Phantom of the Opera movie

What I can say is that the movie is fairly directed. The music is marvellous but apparently its been casted with worst singers ever. Overall the phantom is the worst singer with the most unmusical voice i've ever heard in my life. There is nothing scary about his voice, except that he occasionally try to sound like a toad which isnt working for me. The christine role sounds like another version of sarah brightman, those who try to substitute acting and musicality with divaism. I dont see why the phantom accuse the diva carlotta for being bad in acting although she is moderately very good for me except the fact that she have to use that wagnerian slide up. There is nothing interesting about the vocal color of the singers. All of them sounds like puppies singing dead songs. It sounds more like karaoke rather than a good singing. I could tolerate christine and raoul but not the phantom; he is a crime.

It's very irritating to see how they abuse such musical masterpiece. I expect the movie to be at least comparable to normal local musicals but its far worse than that. I doubt if actually christine would actually be heard if she sang that aria in a real theater. It is total humiliation for opera singers that the movie uses such incompetent singer to compare with opera singers. I think even thought it is a musical; they should at least put at least a bit of operatic voice in christine because she is an opera singers in the story for goodness sake. Her voice is dead and lack of expression; its just beautiful and doesnt not resonate. The music is touching thanx to the composer of the music, but relying on the musicality of the composer is but showing the sign of a dead performer. THe least for human to be is to be a singing machine. 'such thing is the most cruel thing one can ever do' Felix Mendelssohn.

I think your comments on the new movie release of The Phantom of the Opera are very unfair.
You have only commented on one aspect of the production - the singing.
OK, so the singing wasn't as good as I had expected either, but please don't just bag out a show because of one part of it.
Why not comment on the extravagant sets? Even the professional stage production wasn't able to make sets as lavish as those seen in the latest screen version. And what about the costumes, the make-up, the realistic portrayal of the behind the scenes look at a theatre circa 1911?

I guess all I can say is that you don't have to go and see it again if you don't want to.

I just wish people could look at the good parts of a production and not just the negative side.

Its one of the greatest crime for hollywood to make musicals because musicals are musicals because they are music, music is one of the most important part of the story and if there is not quality in the music that everything is but spoiled. I dont mind watching normal on stage musicals with lack of backstage design and all those animations and stupid gay phantom's voice. I go and see it because i expect and how can u judge if you havent see it? There are billions of phantom uglier than the phantom there and who can sing far better than him, those who sing with soul and doesnt express just from acting but also from voice. Relying expression on the music written is but an insult on music. At least it needs a heart to sing a music written with a heart. Heartless music turns a musical into a cold dead world. I do like the movie, but i just cant stand the cast and the singing. Its life, even there is a slight flaw its still a flaw nevertheless and it will worth far less than a perfect one. just like a little scar on the face would make the phantom ugly for the rest of his life forever.

I thoroughly enjoyed the film. Like T, I decided to view it as an entire package and a fabulous entire package it was! I believe that the costumes and the set were full of colour, life and beautiful details. I particularly liked the use of black and white vs. colour to show the change in time. Especially the first stunning, slow transformation from black and white to colour. Not to mention all the great special effects and film techniques!

I thought that the singing was very moving. I thought that the actor playing the Phantom did really well and, I admit, he scared me at times! He also earned my sympathy due to everything his character had been thorugh. I enjoyed listening to his strong voice and I think that his songs were full of emotion.

I particularly enjoyed the actress who potrayed Christine's performance. Although her singing wasn't extremely loud or strong, it had a beautiful tone to it. I noticed plenty of expression in her voice and I think that she did a fantastic job of acting and conveying emotions as she sang. However, there is nothing like sitting in a theatre and feeling the actor's emotions and energy radiate from the stage. I think that film attempts to compenstate for this by not focusing on volume and projection, and instead on telling the story with sensitivity and creating mood. This is why I think that they chose to cast someone with a beautiful, gentle voice that suited the character's personality rather than a booming-voiced professional. If you think about, her sweet voice really did suit the character.

Perhaps, better versions of this musical have been performed or recorded,but one major success of this film is that I noticed is that the performers' singing voices really suit the characters and convey their personalities and objectives. This worked to create a strong emotional impact. At least it did in me, I was totally engrossed and in awe of the film. I am not alone as several other audience members were overcome with emotion and in tears! In my opinion, it is creating emotional impact that really makes a great performance.

