Hey guys; I just bought this movie on DVD for $3.88 at Wal-Mart but haven't watched it all the way through yet. Was it worth it? I turned it on for a moment to sort of get a feel for it and it was pretty weird... (the Phantom has sold his soul to Satan; instead of wearing a mask he sews the dead skin of the folks he sliced up onto his face... :blink: um, yeah, eww....) But I couldn't resist buying it for the price; it's a double sided disc with both full screen and widescreen verisons.

But, anyway, have any of you seen it? What did you think? :)

For the Erik The Phantom musical I'm writing (with the same guy I'm writing Dr Jekyll & Mr. Hyde) I researched all of these movies but never got to see this one. It's my understanding that the score is a real treasure (as in the instrumental background music)

I've always wanted to see this, basically out of (sheer) curiosity. Would you recommend it?

Another interesting one is the movie with Charles Dance. The Phantom there is so gentle he couldn't hurt a fly... plus it goes on for hours.

I've wanted to see this version but I can't get my hands on it. It's supposedly quite gory? But I wouldn't know, not having seen it before. The Red Death costume in this version looks great though. ;)

The Charles Dance version is a miniseries, that's why it's really long.

Ah. That explains it then.
Because the video I have goes on for hours

Well, I heard there's a scene at the ball where they find Carlotta's severed head in the punch bowl... and,also that Raoul dies at the end... what phan hasn't wanted these things to happen? :P

The movie was out of print for ages until 2004 when MGM put it out on DVD, to cash in on the profit of the movie musical, I suppose.

I'm going to watch it this week though, so I won't state an opinion until I've seen it. Like I said, I only saw the first few minutes, and it seemed like it was actually going to be pretty scary.

Oh, rockfenris, BTW: Would you mind giving me a brief description of your "Erik" musical, as you did for your "Jekyll" musical? I'd love to read it. :)

I just heard that the Lon Chaney version was NOT the first film verison, as people usually say, but there was another film, German, I tihnk, mad in 1916. But, unforunately, it's been lost. :(

Well, a horror version of Phantom. I'll have to check it out :rolleyes:

As for ERIK: it's, in Joe's words, the closest and most true adaptation of the Leroux book. It goes to the extremes of, say, including The Persian (who is like the Javert of this Phantom).

Besides being faithful I had to put my spin on the piece. When I was asked to create the lyrics (additional lyrics in the first place), I told Joe (and the composer at the time) that I wanted to see the context that the lyrics would be in. I read the script, as fascinated as I was reading the Leroux novel for the first time. I was blown away because it was the most strangest script I'd ever read.

It was already pretty "weird" in places but I added the slant that the Phantom was a sexually repressed man who was full of energy and passion but never had the chance to release it, or even lose his virginity, because of the hideous disfigurement of his face. He's not only denied true love but empathy itself. The Lloyd Webber musical "grasped" the phantom's alienation but it didn't really explore it. We knew he was in love with Christine, and exercised power over the Opera House, but we didn't see his true passion and sexual deprivation. This "Erik the Phantom" is, more or less, a combination of one of Jim Steinman's monologues and a freaky 40-year-old psycho / genius which is THE ultimate role for a male actor - whether singer or actor. The first act ends with Phantom's seduction routine which is a blazing Steinmanesque love / almost rock ballad called "THE VELVET RACE OF NIGHT"

I put up the lyrics at my site (there should be a URL in my settings) which includes the opening chorus and the Phantom's Act Two solo. Joe wants me to do a follow-up called PROGENY but I'm boycotting it because musical sequels never work! :angry:

P.S.

The best example of my Phantom is a song that's on Jim Steinman's solo album BAD FOR GOOD. Both Meat Loaf and Barbra Streisand have covered it (and screwed it up lol) but it's toward the end and it's called "Left in the Dark"

P.P.S.

Musical files of our Jekyll should soon be available. Can't wait to show you Song 2: Hell on Earth :D

Yes! I saw this on a documentary of Nosferatu. It's called DRACULA'S BRIDE or something. The commentator described it as being an adaptation of Phantom of the Opera with the only relation to Bram Stoker being that they used the name of Count Dracula. Very weird...

Gaston Leroux did dabble in the film industry before his death in 1927 although I've no idea what films he made. The only other book of his I know is "Mystery of the Yellow Room" in which someone is murdered in a room with absolutely no doors, windows, or any means of coming in or out :blink:

Another thing I'm interested in is the deluxe dvd of the silent. It contains the original cut. If you buy a dvd of Phantom, say a random version, it's likely to be a revised cut from 1929. For this version they added the dropping of the chandelier and something else. In the original there was a different ending (I think) where the Phantom dies of a broken heart.. and the whole graveyard scene is included in the story. THAT alone is what I'd LOVE to see :blink:

I'm dying to get a hold of that dvd...

