Rating: 
Summary: Entertaining and intriguing
Review: After we got over the initial shock that this movie was not going to have the great Andrew Lloyd Webber music in it, it was great to view. The comic approach to classical opera would appeal to anyone, and yet it does not compromise the greatness of opera itself. Also, the great storyline is woven into this setting with intrigue and it is all very pleasing.
Rating:
Summary: Best of all the Phantoms
Review: I live in the UK and had to order this from America which took about 10 days which isn't long and it was well worth the wait. This version is absolutely brilliant. Charles Dance has expression and grace which adds to his portryal of Erik. I think the unmasking scene was handled wonderful-as you never see Erik's face. Due to this we only see a human Erik-not a crazy deformed murderer which makes a wonderful change. I believe some scenes are rather funny with Erik as he can be quite sarcastic especially concerning Carlotta. Erik is also shown to be loved in this version, by Christine and his father. The only faults are the lip synching to the opera and the one portrayal of Erik as unaccustomed to murder. But despite this it is still fantastic.I think this is a must have version and no one can possibly watch it and not feel anything but love and sympathy with Erik.
Rating: 
Summary: mmhh
Review: This is an intersting version.Though I love Erik with all my heart. I am so used to the Leroux and Webber version.It has somewhat to do with the story and yet does not.Good for entertainment though.
Rating: 
Summary: Review from a 15-year-old Phan
Review: I am a huge phan of Phantom of the Opera, and I got this movie for Christmas a few years ago. I popped it into the DVD player and absolutely loved it!
One of the best things is that it is filmed in the real Paris Opera house(but the basement is fake), and it was also the first TV show to be filmed there. It makes the story seem more real.
The cast is excellent! I'm sure everyone's favorite is(duh) Erik, or the Phantom. Charles Dance is an outstanding Phantom. He has very expressive eyes and a calm, cool and humorus personality. I loved it when he dumped the suitcase of rats on Carlotta! I would put him right up there with Michael Crawford. He is immediately likable, and you will find yourself replaying only scenes that have him in it.
Christine was very emotional and had a charming face, but sometimes she acted a little airheaded or ditzy. Otherwise, she was great.
Raoul, here called Phillipe, seemed a little less wimpy than in other versions of Phantom, but he was kind of irritating, with his girlish hairstyle and "I'm so great" personality. He hangs out with the incredibly annoying ballet girls who giggle endlessly. He seemed a bit nicer to Erik, such as when he was dangling off the Opera house roof, and Erik helped pull him up and Phillipe mouthed "thank you" and looked grateful. Usually Raoul is a big jerk, but he seemed a little better in this one.
Carlotta was wonderfully horrible, cruel and irritating, but I thought her costuming was a little extreme for the 1880's. She is the best Carlotta I have seen(what she does to Christine at "Faust" will make you want to punch her in the face).
Her husband, also the manager of the Opera(I forget his name)was hilarious! I loved it when he fell into the basket and slid screaming all the way down the stairs.
Burt Lancaster plays Erik's father, which may seem weird to Phans who are thinking of buying this movie, but actually it is a good idea, especially with Lancaster playing the role. He played it perfectly and is one of my favorite characters.
Now for the movie itself: most of it is excellent, but a few scenes could use some work as they were either weird, a little cheesy or even a bit dorky. The basement looks like something out of "It's A Small World", and the fake forest was just plain bizzare. Where the heck did they get that? Also all of Erik's junk down there(Egyptian statues, carousel horses, giant crossbows, ect.)makes you wonder why he would drag all that stuff down there in the first place.
Another annoying factor: all the singing is dubbed! It gets unbeiliveably irritating during a long song or(as in Carlotta's case)if the actors are poor lip-synchers.
The music was enjoyable, and so was "Faust", which hardly any other Phantom books or films even mention. But whatever happened to "the angel of music"? They don't even mention it, but it was great seeing Erik actually teaching Christine how to sing.
The fall of the chandelier was great! It really did plunge down into the auditorium, complete with sparks, screams and a lot of broken glass. They used a different chandelier that was bigger and had more bulbs, which made the crash even more scary.
The unmasking was very suspensful, but it turns out you never see Erik's face, which I thought was a good idea, as it probably would have been cheesy-looking on TV. The ending is extremely sad, so be prepared for an unhappy ending.
So here's my advice: If you are a die-hard Phanatic like me, buy. If you've never seen Phantom before, read the book first so you will have a good idea of what the movie is about.
This movie is good for ages about 13 and up. It can get scary or a little violent.
Rating:
Summary: "All I ask of you" is to trust "The Music of The Night"
Review: Alright this isn't the Broadway or London's West End Musical. But it is just as good if not better. Charles Dance as my namesake (yes I know he spells it with a k) is delightful. Burt Lancaster as his father (Carriere) is well has the man ever done anything bad on the big or small screen? It's a shame that this came out on DVD only and as 2 separate parts like on TV rather than one straight 3 hour film. Must be because it never came on VHS. In fact, after NBC showed it in 1990 it disappeared til A&E showed it a few times prior to the DVD release. It is definitely a must see whether you have seen the musical, listened to the musical's soundtrack or none of the above. If you are only fans of the silent movie, the Herbert Lom of the 60s, the Claude Rains of 43, or any of the others (yes even the Freddy Krueger one of 89) you are in for a surprise. This is much better. You wouldn't think it was a made for TV film. ENJOY!!!!