I was tremendously excited about seeing this film - being a great musical theatre fan and having enjoyed the Phantom on stage several times before.

I went into the cinema with the reservation that the transference of a theatrical masterpiece to the silver screen is a big ask and there were bound to be perceived inconsistencies and criticisms through the harsh viewpoint of comparison.

Certainly, I felt that the electric and unquestionable energy of a staged production was lost on the film (how could it be otherwise) as the atmosphere of live performance has an unmatchable buzz in my book. Particularly during the more "conversational" sequences of singing (and the lengthy Music of the Night) - momentum is lost.

The film is long and for some people less than passionate about musicals - this could be the main failing. Modern audiences have less and less patience and many people are becoming less able to concentrate and appreciate each moment of a story, let alone modern cinema-goers with no real musical theatre interest.

This is not to say that the film should not have been attempted - indeed I am thrilled to see the culture of musical theatre being re-introduced to the wider public through the medium of film (and what a success for the unexpected and obviously truly diverse director Joel Shumacher - better known for films such as Phone Booth and the Batman series).

For those who allowed themselves to become fully immersed in the storyline and drawn in by the breath-taking spectacle of its masterful and indulgent (in the nicest possible way!) cinematography The Phantom of the Opera is a classy, beautiful and timeless film.

For those with the imagination and romanticism left in their souls - somewhat desensitised and hardened by the modern, fast-paced action flick - The Phantom holds a key into a parallel universe of powerful music, seduction, magic, smoke, mirrors and love.

I too was disappointed in The Phantom, Gerard Butler's vocals at times - but by the end of the film I was drawn into his plight. Christine (Emily Rossum) is obviously an enchanting beauty and an expressive performer. Her voice might not be powerful but for the screen, a different kind of expression is needed and her delicate performance was a stand-out. Raoul (Patrick Wilson) was also commendable and fit the role of suave, knight-in-shining-amore perfectly.

Miranda Richardson was also fitting as Madame Giry and Minnie Driver's performance as Carlotta was surprising and successful - providing a positive tension release from the rest of the dark, smouldering feature.

My major complaint about the film would be in the dubbing and sync of the voices. Having developed a keen eye for that sort of detail (highly irritating when you're trying to lose yourself in a film) it stuck out to me that on a fair few occassions the performers lips were moving entirely out of time with the vocals. Although of course, this is a challenge in any film, let alone a musical where over-dubbing is almost entirely essential.

Notable numbers were All I Ask of You, Wishing You Were Somehow Here Again and Masquerade.

For any musical theatre lover, film enthusiast or hopeless romantic this is a must see - just take a little patience, an open mind and let your fantasies unwind...

I haven't seen the movie but have heard 3 reports, all highly favourable. Two were from people who had seen the stage show in Sydney and Melbourne, 1 had never seen the show. All loved it unreservedly, and all thought the singing was fantastic (which surprised me considering previous comments on this site), but 2 out of 3 mentioned the terrible lip-synching and dubbing -- how can this happen in this day and age? One lady in her late 20's mentioned the Phantom was much spunkier than Raoul ; one other comment was how long it took to set up the graveyard scene, which is much quicker on stage.
Suzanne, your comments re musical theatre on film are interesting. I've just finished reading a biography of Oscar Hammerstein II and when you read about the difficulties of finance, artistic licence, differing media, etc, it's surprising the films ever get made. I've also watched a few Rodgers and Hammerstein films recently, and I think we have to accept they are just a different phenomenon, somehow related to the musical but different, in the same way that musicals are often derived from plays or books ; we rarely analyse the musicals in terms of how well they represent the books.
Probably the best approach would be to film a performance (this is the usual approach with ballet, which rarely tries to do more than record the stage show) -- preferably with multiple cameras for different angles, and filmed over several shows to catch highlights and cut out bum notes, with overdubbing where necessary (this is usually the case with rock shows and "live" albums) ; even so, you are right, the live vibe is what makes it exciting. I once invited some friends to a small local dramatic production -- they had rarely seen that kind of theatre. The actors were physically close to the audience, and my friends were literally blown away by the force of real people and audience reactions around them.