LOL

I haven't seen the Englund version of Phantom because the description made it seem really weird (a mask made of dead skin, and some sort of time travel with Christine). But I am curious about it.

I just finished reading the original novel by Gaston Leroux, and it was amazing! Some parts made me think that Erik may have been slightly mad, like when he'd refer to himself in third person, and when he was telling Christine about the Scorpion and the Grasshopper. *shudders*

rockfenris, the Erik, the Phantom musical sounds intriguing. I can't wait to hear more about it. :)

I'll agree with that. I love that musical, but it doesn't really take time to explore much of anything, and the characters are often more-or-less 2-D.

The description of your version sounds facinating and much more realistic and down to earth. I read the lyrics and I was once again impressed. Thumbs up!!!

I've long been hesitant about spending the money on the deluxe "Phantom" DVD, as I already have a copy of the movie, but after what you said, I can't wait to get it. I've always found the regular ending where Erik get beat to death rather stupid, this ending sounds so much better. :)

The ending is much better IMO. The reason for all these cuts is the change in directors. The guy playing Raoul had huge rows with the original director Rupert Julian. Universal sacked Julian who made a very dark film which was also more faithful to the book than the eventual cut (if you look at the cast list Mama Valerius, who's never been in any other version, is listed).

After that, a comedian-director Edward Sedgwick was brought in to re-shoot a bulk of the film. Both versions were shown as previews: audiences first saw Rupert's and thought it was too dark. They laughed hysterically at Edward's and that too was canned. Finally the production editor segued all the best bits together and made a complete, also "choppy", movie. The outtakes should be on the DVD

EDIT: The worst bit is the ending. That's Edward's. The original one is Rupert's. I guess the studio felt that the Phantom had to pay for his crimes...

I just read your lyrics, and they're amazing!!!! :D

I never liked the ending of the silent film where the Phantom runs away and the mob gets him. It kind of ruined his relationship with Christine. I really need to see the other ending, it sounds better than the one I saw.

Thanks :)

I want to see the DVD simply for the graveyard scene and the ending. I guess there's two sides of the coin:

Universal didn't want to condone the Phantom's behaviour by letting him get away with the murder of Buquet and whoever else. Morally, they gave the right ending but it didn't really work...

The Phantom really didn't mean to kill those people, he's not a sadistic murderer. He's just insane because no one's ever loved him because he's hideous. I still believe, at the risk of being revolutionary in the day, they should have kept that ending

The original ending in the Lon Chaney version has unfortunately been lost. So now we are stuck with the one where he got killed by the mob. It is really rather sad; Erik loses his one moment of redemption in the story because the test audiences didn't like it.

I'm still waiting for the definitive Leroux movie to be made, without changed endings and such. :)

Oh so it's lost :( Damn!!

I'm surprised anyway that stuff HAS survived. Back in those days if scenes were cut they were destroyed. Studio's didn't a) have room to store these things and B) no one ever thought there'd be Deluxe DVD releases in the 21st century :P

I don't know if anyone's a fan (and this is yet another of my myriad of musical assignments :P LOL) but one of my favourite movies is MGM's Wizard Of Oz. The latest DVD release includes a HORDE of cut scenes like the scarecrow's dance routine (practically the only outtake to have survived) and rehearsal footage of Ding Dong Emerald City and Jitterbug (the dance sequence in the woods before Dorothy etc. are kidnapped by the monkeys). If you're an Oz fan, I definitely recommend you pick this one up :D

I have GOT to get that Phantom DVD :blink: PRONTO!!

LOL

I have some vague memories of seeing the Jitterbug when I was little. The Wizard of Oz was probably the movie I watched the most as a child. The one part that always frightened me was when Dorothy was locked in the room in the witch's castle with the hourglass. What scared me was that the witch never said what she was going to do to Dorothy when the hourglass ran out, so all these horrible scenarios came to mind.

It's a shame that the other ending to Phantom was lost. I'd hoped to see something other than the mob attack. :(

Phantom of the opera is my fav musical.......after J & H of course....!!!!

