The Phantom of the Opera

[Yo Kang]

Is coming out! WOOHOO. I've been waiting 2 years for this movie.

The trailer looks amazing, btw. Anticipation anybody?

[eeyore]

I watched it! it was great!!!!

Emmy Rossum sang beautifully, I like her voice better than Sarah Brightman, as for the Phantom, I like Anthony Warlow's version than this one

still a good movie.

[dgfds01]

I watched it! it was great!!!!

Emmy Rossum sang beautifully, I like her voice better than Sarah Brightman, as for the Phantom, I like Anthony Warlow's version than this one

still a good movie.

Good movie. I quite enjoyed the scenes with Carlotta, she was great as a b****. The guys who played Andre and Firmin were good.

As for the main characters, Raoul was good. His voice suited the role. I think he was better than the Phantom but that could be because his part is easier. I still prefer Micheal Crawford and Sarah Brightman.

Btw, did anyone think Emmy Rossum's speaking voice is very deep?

[Guo Xiang]

I love it! I think the voices are good too, and that they fitted nicely. Sarah Brightman sang very well, but I thought her voice was a little too deep for Christine. But then I could be thinking too much on Emmy Rossum's innocent face. ^__^()

They should have the Phantom as the original... Face fully uglified and masked instead of just half. But then we couldn't have enjoyed Gerard Butler's handsome face. c.c *thinks Gerard Butler is more handsome than Patrick Wilson*

*is currently running Phantom of the Opera songs on repeat* u.u;

And talking about the old versions btw, how come Michael Crawford sounds so much younger and vibrant than the guy who did Raoul's? Raoul's voice sounds as if it belonged to a fat old guy's! e.e;

[Moinllieon]

And talking about the old versions btw, how come Michael Crawford sounds so much younger and vibrant than the guy who did Raoul's? Raoul's voice sounds as if it belonged to a fat old guy's! e.e;

Steve Barton was the original Broadway Raoul. If you ask me, as good as Crawford was, his voice was a bit too young and un-"seasoned" to be Phantom's. But whatever. All of this has reminded me to order tickets to the Phantom when they play in my college town come January.

[Guo Xiang]

Steve Barton was the original Broadway Raoul. If you ask me, as good as Crawford was, his voice was a bit too young and un-"seasoned" to be Phantom's. But whatever. All of this has reminded me to order tickets to the Phantom when they play in my college town come January.

True, which makes the whole thing kind of weird, because Phantom was supposed to be a lot older. @.@;

[patricia n]

i enjoyed the movie and thought everyone did a great job with the respective roles. it's been a while since i've seen the musical, and watching the movie and being reintroduced to phantom sent chills down my spine. the songs were so haunting and beautiful. there were some complaints regarding this movie but i could care less. i love it and will buy the dvd when it comes out.

what i truly appreciate about the movie was it focused a bit more on raoul's and christine's relationship. the musical did no justice in portraying raoul's love for christine (i actually was rooting for the phantom while watching the staged production), but in the movie, i actually rooted for both men. and the movie also showed why raoul returned for little lotte...

by the way, who do you think had the most difficult songs to sing...christine or the phantom?

and i agree that minnie driver (as much as i dislike her) did a marvelous job...very amusing.

spoilers.....


/
/
/
/

i thought the phantom died in the musical (at the end) but the movie allowed him to live. i can never get over how sad his childhood was. and to be alone all your life...it's just so sad. yeah, yeah, it's not real, but i can imagine modern day equivalent to such a life like abuse...

[eeyore]

To said which song is more difficult it will depend with the singer's ability and experience.

Emmy Rossum was a stage singer when she was younger and I take it she still practicing prior to the movie. I have to agree with dgfds01 that her voice is deep. She's seems has no problem with lower note as she sang.

As for Gerard Butler, I read he has no singing experience before this movie (correct me if I'm wrong) so I supposed his character's songs can be more difficult that Emmy Rossum's.

I never watch the stage production (I actually got the chance but turn it down, and I regret it till now ) so I can not compare really. I don't even know what is the real story about POTO until I watch this movie, I keep it that way so I can feel the suprises .