I thought that the Phantom of the Opera movie was one of the most exciting musicals i had seen in a very long time. Yes, it was different to the stage production, but the scene such as the graveyard ones added more emotion and depth into the Phantoms character, which i believe was Andrew Lloyd Webbers idea in the first place. More music had been written for this production to not only make it more emotional, but also to make it appeal to the younger generations by adding more electric guitar than the original score and by using 'spunkier' actors also helps the youth become more interested. The costumes, and especially orchestor was really no comparison to the broadway production, becuase they just excelled so much by using wonderful musicians, desighners and had a much bigger budget. Overall i think it was (as said before) the best musical i have seen for a very long time and i strongly recomend it to anyone interested in musical theatre.

[%sig%]

May i just say one word,

Perfection!

Why you may ask, everything about Phantom was what it was supposed to be Emmy Rossum's beauty is equal to her voice, she is Christine. Also i have to say how wonderful i though The Phantom's voice was. Gerald Butler, when he sang he sent chills down my spine it was so good. So i do not agree with the rest of those people who dislike his voice. And we are not only talking about a singing voice but this very unique character hiding inside, and he is that character. For those who have seen it at the very end with him singing all i ask of you when Christine leaves, will be something i shall never forget, for the whole i was overwhelmed and sent into a different world. Patrick Wilson has a soothing melodic voice that does and will make you cry. Not only does he sing well he acts well Roaul is a very difficult part to portray, for the character does not have much chance comparing to the other characters, but yet he does it so well. That was just about the actors.
the set, the costumes, divine.

Phantom of the Opera to date is one of the very best films i have ever seen. It has humour, romance and trilling action. what more would you want, and oh did i forget to mention that Webber's music, is what it is. And what we love ever so much.

sincerely singing goodbye
*****AUDREY*****

probably its not bad in the sense of making people love the music. What i think about contemporary music is that people doesnt really care anymore to those who wrote the music; giving credits of the music to the singers who cant express the third dimension of of singing, the true innate expression in music that doesnt need digital effects, speaking effect or any sort; pure sound created by the singer that could even express the story without singing the lyrics. Substituting virtuosity with selecting popular repertoire that attracts majority's favor, singing only for ear not for soul.

probably its just me that is focused to much of a classical approach but somehow i think they should never touch anything that have things to do with opera when they dont understand what opera and the singing really is; this movie shows the shallowmindedness toward the existence of the virtuosity of the performer rather than virtuosity of the composer. People should one day realise the difference between good music and good performer. A great music can be made good with a bad performer but a bad music can be made good with a great performer.

I wonder if what they've done to the musical is half so bad as what you're doing to the English language?

hey im not a first english speaker and it just has been two years that i spend my life in western world. If the tsunami accident didnt open your eyes to become someone who arent as ignorant as hell then stop critisizing people. Prolly if you can speak indonesian and mandarin and hokkien and english, and a bit of this and that then you can criticise me. And yes, they have destroyed the point of making music. and please gimme a break because I dont want to try to accuse someone a racist. I am talking about music and performing and you dont have any good reason to bring the conversation to something that has nothing to do with the topic> its not that i dont know my english is bad but i know im far better than those in the same condition as me. You can live in your victorian lifestyle as much as you want and be happy for the rest of your life as an ignorant along with pauline hanson and her cronies and dance with the stars. You know what, you're like a little kid, when you dont have any amunitions left for you to throw you use things that doesnt make sense to make yourself feel better and superior. You are right, you are very superior indeed; you know english very well. But at least I know many other languages than you. Literature wise I am far better than you. I've read books in many languages and what do you know? english, bit of french? bit of italian? thats all. A puny performer like you who lack virtuosity and professionality is but a shame to the world of music and performance. you try to compare the virtuosity the musicians to the virtuosity of your language you use almost every second of your life; which might not be even as good as how a good englishman or australian should know english. If youre in my place, i can believe how sucks in english you are. your attitude shows it better than anything else.

