Phantom of the Opera (2004)

The 2004 Phantom of the Opera movie by reputation alone sounds like it’s a good movie. The classic music, the alluring nature of Gerard Butler, and some nice visuals all are combined into this cinematic retelling.
Then you see the director…
Yeah, the guy who directed Batman and Robin….
So yeah, is Phantom a good film?
Is it an enjoyable one?
Phantom manages to find that paradoxical nitch inbetween So-bad-it’s-good and popcorn-movie.
Here’s how:
Phantom is very obnoxiously colorful and fake looking, from the bad toupees to the costumes. However to an average audience member, this can be passed off as the film looking intentionally stage-esque. But to a critic all we see is it’s true face, as scarred and hideous as it is.
Phantom is also very terribly made in that it’s symbols are even less subtle then it’s counterparts and it’s blocking, acting, cinematography, digital effects, and numerous plot-holes all keep it from reaching a level beyond… adequate.
However, everything it does wrong, it does on a) a way only noticeable to a critic or b) with such fury and passion that you are easily swept away if you let yourself be. While Phantom may not be the best movie ever, it has passion. A driving passion behind every performance and every song. The kind of passion that coupled with a better director or just plain logical filmmaking could have made this a great film.
So should you see it?
Weellllll… this definatly needs to be coupled with a viewing of the original show, so please do both or just the musical, because alone… I don’t think it can stand on it’s own knees.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s