Phantom of the Opera

[Docnzhoss]

At the risk of starting a riot, I HATED the film! Really, I thought it was the worst film I've seen in many years.

Phantom is my favorite obsession, and has been since 1987 when I first heard the cast recording. Yes, I'm one of those fanatics that gets upset when people refer to cast recordings as "soundtracks...

I have seen the show staged 15 times all over North America, including seeing Michael Crawford perform the title role. It really is a brilliant story, in the hands of the right director.

Joel Schumacher is not that director. My impression is that he saw Chicago and Moulin Rouge and decided that the show needed to have a nice, "modern" appoach to it, and that is the only reason I can possibly imagine for having people "Vogueing" during "Masquerade" (shouldn't that have died in the 80's anyhow?). Then during the Phantom and Christine's most intense duet "Past the Point of No Return" he filled the stage with all kinds of unnecessary masked people who added NOTHING to the scene and distracted from the important relationship...but no matter, climbing up onto the huge, unnecessary scaffolding-style set kept the scene from playing anyway.

But then there are the more important issues of the central characters. Emmy Rossum did an admirable job of trying to portray Christine, but quite simply she is too young yet to really play it to the maximum. Her voice is not yet mature enough to sing it, although I should think that in the next few years she'll be ready.

Patrick Wilson you would never guess to be a fine musical theatre actor because of the way Raoul was really wasted in the film. He's really much better than you'd think!

But the worst offender by far was Gerard Butler as the Phantom. WAY to sexy and WAY too confindent around Christine. No sexual tension at all, just sexuality, and the two must never be confused. Then after he is finally unmasked, it looked like a slightly more than moderate case of acne. I felt absolutely NO compassion for him, and in fact I had to fight guffaws of laughter at several points during the showing.

I did admire much of the look of the film, but it wasn't (nor should it ever be) enough to sustain the movie.

Well anyway, that's my opnion of it...

I felt the exact same way about the phantom. He was ridiculously debonaire (sp?) and I also felt nothing for him or his performance. The songs and cinematography were the bright points of this movie for me. I've got to say, though, that it put me to sleep at one point. If I'm going to watch it on film, give me Lon Cheney's version.

 

[Krazedmuppet]

I guess the way I see it, (and weber did have alot of say in the movie) was that, yes I do understand the greatness of it n stage, I really really do, its powerful and moving, BUT they could NOT film it as a movie the same way they preform it on stage. Yes I understand that the singers that prefrom this on stage, when they hit those oh so beautiful notes, its mind blowing a moving, but on film.... it just does not even begin to have the same impact that it would filmed, it would never capture it unless you had some pretty serously cool sound system to record, and to play it, but not many people do. SO this is the ADAPTED FOR FILM version, yes it is diffrent, it does have a diffrent feel, but at the same time does not disgrace the original story, Im sure this movie was VERY hard to keep up standards, yes not everyone is going to love it, cuz you will have the few "die hard fans" and thats fine, but I think they did a good job adapting it for film (its not easy, trust me) you may say "well they might as well have not have tryed at all" but IF nothing elce, it has brought the Phantom to a younger generation who would have not normaly gone to see it, and will go see the real thing beacuse they loved the magic that the story brings. They really did do a good job, cuz you can actualy see feeling in their faces, you cant see that on stage, another thing that had to be adapted, and even though they could not sing as loud, they could sing quiter, but with feeling in their voices, that would have been too quiet for stage. Anyway, Yeah, thats my opinion anyway. It was just someone elce taking the same story and puting there twist on it, you know? like someone reinacting like... say any play, its going to be diffrent anyway, cuz its diffrent people, and it would have been lame if they would have done it EXACTLY like the stage version, cuz its ment for stage, not the film... anyway gtg

 

[Jinx]

Right or wrong, I find it very difficult to take seriously any post that contains as many spelling errors and convoluted sentences as this. In particular, I wonder when you say of adapting the story to film that "it's not easy, trust me", why should we trust you? Are you a screenwriter? Do you make films? Do you know specifically what goes into making a film adaptation?

In my opinion the point that it brings the Phantom to a younger audience who might not have otherwise experienced it is not an excuse for shoddy storytelling. Yes, it would have been "lame" to film it as done on stage because that is an inherently theatrical production. However, I do believe that it does disgrace the original story by taking the central character and removing the deformity that motivates his every action. When the Phantom becomes a very suave, sexy, handsome man in or out of his mask it becomes impossible to empathize realistically with him. The "magic" that the story brings becomes watered-down and flimsy.

I understand that these are my opinions, and I certainly do not begrudge anyone who likes the film, even though I may not begin to understand how or why they do. Just as they may not be able to understand how or why I dislike it.