Mickyjim, I hope your comment was just meant to be humorous, but the name "ardjoena" and the structure of the messages should clearly tell you that ardjoena is not a native English speaker. As others have pointed out, ardjoena's postings are actually better than many others we see in terms of grammar and spelling. My only real concern is the mention of Lloyd Weber (never sure of the spelling) in the same sentence as "great music" -- yes, I know he has done more than I could dream of, but schlock is schlock, and noone does schlock like Andrew.

I for one thoroughly enjoyed the film. The Phantom of the Opera has been my favorite musical for so long now, and I have seen so many. But no music and no story could ever match that of the Phantom. Needles to say I was so nervous to go and see the movie, scared that it could never truly match the majesty of seeing the show onstage.

But the movie captured me from the very beginning. To show the later scenes at the opera house in broken black and white was perfect, and as the organ began and the theatre transformed, I was literally jumping up and down in my seat. The sets, the costumes, the characters, I loved it all. OF course, I will always prefer the play to the movie, no question. And the Phantom was no Michael Crawford, but I still loved the way he played the character. Not to mention, he pulled off Music of the Night well...my favorite song! So it was all smooth sailing after that. I even liked Christine, maybe more than Sarah Brightman. Ofcourse, the film holds its advantages of special effects, but one thing that I truly missed while sitting in the movie theatre was the Chandalier rising over my head...I half expected it to still happen....

Anyways...I loved the movie. Three times seen, going on a fourth...

May i quickly say that Sarah Brightman has a beautiful light voice. I say light because it does not hold very much power. The part of Christine is not a strong Coloratura Soprano role that could be like Maria Callas or Joan Sutherland. But was ment to be light and beautiful and innocent. Christine is young and innocent. So please do not go on about Emmy Rossum's voice lacking power, it has the amazing range doesnt it? Besides for those who do not now in the opera world young complete voice does not fully mature untill you way past 21 and Emmy is only 18. Besides that she full filled all that was needed for this role, her voice was beautiful and hit all the notes.

You can take this movie apart all you want, piece by piece and critise this movie, by art is supposed to creat magic and that is what excalty this movie did. Why cant we talk about what perfect for whom and when and why

To all that have Problems with cast,

Such a same Andrew Lloyd Webber is incompentant in being apart of selecting a good enough cast. let me here you sing better. It is sad that you must critise a musical genius. I await your version of phantom of the opera soon. suprise me,



i'm waiting

of course i never will insult andrew lloyd weber; if you read my further writing I never insult andrew at all. I even feel ashamed because of the casts make such good work into a less quality musical. What i dont like about it is that people regard a singer more of the song they sing rather than what they actually can do. Rossum is a young coloratura and that is fair enough but of course she is nowhere better than carlotta in opera. A voice like carlotta in reality even though is not one of the greats, it is still wonderful yet rossum is no where near carlotta's technique and musicality. One of the most dissappointing scene is when rossum sang the aria. Opera is not about being a primadonna on stage: its not about being like sarah brightman standing and sing and act like shes the greatest diva and throw all the vocal fireworks. If you actually listen to a maria callas lecture; she despises beautiful singing without expression. As a classical singer or musical singer we are responsible to express and to convey the story of the song. I do think it is very unfair to compare emma rossum with maria callas; but i am happy if someone compare her to sarah brightman because sarah brightman is ten times worse than rossum. Some people love to lsiten to a beautiful light voice; i personally like dark yummy voices like cecilia bartolli and dimitiri hvrorostovsky: voices of great expression.

I must say I enjoyed the movie adaptation of Phantom very much. I thought Emily Rossum was delightful as Christine. She was able to give the character a sense of innocence which was partly conveyed through her sweet singing voice. Definitely not your conventional "ballsy" operatic voice, but it was all about clarity. I found it to be very pleasant to listen to (particularly Think of Me).

May I suggest ardjoena that you stick to listening to and commenting only on opera, because you clearly have no understanding of musical theatre repertoire and what it requires in terms of its singing style, techniques and performance practice.

And for the record, I thought the film was great, but had many wasted opportunities, which was disappointing. But as I read somewhere, its better to have a film than no film at all.

what can i say, an amazing film!
Even though i'm only 13 years old, i am truly moved by the whole thing. The music, the singing, the effects, the people, everything!

