A
film review by James Berardinelli for ReelViews.net.
I
have never been a fan of Andrew Lloyd
Webber's phenomenally popular stage musical version of The Phantom of the Opera, so it will probably come as no surprise
that the film adaptation, which is faithful to its inspiration, left me feeling
underwhelmed. Truth be told, I am not fond of Lloyd Webber's style of music,
and The Phantom of the Opera suffers
from a multitude of problems, not the least of which are poor writing and an
uneasy marriage between a gothic setting and big-production musical numbers.
The tale of the Phantom is softened considerably in an attempt to keep things
from becoming too depressing.
This
film underwent a lot of iterations before finally making it to the screen. As
originally conceived in 1990, it was to star Michael Crawford and Sarah
Brightman (the original Broadway performers), but those two long since
departed, along with many other names, including Antonio Banderas. The trio who
eventually got the lead roles are relative unknowns: Gerard Butler is the Phantom (his largest previous role was as the Stranger in Dear Frankie); Emmy Rossum
(the dead daughter in Mystic River)
is Christine; and Patrick Wilson is
Raoul. It's hard to make any determination about their acting skills based on
this movie, but they can all sing to one degree or another. The supporting
roles are filled by British character actors - Miranda Richardson as Madame Giry, Minnie Driver as the diva Carlotta, and Ciran Hinds and Simon Callow
as Firmin and Andre, the new owners of the Opera House.
Although
the storyline has been made more coherent for the movie than it is in the stage
version, it nevertheless helps to have seen a previous version of the film or
to have read the novel upon which it is based. In brief, Christine is an
up-and-coming opera star who has taken extensive voice lessons from the
mysterious Phantom, who lurks in caves beneath the Opera House. The Phantom
loves Christine, but will not allow her to see his scarred face, for fear that
she will reject him. His goal is to make her a star, but, when he achieves
that, he loses her to Raoul, her childhood sweetheart who is now the Opera
House's patron. But, once he realizes Christine has slipped away, the Phantom's
jealousy has terrible consequences.
I
won't say this is the worst version of the roughly half-dozen cinematic
editions of the story to-date, but it's near the bottom, and doesn't come close
to either the silent classic with Lon Chaney or the 1943 re-make with Claude
Rains. Of course, its goals are different. When he penned the musical, Lloyd
Webber was not striving for shock and horror. Instead, he wanted to emphasize
the romance and operatic elements. He's successful when it comes to the latter
- there's a lot of singing, even to the point where whole passages of dialogue
are sung rather than recited. The love story is a failure, however. While some
emotion is evident between Christine and the Phantom, Raoul is as boring a hero
as has ever graced the screen. Added to that, Butler has screen presence - a
quality that Wilson lacks. It's impossible to believe that Christine feels
anything for Raoul (or vice versa), and The
Phantom of the Opera's insistence upon fostering this dead-end love affair
is its downfall.
The
director is Joel Schumacher, who,
despite commercial successes like Batman
Forever, Falling Down, and Phone Booth, would seem an unlikely
choice for a gothic musical melodrama. There's nothing special about
Schumacher's approach; he presents the material in a mostly straightforward
manner. He offers one tremendous visual image, when the chandelier is raised
and the Opera House returns to its splendor of 1870 (the movie is bookended with
unnecessary scenes in the 1910s). Beyond that, Schumacher does little more than
highlight the singers, dancers, costumes and set design. One could argue that,
for a movie like that, his approach is the correct one.
It's
questionable whether fans of the musical will be enamored with this adaptation.
The energy that characterizes a live performance is absent, resulting in a
production that often feels sluggish and slow-moving. And the absence of a cast
associated with the stage version may aggravate any who feel their favorites
have been slighted. Those who have not seen the stage version are unlikely to
be won over by this Schumacher/Lloyd Webber collaboration. It's the kind of
motion picture that typifies why movie musicals are rarely made - were it not for
the huge built-in audience, it's hard to imagine many patrons paying to see
this.
Ultimately,
however, appreciation of The Phantom of
the Opera will hinge upon your opinion of Lloyd Webber's skills as a
composer. The film, like the stage show, contains one great baroque theme and a
lot of unmemorable drivel. If you are partial to Lloyd Webber's style, you will
at least find The Phantom of the Opera
palatable. If not, then this will be an endurance contest. This isn't really a
film that needs reviewing. Going in, most viewers will know what to expect, and
Schumacher's unchallenging style delivers without frills. For some, this will
be a new way to enjoy a favorite musical. But for those like me, it's a mostly
tedious way to kill 140 minutes. [Berardinelli’s rating: ** out of 4 stars]
Labels:
drama, musical, period, romance, thriller
No comments:
Post a Comment