When I listened to the original Soundtrack of the London casting, I can only imagine that Phantom love Christine so much and Raoul only come to ruin it. But this movie show it differently. As patricia n mention, I love the way they bring the love of both characters to Christine, so beautiful and selfish (mine and mine alone ).

[dgfds01]

spoilers.....


/
/
/
/

i thought the phantom died in the musical (at the end) but the movie allowed him to live. i can never get over how sad his childhood was. and to be alone all your life...it's just so sad. yeah, yeah, it's not real, but i can imagine modern day equivalent to such a life like abuse...

In the stage version the Phantom didn't die. Like in the movie, he just disappeared. His childhood was a new section thrown in after the Phantom of Manhattan (sequel to the musical) was written.

by the way, who do you think had the most difficult songs to sing...christine or the phantom?

You can't really compare. One is a soprano's part and another is a tenor's. They're totally different. It would be easier to compare the Phantom's and Raoul's songs.

Btw, did anyone think the Phantom wasn't ugly enough? It's hardly a face that would give nightmares to anyone, even children. The stage version was so much uglier - you could see how even his mother would fear him. And that's from the distance of your seat.

[dgfds01]

When I listened to the original Soundtrack of the London casting, I can only imagine that Phantom love Christine so much and Raoul only come to ruin it. But this movie show it differently. As patricia n mention, I love the way they bring the love of both characters to Christine, so beautiful and selfish (mine and mine alone ).

One difference is the potrayal of the Phantom as a cold-blooded killer in the movie. The stage version never showed the actual killing, leaving it up to the audience to decide how it happened.

[dgfds01]

Steve Barton was the original Broadway Raoul. If you ask me, as good as Crawford was, his voice was a bit too young and un-"seasoned" to be Phantom's. But whatever. All of this has reminded me to order tickets to the Phantom when they play in my college town come January.

Micheal Crawford brought a softer protrayal of the Phantom thant Gerrard Butler. You could sense the gentleness and passion when he sang songs like "Music of the Night". It was easier to feel his agony when he told Christine about how his face condemmed him to this life and when he saw Christine's and Raoul's love on the rooftop.
In contrast, Butler played the darker aspects of the Phantom's character better. However, when it came to the softer side and the love scenes, I found it a bit weird. Overall, I still rate Crawford higher.

It would have been interesting had Antonio Banderas been cast as the Phantom. But then, the deirector wanted a cast of fresh faces....... shrugs.

He was in a sense 3rd choice for the role of the original Phantom. Colm Wilkinson was first choice but he turned it down. Steve Harley sang in the first recording of the theme song. After that, Andrew Lloyd Webber decided that his voice didn't have enough depth to carry the role. Then Sarah Brightman suggested Crawford, who incidentally, once had singing lessons with her. He went for an audition and the rest is history. On a sidenote, Wilkinson eventually created the Canadian Phantom.

True, which makes the whole thing kind of weird, because Phantom was supposed to be a lot older. @.@;

Not necessarily. The stage version never told us how old the characters were. I always had the impression that the Phantom was at most a few years older than Raoul.

[patricia n]

In the stage version the Phantom didn't die. Like in the movie, he just disappeared. His childhood was a new section thrown in after the Phantom of Manhattan (sequel to the musical) was written.

well, the ending was definitely ambiguous in the staged version. as the stage phantom was never shown to kill, i definitely sympthatized with him and i left the theater with a heavy heart, believing that his life was full of misfortunes and perhaps ending it was best for him (even though i didn't want him to die). but the phantom redeemed himself in both versions, that's why when the movie made it clear that he survived, i was quite taken back and ...er happy.

there was a sequel to the musical? i remember the musical revealed that his parents gave him away because of his naturally ... er... freaky face and he grew up to be hated by many because of his disfigured head. the movie showed us how he suffered and how meg's mom helped him (which the play never bothered with).