I think that Gerard sang amazingly and did the phantom well, most people think he wasnt that good, but i thought he was amazing so leave him alone! Emmy sang beautifully, and acted well.

Now with movies, there must always be a let down, and this let down was Jennifer Ellison. She is made to stay in soaps like Emmerdale and keep away from legendary musicals, she let the movie down.

If any of you have any comments you want to tell me, email me on laurencarrchick@hotmail.com

Simon Holt wrote:
>
> May I suggest ardjoena that you stick to listening to and
> commenting only on opera, because you clearly have no
> understanding of musical theatre repertoire and what it
> requires in terms of its singing style, techniques and
> performance practice.
>
> And for the record, I thought the film was great, but had
> many wasted opportunities, which was disappointing. But as I
> read somewhere, its better to have a film than no film at all.

But Simon...
The musical is called The Phantom of the OPERA, not the Phantom of BROADWAY, and there is a certain artistic requirement in film (not thankfully on stage) that if you are going to tackle a subject you should tackle it fairly accurately.
Christine is supposed to be AN OPERA SINGER, and the way Rossum performs in the film she wouldn't be able to be heard past the curtain, let alone over the orchestra.

Also I am a bit at odds with your criticism of Ardjoena on her supposed ignorance of Musical Theatre singing style.
The points she are making are TOTALLY valid to either of the sister forms of Music Theatre.
An ugly but expressive voice is far better than a pretty but inexpressive one as far as the drama is concerned.

Here's a case in point, take Some of the Disney musicals, like Aladdin or Beauty and the Beast. On the soundtrack they normally have two versions of at least one song, the version used in the film proper and the version used over the final credits and also put out as a single. If you are just going to listen to the song, then by all means listen to the nice pretty version. If you are watching the drama, then the pretty version is pointless, you need the more gutsy version.
If you are watching the film, would you rather listen to Angela Lansbury or Celine Dion?

But then again this boils down to the old argument:
Do you prefer MUSICAL theatre or musical THEATRE!
I know that I prefer the latter, but other people do prefer the former.
Its not that one is right and the other wrong, its just a matter of taste.

ardjoena is a he, not a she. It is a fact that I doesn't really know much about musical theatre. Some people might think that phantom is expressive although not very pleasant to hear. I do think he is expressive but I just think that his intepretation of the phantom is abit ambiguous. There is a point when a fair voice could express without the need of vocal fireworks but there are times when the voice become a hindrance or obstacle in order to achieve a certain emotion and its just my sixth sense hunch that he doesnt really plan to sound in that certain way. if he has better vocal technique i believe he could express the character more. Like Mendelssohn wrote to his friend in the letter, he believes it is tragic to the fact that techniques and all those things that makes music into cold and dead cruel things are actually the most basic part of learning music. I guess its different when im talking about 'technique vs expression' and 'technical efficiency to express' and also 'success of expression in story'.

I would put voice of emma rossum to 'technique vs expression' issue.
I would put phantom's voice to either 'technical efficiency to express' issue or 'success of expression in story' issue.

Just to say that its all very subjective and all based on personal opinion.
I am not speaking under any group of people or any school of thoughts.

sorry... grammatical error: i doesnt. should be i don't.

Hello!
I too have stumbled upon this site after a 'Phantom' google search!

All the opinions expressed here are great... I've enjoyed reading them all, so thanks.

I, like most of you, found the film to be incredibly beautiful. I really appreciated the balance Schumacher created between the light and vibrant scenes such as Masquerade, and the dark and gothic looking scenes beneath the opera house. Amongst these, the rooftop and cemetary 'snowing' scenes were glorious... without doubt, the world which Schumacher created for his characters is a richly textured feast for the eyes... loved it!

However, with the studio throwing $70 million US at the project how couldn't the film be a visual masterpiece?

The acting and singing - I agree, the two should very much go hand in hand in a movie such as this. When it comes to the Phantom's performance, I thought Gerard Butler was very good at incorporating the two. Gerard's Phantom was very raw in comarison to Michael Crawlford's... and in many instances I found him growling out his lines... but somehow, it worked. He did make me feel for him... and what he lacked in vocal ability, he more than made up for in conveying both the haunting sorrow and deep love of the Phantom ... not to mention his sex appeal!

