Movie Reviews
If Andrew Lloyd Webber wanted to give everyone in the world a chance to see his musical, he failed in doing so. “The Phantom of the Opera” is basically his composition put to film (as any stage to screen musical is), but he would benefit himself in keeping his masterpiece to that stage. I say that knowing full well that movies can bring to life virtually anything you want – and results in making it far easier to bring the world of the Phantom to the audience. But to experience “The Phantom of the Opera” is to watch and hear it live. What movies cannot do is personalize musicals like this.
So we come to the Phantom. This is, no doubt, one of the most fascinating icons ever conceived by the mind of an entertainer. In my opinion, Gaston Leroux wrote “The Phantom of the Opera” as a form of shock entertainment, much like any horror film now. But more than Jason, more than Freddy, more than Michael, Frankenstein, Dracula, or the Boogeyman, the Phantom is the most universal to the average private citizen. When we watch television or a movie, or when we read our magazines, we are forced to feed ourselves the lies that society has taught about beauty for centuries. The Phantom is you and me – only scarier.
But just like Frankenstein, Dracula, etc., the Phantom has been used so much, that he’s no longer frightening. There’s been another “Phantom of the Opera” once every other decade since the 20s. This gives leave to director Joel Schumaker to make the Phantom look however he wants him to look. In the 1925 version, Lon Chaney’s stunning portrayal was not only scary, it was haunting. Schumaker’s and Webber’s Phantom is not the least bit scary, but that’s okay – this is a musical not a horror film.
What Schumaker was obviously trying to achieve with this is an experience that surpasses “Moulin Rouge!”. We get many of the same kind of unnatural sweeping camera shots that turn upside down and go through glass and ventilators. There’s a barrage of colors from every single flank – all mixing as the music plays and the camera flies past.
The music, almost the entire time, packs a punch in beauty. Webber’s music is off-color at times, but then again so is the film. But when it works out, that music soars through its notes and chords like an eagle through the trees. Often it’s internally rousing..
I enjoyed the changed relationship between Christine Daae (Emmy Rossum) and the Phantom (Gerald Butler). The memory of her father weighs heavily on the mind of Christine. She believes that his spirit is her musical angel – the source of her beautiful singing – when in truth it’s the mesmerizing voice and sight of the Phantom. She doesn’t feel threatened by him because she thinks it’s her father. So in a sense, she does love the Phantom, very much so. That, to me, it enjoyably ironic. ***