the end the makers of the film quit trying to please everyone and the film degraded into the typical slasher genre. I really enjoyed this one and personally I think that it's wrong that die hard "Phantom" fans give this film negative comments. If you were expecting to see the 1925 version all over again with Robert Englund as the "Phantom" then you're way off. Die-hard slasher and horror fans as well as "Phantom" fans should find this at least marginally enjoyable. ***out of****This film is fun and really cool especially when you watch it for the first time and late at night

In New York, the Julliard student Christine Day (Jill Schoelen) meets her friend Meg (Molly Shannon) in the library where she works and she shows a piece of music from the unknown author Erik Destler that she has found on the shelf. Christine decides to use the music in her audition on the next day for a part in a Faust version in the New York Opera.

During the audition, there is an accident on the stage and Christine faints. She relives her past life in the Nineteenth Century in London, when she is an aspirant opera singer and becomes the protégée of The Phantom (Robert Englund) of the London Opera House. The Phantom is the unknown composer Erik Destler that makes a pact with the devil in order to the world would love his music. In return, the devil destroys his face and tells that he would never be loved by anyone and would be disfigured forever. After a tragic ending, Christine awakes in the present days and has a great surprise when she is introduced to the producer of the opera.

"The Phantom of the Opera" (1989) is a gore and bleak version of the classic novel of Gaston Leroux. The make-up of the Phantom is impressive and gruesome. Jill Schoelen moves her lips perfectly and gives the sensation that she is really singing opera. The screenplay is original, with Christine Day living her two lives in two different centuries with the Phantom obsessed by her. My vote is seven.

Title (Brazil): "O Fantasma da Ópera" ("The Phantom of the Opera")