I agree with Paul Treasure in regards to Minnie Driver's performance as La Carlotta... I had my doubts quelled there! ... but, Minnie... that awfully boring song they got you to sing over the closing credits!! Was that the best they could come up with? Ah well... I spose you would have felt out of the loop had you sung nothing at all...

Onto Emmy Rossum...
I won't bother talking much about her acting while she was not singing... all the role really called for was to stand open mouthed in bewilderment, and never let the audience forget you have a heaving bossom. And... she did this well!
Emmy embodied Christine physically, and I thoroughly enjoyed her singing. Her voice is exceptional, crystal clear, a good range... and yes, she IS expressive. Listening to Emmy sing on the soundtrack cd alone, during the 'Point of No Return' it does sound as if Emmy is seconds away from jumping the Phantom!
Here, Rossum has been criticised because her singing wouldn't pass in a real Opera... but that's the beauty of Andrew Lloyd Webber. Opera fans in general despise his work... and the majority of the millions who have seen the Phantom live on stage... are not Opera fans!

The point is... to the untrained ear, Rossum's singing is both beautiful and strong. And clearly Lloyd made this movie for the mainstream.
Listening to Sarah Brightman on the original recording, sure, you hear a powerful voice. But some of her notes are so operatic you can't even make out the words! In seeing the movie, I found I could make out words I never knew before - and these were imperative to following the story and understanding how the characters were feeling. So what if it's opera-lite... I can appreciate it in my ignorance!

It was the little things that bugged me during the film.
The way the little black mask that the Phantom wore at the end would not have even half covered his deformity.
While singing the Point of No Return, Christine was wearing this lacey black pirate-looking number which kept slipping down her shoulders... yet somewhere in between sliding down the pole with the Phantom, and him ripping her down to his dungeon, she found the time to change into that white wedding dress. Go Christine!

Otherwise... a thrill to the eyes and the ears! Very entertaining and one of my favourites this summer.

For those of you about to go and buy the soundtrack. Wait till Monday 17th January... on this date they are releasing the 2 disk version with a hardcover book! Looks quite good.

Take care all!

Chris::

This is a review section and everyone is entitiled to their own opinions so i think we should stick to reviewing whatever play/musical theatre piece rather than having heated discussions started just because someone cant spell or doesnt have the same opinion as yourself.

My god!! enjoy the movie and stop all this critic they are actors not opera singers. Maybe they could have used a fat soprano or a old tenor to play then. I really enjoy this film.

screw you i thought the movie was awesome, and very underated no thanks to people like u



Thou venomed tickle-brained strumpet!

Thou errant swag-bellied moldwarp!

I believe we do not live in George Orwell's 1984 and everyone are entitled to their decisions. What really matter is what us, the individuals, think and what really happens is no concern. So whether Phantom of the Opera movie goes popular or not or get hundreds of emmy or golden globe or any award or not is none of my concern and none of my right to protest.

I believe thats the difference between an opinion/critic and anti movement. Nevertheless entertainment are always valued based on its popularity amongst the mass even though thats not exactly the thing entertainers would like to do. Hence, a successful movie speaks for itself and no matter how good or how bad it is in our eyes it has nothing to do with what others think. If really people hate phantom because of me then people are being unoriginal and can't decide whats good and not good for them. Whether we are living in a society where we are programmed to think the way people say or to reflect upon a certain review and take it into account and prove the validity with their own eyes. Critics is the base of democracy and that it is the external force that works in this system to make itself into a more reflexive mechanism that benefits everyone. The purpose of a written opinion is to raises issues that might have any interest for others so taht they can validate a certain issue and therefore gain more perspective. I hope no one is offended. I hope people get what opinions are and the line when opinion became abusive. I did used some words that might've abused some people and well, its another new thing to learn.

So that was Minnie singing over the closing credits??

My daughter and I both loved the movie but sat rather stunned at that song.... better off without it I think


Anyway... Visually i thought the movie was stunning

Musically great too... loved the deep bass sounds

As for the leads... well the great thing about musicals is that you get to hear different people's interpretations

I enjoyed all the performances

Blah Blah Blah, can anyone PLEEEEEASE stop this person from all this stuff he's writing. No wonder we have wars!!!!