Well, I FINALLY got around to watching this movie today. :rolleyes: I can't really reccomend it; it isn't really a good movie, that is has some good things in it - yes, rockfenris, the music is indeed a tresure, and the cinematography and sets are awesome. Robert Englund was an okay Phantom I guess, but he would have been better if the movie hadn't emaphasised the slasher elements so much. It seemed kind of unbalanced to me, because it was trying the appeal to two completely different audiences: fans of the musical and fans of gore. I personally skipped over many of the gory bits, which were much too frequent, getting in the way of the story. It goes that Christine is in modern-day Manhattan when she gets hit in the head and is transported back in time to victorian London (?) where Erik of course falls in love with her, and goes around killing anybody that is critical of her. One theater critic says to him - "I'd rather DIE than see that shrieking child perform again!" And the Phantom replies : "As you wish..." He tears off his disquise and smashes the guy's head against a wall. There are plenty of gorier parts though: some men try to rob him so he beheads one of them, Carlotta finds Joseph Buquet hanging in her closet with all of his skin peeled off - and he's still alive! And of course there's the bits where he's sewing the dead skin of his victims onto his face! :blink: As I said I skipped over these parts and I realized that it might have been a much better movie if it wasn't for the slasher-movie slant. It does have a gorgeously filmed graveyard sequence though. :)

:o
Oh, that is just wrong! *shudders*

Glad to here that there were some enjoyable parts, but I wonder why the setting was changed from Paris to Victorian London, even though I'm fascinated with Victorian London. :D

Didn't Erik also chop off Carlotta's head and put it in a soup bowl? I thought I read about that somewhere, but I may be wrong.

Indeed it was. Ugh...

Yeah, he did. I metioned it early on in this thread, but mistakenly said it was a punch bowl.

I guess maybe the setting was changed to London simply to make people to think of Jack the Ripper... it certainly has the atmosphere, and is gory enough to be a Jack the Ripper movie... Because of the setting-change, some of the French-sounding names were changed too - Christine Daae became Christine Day; and Raoul was named Richard. Oh, yes, near the end Erik stabs him through the stomach with a candleopera and then sets him on fire.... That was pleasent... :P AND there was no chandelier.

It's also worth noting that I watched the Hammer Studios "Phantom" a while back from the sixties, and it too was set in London. But that Phantom was the complete oppisote of the one in this movie - he's actually a really nice guy, and completely innocent; the murders are commited by his evil dwarf assistant(!)

One rather intrguing part in this version was when Erik visits a prostitute and says, "Tonight, you're name is Christine"... Interesting. :)

That line is a dark, eerie touch... I kind of like it.

The movie didn't have the chandelier crash? Too bad, with all the gore you said the movie had, they probably could have done something really gross with that scene.

On second thought, maybe it was a good thing they took it out. I hate to think of how bloody it might have been.

I did too. A lot of phans are all shocked when they here about that scene ("Erik would NEVER visit a prostitute!") But I'm not so sure. As rockfenris says, I think he's really supposed to be a very sexually-alienated character, and that's part of what makes him so tragic.

THe movie actually had some really emotional parts; as I siad, the graveyard scene, as well as another in which Christine sings "Don Juan Triumphant" and Erik has tears streaming down his face...

Oh yeah (I keep forgetting to mention stuff) this version also keeps in "Faust," which makes it the only film adaptation I've seen that does, so that's good.

You're right; that does sound emotional.

I don't think it would be too out of character for Erik to visit a prostitute, especially if he pretended that she was Christine. By the way, how was "Don Juan Triumphant"? Did it have a dark feeling to it, or was it a bit odd? I have the soundtrack from the movie around here somewhere, but it's been a really long time since I've listened to it.

The score is one of the few things about the movie that was really brilliant. "Don Juan Triumphant" was pretty much exactly what I always imagined it to be; it was indeed VERY dark, but also very sad.

I saw the soundtrack at the store the other day and really want to buy it.

Replying to the first post here, the 1989 version I personally have not seen though I am a huge fan. My personal favorite is the 1991 version with Charles Dance and of course our new 2004 version. I took a trip to Amazon.com and found Phantom stuff that even surprised me! haha If you watch it, let me know, I am getting it soon as well.