Rating:
Summary: Good Miniseries
Review: For those of you who know the Kopit Yeston version of the story, this movie's for you. Or if you just want to laugh - the character of Carlotta (and her husband) is hilarious. However, the story is a bit slow and 'obvious' in places. Don't get this expecting a work of art, but just some good entertainment. Also, it was filmed in the Paris Opera House, so that's another neat aspect of it!
Rating:
Summary: Great Chandelier Scene!!
Review: The chandelier scene is so realilistic (actually it is real)! You actually see the chandelier crash!!! But it isn't like a big metal and crystal chandelier (like the one in the 1943 Claude Rain's version). Instead it is thin metal cords, small crystal light bulbs, an has a round ballish figure an the bottom of it. I still don't get how they do it. I mean, the chandelier crashes right near some people (about a foot away from them)! All in all this movie was great!!
Rating:
Summary: 1990 TV Miniseries Phantom
Review: This is the first version of the Phantom story I saw, and it is still my favorite. The series gets into the backstories of the complex characters. Anyone who likes The Phantom of the Opera needs to see this version. I wish I could find the soundtrack, because some of the music in it is hauntingly beautiful!
Rating:
Summary: The most romantic and operatic version of "Phantom"
Review: This two-part televison version of "The Phantom of the Opera" is a mixed bag to be sure, but it does have its moments. Clearly this is a post-Lloyd Webber version of "Phantom," highlighting the romance between the title character (Charles Dance) and Christine (Terri Polo) even more than the Broadway show. For once, the love triangle between teacher, pupil and Philippe (Adam Stroke), the Count de Chagny, is realistic; which is to say, Christine really has a choice between the two men who command her affection. Of course, the paradox is that the more romantic a figure the Phantom becomes, the less he can be seen as a deadly maniac roaming at will through the Paris Opera House. The result is that when this Phantom kills intruders into his subterranean realm, I found it hard to believe because it went against Erik's character (cf. the 1989 film version with Robert Englund of Freddy Krueger fame). One of the strengths of the film is the use it makes of the opera part of the title. There is a wonderful scene early when Christine has come to the big city and has joined the chorus of the Opera. One evening she is signing at a local tavern and the managers of the Opera House convince Carlotta (Andréa Ferréol), the egotistical diva, to go up and sign with the girl. However, it does not take long for Christine to blow Carlotta away, and when the diva flees from the stage we have clear proof as to who has more talent. The finale of the mini-series involves a production of Charles Gounod's "Faust," which is one of the best uses of an opera in a film since a production of "La Traviata" popped up in "Pretty Woman." The choice of "Faust" is a masterstroke, not just because the opera is actually sung in French, but because there are some strong parallels between the story of Faust and that of the Phantom. This allows for a rather surprising and haunting use of the opera's climatic aria. I know there will be strong disagreement on this score, but I also appreciated this version's approach to the Phantom's disfigurement. There is a pivotal scene early on when Christine actually tries to persuade Erik to remove his mask, maintaining that she can look at whatever is beneath it with eyes of love. When the mask is removed the focus is not on his face but rather on Christine's as she bases from shock to horror to senselessness. It is that look, along with Erik's cry of anguish, that carries the scene. More importantly, it sets up an even better scene at the end of the film. That first scene is clearly influenced by the Broadway version, where the audience never sees the Phantom's face at that point, just Christine, rather than the immortal scene where Mary Philbin unmasked Lon Chaney in the classic silent version. Meanwhile, the film's conclusion actually harkens back to Gaston Leroux's original novel with regards to how Christine conquers Erik. Editing this film down a bit would certainly be helpful; the four-hour mini-series loses about an hour once you take out the commercials, but could benefit from losing another half-hour or so. The performances are competent, with Dance evincing charm as the Phantom without a real undercurrent of menace. Polo is a tad too emotional at time and has a lot of lip-synching to do with all the opera singing, but there is an earnestness that matches the character. Stroke has the unenviable tasks of trying to convince both Christine and the audience that she should pick his character instead of the Phantom. Most of the supporting cast are assigned various roles of comic relief with French accents, while Burt Lancaster gets to bring some dignity to the proceedings as the former manager of the Paris Opera House who knows more about the Phantom than anyone knows. The key thing is that this 1990 version of "The Phantom of the Opera" is not going to be the first one you view. You have to see Lon Chaney's silent version and at least listen to the Broadway musical (paying copious attention to the libretto so you know exactly what is happening). The 1943 Claude Reins film involving acid being thrown and music being stolen is optional. But the more you are familiar with the various tellings of this tale, the more you can enjoy what writer Arthur L. Kopit and director Tony Richardson ("Tom Jones").
Rating:
Summary: All Phantom Phans MUST see this one!
Review: Most of us Phantom Phans have bought many movies/books, but none of them usually do Erik any credit. This one actually goes into some emotion and character depth. GET IT!
|