I've been to see "Phantom" twice now. First of all, I think all the voices are adequate - it is a stage musical, not an opera, so trained singers aren't paramount. Christine is supposed to be a rising star in her teens - very few teens have full range voices - Miss Rossum has a sweet voice that fits the bill. Raoul's voice was splendid. I saw an interview with Andrew Lloyd Webber and he apparently auditioned Gerard Butler for the role and approved of his edgy sound. As for me, the cast works well together and the overall effect is breathtaking - even though it has a few flaws - I'm very happy that there was very little variation from the stage production. Very well done!

I agree with you! I've seen it in the Haymarket in London and have the original London cast recording - this cast works very well together. I occasionally wince at a note or two, but the cast members are completely into their roles and convey them very well.

I have to disagree, Emmy was amazing and it has been rumoured that she actually did not hight a high E over C but she did. She should be proud of herself! The first time I did I went over the E to a F sharp and I was very proud. Micheal Crawford was better though.

who wrote the lyrics in the Phantom of the opera movie

if you think this is a war, then you have never seen entertainment world, sista.

maria callas: 'when enemies stop hissing, you know you are falling'

Yes please make this unappreciating girl shut the hell up.

The movie was a great performance and the music was splendid. It's not supposed to be a damn opera. It's a film. A film consists of ACTORS, not opera singers.

give it a rest

ardoena is gay wrote:
>
> Yes please make this unappreciating girl shut the hell up.
>
> The movie was a great performance and the music was splendid.
> It's not supposed to be a damn opera. It's a film. A film
> consists of ACTORS, not opera singers.

To the person who wrote this:

Do you realise how offensive your moniker is?
No, you probably don't.

I know that the use of the word "gay" to denote things that are stupid or pretentious is common usage. But, just because everyone is doing does not make it right or acceptable.

Please refrain in future from this practice on a site that is frequented by a number of people who will be offended by it.


Point two:

"It's not supposed to be a damn opera. It's a film. A film consists of ACTORS, not opera singers."

Actors are supposed to convincingly portray the characters they are playing. If they are playing Opera singers they should be believable as Opera Singers.

If you can say no more to counter Ardjoena's arguments than "Ardjoena is gay", then perhaps you need to ask yourself this little question. Do you think Phantom is good because you have used ALL your critical faculties to find it without fault, or are you just being a pathetic little fanboy.

If the former then by all means add to the discussion with some more reasoned and thought out posts.
If not...
Then you "shut the hell up"

HOW DARE YOU EFFING SAY THOSE THINGS ABOUT THE FILM OR THE PHANTOM! I think that the Phantom had an amazing voice and not to mention that the film was supposed to be a little different - sexier if I may add! Christine had a sweet voice and Raoul had an alright voice but he would not be top of my list. The Phantom just hadn't sung before and after lessons and practices, I think he did a superb voice! You probably were just concentrating for the bestest and overal, I'd say what the director did was beyond brilliance. I can't believe you could say such outrageous things about a wonderful film - the music was BRILLIANT!!! And to add a bit on, the Phantom was supposed to have a seducting voice and that was how Christine got bewitched. If he began singing to her in a scary holy-@!#$ kind of voice then she would've run away but instead (with the voice he has) it made a very good story!! That took one breath to say... bye!

I totally agree!

Listen up, ardjoene,

I just wish that I had some duck tape and you infront of me so then I could wrap it neatly over your mouth. It is not in me to be so crazed about such a dis about this film. I really REALLY enjoyed it and I apologize if I acted a little to abruptly when I first read the comment. But, firstly, some things to take in account.

Damn! Lol. I was just searching Google on Phantom of the Opera (Am going to see the actual at Her Majesty's Theatre in weeks to come after seeing the film and doing a perfomance last year - I was Christine)... then I suddenly searched around and saw fantabulous comments about the film and suddenly THIS! It just disgusts me... I don't mean to be too rash or unkind, but really, ardjoena, if you hate the film to hell and back, then why be so obsessed about how badly the actors sang in your little screwed up head!