Well, I did watch it (see my above posts) When you watch it, let us know what you think. :)

ah, oui. I did not see that at first. I am tempted to order it. Then ill have just about everything Phantom. haha

I take the 1989 version for what it's worth. Even though it has gory parts in it, I did like this movie for the most part. Then again, I'm partial to time travel stories/films. ;)

I've also watched the following:

1. 1943 Claude Rains version - (overall I enjoyed it)
2. 1990 Charles Dance version - (enjoyed this one for the most part as well)
3. 1991 David Staller version - (this one had some interesting parts to it but isn't something I'd want to watch that often)
4.1998 Julian Sands version -(This one was simply awful. The Phantom is not disfigured at all and has long blonde hair. There's also a sex scene with the Phantom and Christine. The thing I liked the best about it was the rat catcher. :lol: )
5. 2004 Gerard Bulter version -(I thought this film had lovely cinematography but I wasn't fond of some of the singing voices.)

I love the music in this movie. But the movie is a bit too gory for my taste. (And I love gory things)

But Don Juan Triumphant is so hauntingly beautiful, especially on violin. And the Jewel Song from Faust is in there. Not to mention, the cemetery scene.

Those alone are worth the price. However, to anyone who hasn't seen it, I'd advise you to get the soundtrack if the idea of this film turns you off. ;)

It's good, though. It's certainly not as bad as another version I saw. *cough* Dario Argento *cough*

Now that version was just odd...Christine pranced around in a see through night gown, and Erik raped her. Enough said. :blink:

My favorite movie version of Phantom is the 1990 version with Charles Dance. Now that one is amazing! Based on the Yeston&Kopit musical, 'Phantom'

I like it, but I like Ken Hill's version of the musical more. Not sure if anyone here's heard of it. Anyway, I'm ranting again. :lol:

whoa! whoa! WHAT!? Erik raped Christine!? that is just not right! And I have the Charles Dance movie, but I could have sworn it was 1991 not 1990. I will have to double check that. Though I am a huge phan, I never heard of the 1989, 1991, and 1998 versions! Im going to have to get working on those. But I cannot get over Erik raping Christine!! What have these people done!? They completly ruined Phantom! No wonder some people dispise the show!

Hey, hey! Good news! Took its time but its finally here. I ordered the 1998 Phantom movie soundtrack. The music is well, but at some parts, just a bit too creepy but then again, it would deal more with the book the Andrew Lloyd Webber's version of Phantom. But I saw the picture of the umm "Phantom"........:blink: ........just no comment! First off, cut the hair! Second, get some makeup on that man and make him look somewhat disfigured!! I will have to rent these other versions and watch them.

Oh, and I should mention, that I do have the David Staller version as well. Not a personal favorite of mine, but still good. (I did kind of dig that gold mask he had on) ;)

Well, I really like Julian Sands as an actor, but I too saw some photos of his Phantom and I was like "what???" Of course that was mainly due to the script and director of the movie, I suppose. I'd like to see this movie version, but I'm definitely apprehensive. Read this thread on IMDB and you'll see why:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0119889/board/thread/20615383

Hmmmmm...

Hate to bring in some shameless self-promotion, but the composer on a Phantom musical I'm working on has written the most psychotic music I've ever heard in my life.

hmm, well I could not see that link you gave me, since I am not a member there, but still, I understand what you mean.

And what is it about the music that makes it so 'psychotic?' I would like to know.

Whoops. Sorry; I didn't think about that.

I personally don't care for any of the movies, but I Love the stage productions

As for personally seeing it on Broadway and in another place, (and seeing it again November 29th *dances*) it is very different from movies. One personal favorite of mine is when they are heading down to Erik's lair (the Phantom's if you want to be politically correct since ALW decided not to use his name) and they have the platforms that change as they make their way down to the boat as they sing the beginning portion of the theme. I dont think they could ever do that for a movie, (unless they tape the Broadway show! lol) but there are others of mine, are there any others that you all like from movie compared to show or show compared to movie? And I will put a movie compared to show....in the recent film, 2004 version, I did like how Gerald Butler's mask was. Just perfectly fit his face. With the show one mask, sometimes it looks like one of the dollar store ones that anyone can buy. (like the one I first got! haha)

I remember buying several of those...

My honest opinion, Gerard Butler ruined that movie.. if not my whole experience with Andrew Lloyd Webber's Phantom

I am probably coming in too late, but, yet, the movie is terribly gory. I own it, because I was on a POTO kick last month....now it's Jekyll and Hyde.

Anyhow, he is gruesome in this version: he skins Joseph Buquet, he does wear victims skins as a mask, and he cuts off Carlotta's head and throws it in the soul bowl for the Masquerade party... :blink:
--------------------
Now version, save the 1986 cartoon and perhaps Lon Chaney's, has come anywhere near the original book.

:o Julian Sands is not deformed in that mvoie, if I remember correctly. He is perfectly normal, and handsome. The only downfall is he was raised by sewer rats.