On the somewhat related topic, does anyone even care about spelling and grammar anymore? I completely understand that the fingers miss a keystroke here and there, and I know that I myself am a lousy typist, but I do try to proofread my material before posting it. I see really poor writing all over the net, in every forum from Muppets to photography and beyond. Don't we have some obligation to one another to try to communicate effectively and not just run on and on without any kind of structure to our sentences? I don't mean that we should strive for achieving great literature in a discussion group, but we should at least put forth an effort to be clear and correct.

Well, this is my (very strong) opinion.

I guess the way I see it, (and weber (Lloyd Webber) did have alot (a lot) of say in the movie) was that, yes I do understand the greatness of it n(on) stage, I really really do, its (it's) powerful and moving, BUT they could NOT film it as a movie the same way they preform(perform) it on stage. Yes I understand that the singers that prefrom(perform) this on stage, when they hit those oh so beautiful notes, its (it's) mind blowing a moving, but on film.... it just does not even begin to have the same impact that it would filmed, it would never capture it unless you had some pretty serously cool sound system to record, and to play it, but not many people do. SO this is the ADAPTED FOR FILM version, yes it is diffrent, it does have a diffrent feel, but at the same time does not disgrace the original story, Im (I'm) sure this movie was VERY hard to keep up standards, yes not everyone is going to love it, cuz ('cause) you will have the few "die hard fans" and thats (that's) fine, but I think they did a good job adapting it for film (its not easy, trust me) you may say "well they might as well have not have tryed (tried) at all" but IF nothing elce (else), it has brought the Phantom to a younger generation who would have not normaly (normally) gone to see it, and will go see the real thing beacuse they loved the magic that the story brings. They really did do a good job, cuz ('cause) you can actualy (actually) see feeling in their faces, you cant (can't) see that on stage, another thing that had to be adapted, and even though they could not sing as loud, they could sing quiter (quieter), but with feeling in their voices, that would have been too quiet for stage. Anyway, Yeah, thats my opinion anyway. It was just someone elce (else) taking the same story and puting (putting) there (their) twist on it, you know? like someone reinacting (reenacting) like... say any play, its going to be diffrent (different) anyway, cuz ('cause) its diffrent (different) people, and it would have been lame if they would have done it EXACTLY like the stage version, cuz ('cause) its (it's) ment (meant) for stage, not the film... anyway gtg

 

[Docnzhoss]

A few corrections that you missed, Jinx.

"mind blowing a moving" = mind blowing and moving. (Line 5)

"pretty serously cool" = pretty seriously cool. (Line 6)

"diffrent" 2x = different (Line 8)

"thats my opinion" = that's my opinion (Line 17)



As an English major and future English teacher, I too get frustrated with typos. However, I usually understand what is being said and leave it alone. My fellow forum members are not my students and if they want to spell things incorrectly, that's their prerogative.

 

[Jinx]

Thanks, Docnzhoss! I appreciate you catching me there. (I was in a bit of a rush to get to work this morning, and should have been more careful.)

I know what you mean about letting it go when you can at least understand the gist of what's being said. And of course the errant keystroke is as much to blame as anything.

We are all language students, whether we like it or not. Perpetually. Language is our tool to communicate efficiently and effectively. As I see it we owe it to ourselves and society at large to properly use that tool, or at the very least put forth a genuine effort.

I see this as being an important life skill, not merely for the discussion of puppetry but for being clearly understood in all facets of life. Certainly a person can attain a higher degree of credibility in the workplace if he has at least a fundamental grasp of his native language.

So with that in mind, I welcome corrections to any of my posts. If anyone sees them, please do bring them to my attention.

I do not wish to come off as condescending or judgemental, I just think that the world in general needs to raise the bar and strive for excellence instead of lowering it and settling for mediocrity.

Anyone want a muffin?

 

[Beauregard]

*gasp*

Dispite the Muffin comments, which I appreciate, I still feel it was very hard on Katie (who has only just rturned after about three years) to Muppet central (Or, correctly, has only just returned to Muppet Central after about three years....) to slam her post like that.

I agree that the world in general neds to raise teh bar, but I don't think poiting out one person's dozen errors is in any way teh correct way to do that.

Please, kindly, keep your correctiosn not to yourself, but don't berate (I do so hope that is the right word and spelt corectly) a member in public.

 

[Jinx]

Certainly no personal assault was intended. I don't even know "Katie" and I don't believe any comments were directed at her personally, only the errors themselves.

If we are in fact going to "raise the bar" it begins with identifying problems or difficulties. If we all just hang our heads and mutter to ourselves then there is no opportunity or impetus for growth.

If I make a mistake, then I make a mistake regardless of how I feel about it. If someone calls attention to it I am grateful for the opportunity to correct it or hopefully do better next time.