You can't really compare. One is a soprano's part and another is a tenor's. They're totally different. It would be easier to compare the Phantom's and Raoul's songs.

the reason i ask is because we know that christine and the phantom are the main stars of the show and had the most songs to sing. patrick wilson did a wonderful job, but his job as raoul is not as challenging as the phantom. both christine and the phantom have to stretch their vocal cords throughout the musical. the reason why i want the comparison is because the people who i saw it with thought gerald butler was the weakest of the three performers. i understand that he did not have much training in singing prior to the movie, and as i am not a good movie critic or theatric critic, it was hard for me to not appreciate gerald butler as the phantom. additionally, i've always believed that the phantom had the most difficult songs even though alw wrote the play for his then wife sarah brightman. but i felt that alw was more biased and wrote christine's songs to show off sarah brightman's talent (so songs mostly in soprano) whereas the phantom had more vocal gymnastics to deal with. hence even if anyone performed slightly inferior to crawford, i would still forgive him. but then again, i'm not a good critic and i'm not saying that butler didn't perform well. i thought he was good enough if not great.

Btw, did anyone think the Phantom wasn't ugly enough? It's hardly a face that would give nightmares to anyone, even children. The stage version was so much uglier - you could see how even his mother would fear him. And that's from the distance of your seat.

actually, i was glad he wasn't ugly enough. i didn't want to see a horror flick. furthermore, it has already been established that he is a freak of nature with the gypsy show.

Not necessarily. The stage version never told us how old the characters were. I always had the impression that the Phantom was at most a few years older than Raoul.

i was under the impression that the phantom was a lot older as he taught christine how to sang since she was young. i could be wrong. but even alw intended for the phantom to be in his 50's, much older than raoul and christine.

i know no one asked, but i have a friend who played raoul about fifteen years ago, opposite to sarah brightman. she's apparently a total diva. not that i care because i still appreciate talent. apparently, he's been hiding this from me because he knows how much i like sarah despite her cheesiness and bi&*3ness. she'll always be christine to me.

[Guo Xiang]

Yes it wasn't mentioned in the movie (I don't know of the stageplay) but if you think of it, the Phantom is a paedophile. When Christine was first at the theatre and learnt music through the 'Angel of Music', she was a child. And Phantom by then was already 30 or into his 30s. By the time of the main story, he would be in his fifties or late forties.

[eeyore]

ok this is what I gather as my opinion according to the movie..

** Spoiler alert: read with your own risk **

the Phantom was few years younger than Madame Giry. than Madame Giry must be around late 30 early 40 when Christine musical debut as the leading lady after being a chorus girl. So for argument sake let say Madame Giry is 39, than Christine and Meg could be around 17-19. If Phantom is say 2-3 years younger than Madame Giry, he than would be around 36-37 y.o. say 20 years older than Christine.

so when Christine pass away around say 60 y.o the phantom should around 80's? bummer, does anyone remember was there any date mention in Christine tomb? I only remember it says beloved wife and mother. I think from there we can make a guess what age different do they have.

once again, just my opinion.

[FoieGras]

this movie sucked

[dgfds01]

well, the ending was definitely ambiguous in the staged version. as the stage phantom was never shown to kill, i definitely sympthatized with him and i left the theater with a heavy heart, believing that his life was full of misfortunes and perhaps ending it was best for him (even though i didn't want him to die). but the phantom redeemed himself in both versions, that's why when the movie made it clear that he survived, i was quite taken back and ...er happy.

there was a sequel to the musical? i remember the musical revealed that his parents gave him away because of his naturally ... er... freaky face and he grew up to be hated by many because of his disfigured head. the movie showed us how he suffered and how meg's mom helped him (which the play never bothered with).

Federick Forsyth in collaboration with ALW wrote a book "The Phantom of Manhattan". It was intended to be a sequel to ALW's version of the story, not Gaston Leroux's original novel. That's what I meant by sequel to the stage version, sorry for not being clear. It's an ok book, gives the Phantom a really good ending and explained a lot about the Phantom's and Raoul's lives. That's where the story about the freak show and Madamme Giry came from.
At that time ALW was thinking of writting a musical sequel to Phantom. He even wrote a song for it. As far as I know nothing more has come out of it, which is for the best IMHO.

