The Phantom of the Opera Movie Review:


Those two masters of overstatement--Schumacher and Lloyd Webber--join forces! Unless you're a die-hard devotee of the stage version, you'll probably find this film both excruciatingly overblown and annoyingly undercooked.

A mysterious, misshapen man (Butler) wanders in the shadowy recesses of the Paris opera house in 1870, encouraging the young newcomer Christine (Rossum) at the expense of resident diva Carlotta (Driver). Just as Christine begins to fall in love with her spectral mentor, she's reunited with former flame Raoul (Wilson). Meanwhile, the creepy, murderous phantom begins to tell the managers (Hinds and Clalow) how to run the theatre. While Madame Giry (Richardson) and her daughter (Ellison) seem to know more than they're letting on.

Not only is the story rather thin, but Lloyd Webber and Schumacher never let us get to know the characters. They're merely elaborate hairdos and costumes adrift on massively elaborate sets--all very colourful, but lacking in even a hint of emotion or meaning. In other words, the film matches perfectly the vacuous spectacle of the stage play, which was revolutionary in the superficial 1980s, but seems merely empty-headed now.

This isn't to say that the cast doesn't give it a go. Rossum emotes her little socks off--singing beautifully, heaving her bosom, catching the light perfectly with her curly perm. But since Christine is never remotely defined, we never feel anything for her at all. Butler faces a similar fate, with the added handicap of a slicked-back 1980s sneer. Only Driver wins us over ... by deliciously chewing the scenery.

And there's a lot of scenery to chew. Schumacher seems to have drifted back to his hyperbolic Batman period, throwing every conceivable design element at the screen, from glittery silliness to gothic schlock. But the underlying tone takes it far too seriously, and the songs are even clunkier on screen than on stage. Really, there are only two ways to adapt such a bombastic play to the screen--either high camp or plainly minimalist. But Schumacher and Lloyd Webber actually increase the pretentiousness. And the resulting film will numb both mind and bum.



Rich Cline

Paris 1870, when the resident diva Carlotta (Driver) refuses to perform for the new patron of the Opera Populaire, Christine (Rossum) is promoted from the chorus line into the leading role. She instantly becomes the darling of the audience and she equates her performance to her unknown teacher, a voice she hears coming from the catacombs of the theatre. As interest in her talents increases and she rekindles her relationship with childhood sweetheart Raoul (Wilson), the voice makes his presence known, commanding to be recognised as the true owner of the theatre, for he is the fabled Phantom of the Opera (Butler).

After years of development and numerous actors, actresses and directors been attached to the project, Andrew Lloyd Webber’s The Phantom of the Opera finally makes it onto the big screen but can it follow the other hits in the genre like Moulin Rouge and Chicago?

As a visual spectacle, the film succeeds extremely well. Joel Schumacher and his creative team have created a visually stunning movie that captures the sumptuous look that you would want for a film like this. The film is also been cast very well. While some may argue that the lack of big star names in the leading roles will be detrimental to the film’s success, Schumacher has stuck to his own devices and cast up and coming actor and actresses who are right for the part and can actually sing. These are difficult songs to perform and unless the principle performers are trained to cope with the rigors of these passionate and demanding tunes, the film would have been as disfigured as the Phantom’s face. Trained opera singer and up and coming starlet Emmy Rossum takes the lead female role of Christine. She has just the right look of innocence and beauty to make the character as alluring as she should be. You have to believe that someone could become obsessed with her and Rossum succeeds in creating this character. Her vocal performance is also first rate. She has a fabulous voice and really comes into her own during the songs. Patrick Wilson is another new talent that is about to be noticed. As Christine’s love interest Raoul, he is the hero of the piece. The part itself isn’t the best, as the character comes across as a little wet, but Wilson does his best with it. Gerard Butler is a star in the making and as The Phantom he gets the chance to show that he has what it takes to be a leading man. As well as having an exceptional voice, he also has the screen presence for the role. This is a character that has to be seductive and have presence that Christine is drawn to and Butler succeeds in creating this. This could be a breakout role for the Scottish actor, as he has what it takes to be a leading man.

