PHANTOM OF THE OPERA

[Guest Dan]

It opens tomorrow, Dec. 22 here in the states, but I see that it's already playing in other countries. I was impressed with how sumptuous it was. Minnie Driver stole the show as Carlotta and Emily Rossum makes an exquisite Christine.

 

Has anyone else seen it?

 

BTW, I checked out the show itself in New York last weekend. To be honest, two of the big set pieces, the dropping of the chanelier and the masqerade ball come off as kind of hokey compared to the opulence of the big screen.

 

 

Dan Dare

http://male4malescorts.com/reviews/dandarela.html

[bigguyinpasadena]

wellllll,it has gotten almost universally bad reviews so I am not rushing out to see it.

[+ Lucky]

RE: PHANTOM OF THE OPERA (It screams!)

 

Well, Dan liked The Aviator too, so considering the source...

[+ BenjaminNicholas]

I haven't had a chance to see this flick yet, but did have a chance to see a live performance on the Today Show from two of the leads.

 

Interesting chemistry, but their voices lacked in power from what you'd find in a stage-production of this show. I've heard from friends who helped out in sound production on this movie that the soundtrack was MAJORLY tweaked, as the leads weren't as sure on their notes as they could have been.

 

I found this NYTimes review quote (regarding the POTO film) to be pretty funny: 'It's no Chicago.'

 

IMO, 'Chicago' set a very high bar to supercede in the movie-musical genre. Although, the movie-version of Bye Bye Birdie was pretty amazing and ranks right up there. There's just something about a young Ann-Margaret that's utterly wholesome in a sex-kitten-with-a-whip sort of way.

 

Now if we could only use the 30-something Ann-Margaret for the film-musical-version of The Producers, set to start shooting in March. Nicole Kidman just dropped out as the female lead (Ulla) and now casting is scurrying to find a 'name' actress who can carry a tune. I'm just glad they cast most of the original Broadway leads in their roles: Nathan Lane, Matthew Broaderick, Gary Beach & Roger Bart. All of these guys were perfect onstage and it'll be interesting to see how it translates to the silver screen.

 

If someone could post their reactions to the new Phantom film when they see it, it would be most appreciated. Thanks

 

 

Warmest,

 

 

 

Benjamin Nicholas

[+ BenjaminNicholas]

I haven't had a chance to see this flick yet, but did have a chance to see a live performance on the Today Show from two of the leads.

 

Interesting chemistry, but their voices lacked in power from what you'd find in a stage-production of this show. I've heard from friends who helped out in sound production on this movie that the soundtrack was MAJORLY tweaked, as the leads weren't as sure on their notes as they could have been.

 

I found this NYTimes review quote (regarding the POTO film) to be pretty funny: 'It's no Chicago.'

 

IMO, 'Chicago' set a very high bar to supercede in the movie-musical genre. Although, the movie-version of Bye Bye Birdie was pretty amazing and ranks right up there. There's just something about a young Ann-Margaret that's utterly wholesome in a sex-kitten-with-a-whip sort of way.

 

Now if we could only use the 30-something Ann-Margaret for the film-musical-version of The Producers, set to start shooting in March. Nicole Kidman just dropped out as the female lead (Ulla) and now casting is scurrying to find a 'name' actress who can carry a tune. I'm just glad they cast most of the original Broadway leads in their roles: Nathan Lane, Matthew Broaderick, Gary Beach & Roger Bart. All of these guys were perfect onstage and it'll be interesting to see how it translates to the silver screen.

 

If someone could post their reactions to the new Phantom film when they see it, it would be most appreciated. Thanks

 

 

Warmest,

 

 

 

Benjamin Nicholas

[+ Lucky]

The woman who plays Christine is supposed to be quite the operatic prodigy so I doubt that her voice had to be tweaked at all.

[+ BenjaminNicholas]

Emily Rossum was an operatic prodigy when she was younger, yes, but as time goes on and as the voice matures (and if you don't keep up with your vocal coaching), things go south.

 

ALW wrote Phantom especially for Sarah Brightman, who's got probably one of the most developed soprano voices out there. She's incredibly talented and has a world of training under her belt, as well as CONSTANT performance experience from her many tours and shows she's done. Rossum hadn't performed as a vocalist when she was cast in the POTO film for over 2 years.

 

Not to say she's not talented: Hell, i'm sure she's more than able to carry the score. I was simply saying that in the studio, producers want everyone to sound perfect, so tweaking is always a part of the experience. Lord knows they tweaked the hell out of Gerard Butler, who sounded as if he yelled his way through playing the title role...

 

 

BN

[VaHawk]

>wellllll,it has gotten almost universally bad reviews so I am

>not rushing out to see it.

 

I agree, I wouldn't waste my money on this movie! Why? I saw the show on stage many years ago, and like all Andrew Lloyd Webber shows, WTF???? I guess I need to be on the same drugs as ALW, to comprehend any of them!

 

Is that why Cats hasn't made the transistion to the big screen? Is that why Evita BOMBED at the movie theatre, despite the presence of Madonna, the biggest musical persona at the time?

[scudman]

as a fan of the stage show--which i know puts me in pretty pathetic company for many theatre snobs out there, i enjoyed the movie for the most part. i've listened to the cd many many times and know basically every word of the score. it was like a long (very long) music video, and i found it interesting what joel schumacher chose to lift directly from the stage version and what he chose to reinterpret.

 

the woman playing christine was expressive and gorgeous. and both raoul and the phantom are gorgeous hunks. sure raoul could use a haircut, but those eyes and that chin dimple sure pushed my buttons. i found myself wishing i could be christine and be ravaged by both of them simultaneously.

 

bottom line--fans of the stage show will probably like it. everyone else (which i've found includes most critics) will find it boring and overbearing. i take with a grain of salt any negative review from a viewer who hated ALW's work in the first place.

[BgMstr4u]

I saw it yesterday and was amused but not much more. I have never been a fan of Phantom, which has always seemed to me to take ALW's penchant for milking a few melody lines and a simple plot to absurd lengths.

 

The film strikes me as being inspired by the covers of teenage girl romance novels - the kind with twenties'-something men wearing large linen shirts open to the navel that somehow still cover the nipples, ride white horses, have long, long hair flowing in the wind and seem born to do nothing more than cater to the not quite hidden s and m proclivities of relationally immature girls and sexually unfulfilled woman. The cemetery scene combined all of these so perfectly that I had to restrain myself from giggling.

 

The sets are lush, the talent in the second tier characters is evident, especially Callow and Driver. But the leads are -- well -- callow. The vast emotion seems unmotivated, and changing the Phantom's face from truly horrible to merely disfigured leads to the question... All this for a bad burn?

 

And one final rant. If these people (except Driver) did their own singing, why is the lip-synching so obvious, so technically poor? And the plug for Svarowski, who made the chandelier -- shameless! The camera must linger on their name for 30 seconds!

[Muscle Lover]

Aviator is receiving excellent reviews, while Phantom's are

very poor.