About the Phantom dying in the stage version. I always thought he just disappeared, ran away. All the mob found when they reached his lair was the monkey and his mask. That doesn't exactly point to his death. It was only in the original novel when it was mentioned that the Phantom might have died.

actually, i was glad he wasn't ugly enough. i didn't want to see a horror flick. furthermore, it has already been established that he is a freak of nature with the gypsy show.

I guess so. After all, the focus is on the music and the love story. For the stage version it was necessary otherwise no-one in the audience would be able to see his face. It had to be bad enough that even people in the back row would get an idea of the horrific disfigurement.

but then again, i'm not a good critic and i'm not saying that butler didn't perform well. i thought he was good enough if not great.

I agree.
On the difficulty of the roles, I think that the two parts, Phantom and Christine, are equally difficult. The difference is that Christine's part was written specially for Brightman so naturally she fits it beautifully. Few have been able to fill her shoes well - Emmy Rossum did a wonderful job.

i was under the impression that the phantom was a lot older as he taught christine how to sang since she was young. i could be wrong. but even alw intended for the phantom to be in his 50's, much older than raoul and christine.

He definately has to be older. My impression was that he was about 10 years older, placing him around the late-20s/early 30s range. But that's just me.

I didn't know ALW wanted the Phantom to be in his 50s. Again from the "Phantom of Manhattan", the Phantom definately wasn't that old. When he was rescued, the Phantom was around 15 while Meg, Madamme Giry's daughter was around 6-7. Since Christine is around Meg's age, that put the age gap at around 9-10 years. The movie changed it by making Madamme Giry a young girl when she rescued the Phantom. I prefer the PoM's version cos the idea of a 50 yr old Phantom going after a teenager is just disturbing.

[kidd]

Just watch this movie yesterday. The main actress has a really good voice and can sing very very well, but she can't act.
They should find an actress who can act and then dub this girl's singing voice in. They did this for Mimi Rogers, so, they certainly won't have any problem doing it for the main girl.

[James Ko]

I was really exciting about this then something click me because I always thought this was a play (well a book first I think) anyways... would the movie experience ruin the musical experience?

[Arisa]

well i first come across it in some second hand bookshop, and bought the novel. actually i rooted for Raoul. I felt that he was sorta "innocent" to this whole game and was sucked in due to Christine.

The phantom is definitely alot older. (I read the book really long ago so my memory is quite hazy to be honest) I was given the impression that he made the opera house his playground and built most of the stuff in it. That is to say he's a really bright fellow, and certainly took a long time to get all his lair set up. He is getting cruel because lets face it, Erik (the phantom) is an antisocial - with the face hes born with its easy to become so. But it was also combined with the nature of his mind (psychopathic tendencies) that drove him to murder. He was in a sense very very possessive, and quite selfish.

He believed as long as he gave everything to Christine, she must definitely return the favor. He was sad to say, for most point of the story, impossible to compromise. I doubt he think in an old mind. He was young in the mind - and being alone for so long possibly never remind him of his ageing. He knew and see the same thing since a child till now - so theres little chance he will act an older person.

On the voice, I dont have a problem with it. I think they all sounded wonderful. Sarah's voice is always bent on the slightly hollowy I felt. Emmy actually looked very Christine. I think they changed the tones a little when she sung "Think of Me". The last bit.

As for comparing the phantom's part to raoul's; I would think the phantom has harder and more songs to cover - personally I would rather do phantom's than raoul's songs. ^^

Although actually I would like to have solely a movie version - and not movie-musical.

Lastly, I really would love to see a terribly disfigured face of the phantom, than just half a mask.

[kidd]

I read the book long before I saw this movie (never saw the musical) and have been partial to Raoul ever since. Raoul is a very likable guy in the book and like Arisa said the Phantom is a person who is hard to reason with. I very psychotic person. But he redeems himself at the end when he let Christine and Raoul go.

Btw, I like the singing voice of the actor who played Raoul more than the actor who played the Phantom. But the phantom guy is a very good actor imo.