Katie, I hope I have not hurt you in any way. I'm sure you must be a wonderful person (otherwise you wouldn't hang out with all of us Muppety people would you? ).

A good rule to remember is that we may disagree, but we shouldn't be disagreeable.

Cheers to ALL!

 

[Beauregard]

Ok. Sorry if I was harsh. I do agree with you in principle. And I shall strive to proof-read my posts in future.

Really!

I will.

Thanks, Jinx.

 

[Whatever]

I thought the film could be better. But my sister adores it to pieces. So it's a tie.

 

[Krazedmuppet]

Right or wrong, I find it very difficult to take seriously any post that contains as many spelling errors and convoluted sentences as this. In particular, I wonder when you say of adapting the story to film that "it's not easy, trust me", why should we trust you? Are you a screenwriter? Do you make films? Do you know specifically what goes into making a film adaptation?

In my opinion the point that it brings the Phantom to a younger audience who might not have otherwise experienced it is not an excuse for shoddy storytelling. Yes, it would have been "lame" to film it as done on stage because that is an inherently theatrical production. However, I do believe that it does disgrace the original story by taking the central character and removing the deformity that motivates his every action. When the Phantom becomes a very suave, sexy, handsome man in or out of his mask it becomes impossible to empathize realistically with him. The "magic" that the story brings becomes watered-down and flimsy.

I understand that these are my opinions, and I certainly do not begrudge anyone who likes the film, even though I may not begin to understand how or why they do. Just as they may not be able to understand how or why I dislike it.

On the somewhat related topic, does anyone even care about spelling and grammar anymore? I completely understand that the fingers miss a keystroke here and there, and I know that I myself am a lousy typist, but I do try to proofread my material before posting it. I see really poor writing all over the net, in every forum from Muppets to photography and beyond. Don't we have some obligation to one another to try to communicate effectively and not just run on and on without any kind of structure to our sentences? I don't mean that we should strive for achieving great literature in a discussion group, but we should at least put forth an effort to be clear and correct.

Well, this is my (very strong) opinion.

I guess the way I see it, (and weber (Lloyd Webber) did have alot (a lot) of say in the movie) was that, yes I do understand the greatness of it n(on) stage, I really really do, its (it's) powerful and moving, BUT they could NOT film it as a movie the same way they preform(perform) it on stage. Yes I understand that the singers that prefrom(perform) this on stage, when they hit those oh so beautiful notes, its (it's) mind blowing a moving, but on film.... it just does not even begin to have the same impact that it would filmed, it would never capture it unless you had some pretty serously cool sound system to record, and to play it, but not many people do. SO this is the ADAPTED FOR FILM version, yes it is diffrent, it does have a diffrent feel, but at the same time does not disgrace the original story, Im (I'm) sure this movie was VERY hard to keep up standards, yes not everyone is going to love it, cuz ('cause) you will have the few "die hard fans" and thats (that's) fine, but I think they did a good job adapting it for film (its not easy, trust me) you may say "well they might as well have not have tryed (tried) at all" but IF nothing elce (else), it has brought the Phantom to a younger generation who would have not normaly (normally) gone to see it, and will go see the real thing beacuse they loved the magic that the story brings. They really did do a good job, cuz ('cause) you can actualy (actually) see feeling in their faces, you cant (can't) see that on stage, another thing that had to be adapted, and even though they could not sing as loud, they could sing quiter (quieter), but with feeling in their voices, that would have been too quiet for stage. Anyway, Yeah, thats my opinion anyway. It was just someone elce (else) taking the same story and puting (putting) there (their) twist on it, you know? like someone reinacting (reenacting) like... say any play, its going to be diffrent (different) anyway, cuz ('cause) its diffrent (different) people, and it would have been lame if they would have done it EXACTLY like the stage version, cuz ('cause) its (it's) ment (meant) for stage, not the film... anyway gtg

Ok, first of all, were not on here to attack other people, no matter what, and you did come across that way (and I dont believe my comments were in anyway Threatening or disrespectful. Second anyone who knows me knows I dont spell the best when im typing (I type faster than I can spell), or at all for that matter (not just the web) ALSO I was in a hurry that night AND I have Bronchitis and was (and still for the past week) heavily medicated, But if you cant stand it that much, Ill copy and paste it to spell chaecker can have a look before sending this over to MC. Sorry for annoying you so badly. I dont want to start anything (I just got DONE with all that, and it resulted in a lot of people leaving) But you must admit, your response was very cold. Just... Thank you for making me feel sooo incredibly stupid and making a show of me to all of MC, I hope you got your point across at the expense of my feelings. It was never my strong point ever, but like I said, thanks for making me feel illiterate.