The Phantom of the Opera
review by Russ Breimeier | posted 12/22/2004
 1 of 5
For fans like myself, it's been a long 18-year wait for a cinematic adaptation of Andrew Lloyd Webber's The Phantom of the Opera, one of the most successful stage musicals of all time with an original cast recording that's sold more than 40 million copies since 1987. The tagline for the new movie is chuckle-worthy, however: "The classic musical comes to the big screen for the first time." It ensures people understand what this particular version is like, but "first" also suggests that there may be future film adaptations of the musical. Judging by this one, that might not be a bad idea.
Gerard Butler plays The Phantom
For the unfamiliar, the musical Phantom is loosely adapted from Gaston Leroux's classic novel of the same name. Primarily set in an 1870 Paris opera house, the story centers on Christine Daae (Emmy Rossum), a young and innocent chorus girl who longs to become a leading opera singer, but is unable to rise above the arrogant preening of soprano diva Carlotta (Minnie Driver). All of that begins to change through the tutelage and aid of a mysterious and romantic "Angel of Music," none other than The Phantom (Gerard Butler), a mysterious masked presence lurking among the shadows of the theatre. When dashing patron Raoul (Patrick Wilson) enters the picture to compete for Christine's heart, it sends The Phantom into a jealous rampage, letting nothing stand in his way to advance the beauty's rise to stardom and win her love.
Lloyd Webber produced this film, selecting Joel Schumacher as director because of his work combining visuals with music in (no joke) the 1987 comedic teen -vampire thriller The Lost Boys. Schumacher does have experience directing music videos and a penchant for visual opulence, so he would seem an ideal choice, with the deceptively easy task of putting the heralded musical on screen and enhancing it with movie magic. As long as he doesn't dramatically alter it, how can he fail?
Emmy Rossum is radiant as Christine
Recall that Schumacher also has a reputation for favoring style over substance—this is the same man who derailed the Batman film franchise in the mid-'90s with Batman Forever and Batman & Robin, opting for flashy colors and camp over sensible dialogue and suspense. To Schumacher's credit, this Phantom looks and sounds great. The set design and costumes are gorgeous and Oscar worthy, the cast is attractive, and the breathtaking musical score has been (mostly) preserved.
Still it falls short of other great movie musicals, though in fairness to Schumacher, Phantom is not as simple as throwing the theatrical production on screen. The stage allows imaginative liberties that don't translate well to film. Also, unlike the classic musicals of yesteryear and the recent Best Picture winner Chicago, most of Phantom doesn't benefit from choreography and action to hold the audience's attention during musical numbers, leaving us with several scenes of actors singing to each other with long lingering gazes.
That's exactly where the director needs to step in to find a way to carry the story on film with beauty and intelligence—Schumacher and Lloyd Webber only get it half right with their screenplay. A montage of shots and images help establish setting, but they don't necessarily tell the story. The best movie musicals, like Chicago, find a way to translate the drama on screen, not simply dress it up.
Browse More Movies
CT Movies Home Page | Now Showing | New on Video | All Reviews
Coming Soon | Discussion Guides | Interviews | Commentary
News & Misc. | Special Sections | About Us
Your Feedback | About Us | CT Mag Home Page
| |
|