The support for the three leads is also good. Miranda Richardson is as good as ever as Madame Giry. Simon Callow and Ciarán Hinds have fun as the new owners of the Opera Populaire. British soap starlet Jennifer Ellison makes the transition to the big screen with ease and she also has a very good singing voice.

Even though the film has many positives it does have quite a few failings and this is mainly to do with some of the choices Joel Schumacher and his team decided to make. Schumacher has always been a flamboyant director but the line between musical theatre and musical cinema seems to have been lost to him. Instead of concentrating on the songs and dance routine, the filmmakers have gone all out on the look of the film, which leaves most of the songs feeling quite empty. In parts, it is also blatantly obvious that the characters have recorded their vocal performances in a studio, as they don’t seem to be singing with as much gusto as they should be doing and sometimes it looks like they are not singing at all. He also fleets between the characters speaking and singing their dialogue, which is fine in the theatre but on the big screen it just doesn’t seem to work and in fact it is quite embarrassing at times.

The Phantom of the Opera is here but he might not have the power to get inside your mind. The performances from the cast are very good but you cannot help but thinking that the movie is a bit too pretentious to take too serious. Fans of the musical will enjoy it however but they might even think the film could have been better than it is. Andrew Lloyd Webber’s famous musical makes a good transition to cinema but it isn’t as good as it could have been.

Jamie Kelwick

The phenomenon that is the musical “The Phantom of the Opera” is something not a lot of people understand. But the select few who used to crank the CD of the music and play air-guitar to the guitar riffs throughout the musical’s title theme know what I am talking about. Are you a closet Phantom fan?

Well sadly back in the late 1980s, I was one of those who used to feel the music of Phantom. Sure I was told that it wasn’t Webber greatest musical but I really didn’t care.

Now nearly 20 years after I saw Phantom, the film version of the classic musical comes to a multiplex near you.

The story is a classic one about a young opera singer named Christine (Emmy Rossum) who is enchanted by a mysterious masked stranger, The Phantom (Gerard Butler), who is haunts the Paris Opera House. The Phantom promises her that he can train her to be incredible and that nothing will stand in their way. Well that is until the love between Christine and childhood lover Raoul (Patrick Wilson) is reawakened and Christine is forced to make a choice.

Phantom, the musical, was never about the story but about how the music told the story and the huge spectacle that the production became. So many bright moments in a delicious array of music picked this story up and made it something special.

This is where the film seems to lose the impact of the stage production. There is a lot of interruption of the musical numbers, added scenes, a whole new song and even a scene where the music plays but no one sings. We never feel the plight of any of the characters or ever got past the gigantic visual assault that is director Joel Schumacher’s over-use of plush design. Did there really have to be that much pink and gold?

I was impressed with Emmy Rossum’s incredible range of voice but felt that in some scenes she was just too high for some of us to understand what she was saying. Rossum is a great talent but she is still searching for the perfect project to make her a star.

Opposite to Rossum was my interpretation of Gerard Butler as the Phantom. His range lacked, his disfigured makeup made me think more about pasta than horror or pain and not for one moment did I feel an ounce of pity for this man. Well maybe for the actor, himself.

I was however quite impressed with the singing of Patrick Wilson’s Raoul. He seemed to be the most credible of the bunch. His scenes with Rossum are a lot more magical than anything Butler can muster.

For this thing to work you need to feel for the musical’s central figures but everything I felt was just hollow.

There were some things I did enjoy. I loved the opening sequence, the singing scenes with Ciaran Hinds and Simon Callow and some bits and pieces throughout. But for the most part I was quite disappointed that so many liberties were taken to bring this musical to the screen.

The liberties I would have to blame on director Joel Schumacher who once more hasn’t learned that less is more. Did he not learn this from “Batman and Robin”? You would at least think the studio would have.

I do wonder what people who haven’t witnessed this musical live will think and take away from this telling. But if it was me I’d skip the movie and crank up my CD one more time.

So Says the Soothsayer



Dean Kish

 

Site Contents Copyright© The Z Review, unless used with permission.This site has no intention to infringe on the rights of the film owners of The Phantom of the Opera and intellectual copyright holders of the movies mentioned herein & hold copyright over the movie, characters, merchandise & storyline.