The music was what MADE the film - including all the set designs, costumes, etc. If you were right here, I'd kick you to oblivion for not even saying anything about how wonderful the props and stage were! Maybe you are caught back in your old age (screwing people who are younger than you - I beg you not to take that as an insult - it would only make me laugh)... stop attracting attention because there ARE people who really enjoyed the film!! And if you go around saying and repeating how much you hate it, you're just going to aggravate the HELL out of them and I assure you, I am not over-reacting!

Gerald Butler... *sigh* what more can I say? Man, I was more bewitched by him than the Tenor that played the Phantom in the Phantom perfomance I was in. He is a BAND singer - get that in your head - a BAND singer!! He only had a spare of time to learn and GOD - he was good!!

I am just trying to give you a word of advice, stop just focusing on the negative side! There are many positive things to focus on instead, they don't all just consist of the bad things from hell. Negative things will just eat up your mind (though that may not make any difference for you - seeing as in how you seem to be obsessed about something you detest)!! Lol... perhaps that should be taken by everyone but I am pointing at you, ardjoene...

Warm regards (though I might be in the state of murdering you at the moment),
~~Erika Phantomness~~

PS. Don't take things so personally - I am not a very secretive person - my mind rules me. And, I don't care about some of the errors or repeatables - I mean, Lol... English is my second language and I am not an essay fluency machine! I only just started my GCSE's and that may let myself be known as an outspoken controlled freak but be glad you don't know me in real life because I'd probably be beating you up at your doorstep! (That, too, was not to be taken personally) but if you try and fight back with me, that would make me continue and God's how I would not wish for that nonsense, though it takes the sun to fall on me to make me stop a fight. I usually end up killing the other person... (joke) Though you are too old to understand the mind of a teenage mental girl :D

Btw... LOL! And it's YOU correcting people for grammatical terms when you have a shitload of them in your gibberish... just something bugging me and nothing made me keep it in anymore. I was forced to let it out... forgot to put it in my hell of a Lord of the Rings book letter I wrote...

~~Erika Phantomness~~

Gods!! I never figured out that ardjoena is a male! WowEEeee!! God's almighty - I am pretty flabbergusted and that explain his obsession with the Phantom. Look, if you are there masturbating about the Phantom, please, oh, please, at least say something nice about him. I would detest the thought of someone having secret wet dreams and hating the victim of their fantasy sex hunt.

Erika said:

"I never figured out that ardjoena is a male! WowEEeee!! God's almighty - I am pretty flabbergusted and that explain his obsession with the Phantom. Look, if you are there masturbating about the Phantom, please, oh, please, at least say something nice about him. I would detest the thought of someone having secret wet dreams and hating the victim of their fantasy sex hunt."

Yes, Erika, because we wouldn't want anyone to say anything negative in a review now would we? We don't want critics being critical do we? Let's all jump on and rubbish someone for giving a harsh review of something so that we can fill the website with nice, uplifting, meaningless fluff in the reviews column so that no-one's favourite play or film gets reviewed negatively.

That's ok Erika, I understand how much it must hurt to have your small little mind strained by the concept that other people might not think the same way as you. It really is a big concept to grasp, and maybe you'd be better off just rejecting it, and insulting anyone who criticises something you like.

One 'might' suggest that your name indicates that you may be a tad biased on the subject of Phantom of the Opera. Some 'might' even say obsessed, dangerously deluded or somewhat deranged. And it was very rude of Ardjoena to criticise the film when it obviously holds so much emotional and psychological importance to you and is probably the only thing stopping you from emarking on a pathological murderous rampage. Again, it really is quite a difficult task to come to grips with the idea that not everyone loves your favourite film, and that people can have good reason for not sharing your taste - I really think you shouldn't try to think about that too hard, just stick to using the word 'phantom' somewhere in your name, using profanity on internet forums and harassing anyone who disagrees with you, it's much easier and more satisfying.

[my apologies to people who aren't used to my being so vehement in posts - the homophobia in this thread really bugged me, and the stupidity of the postings hasn't exatcly helped my mood:-)]

Craig K Edwards wrote:

> [my apologies to people who aren't used to my being so
> vehement in posts - the homophobia in this thread really
> bugged me, and the stupidity of the postings hasn't exatcly
> helped my mood:-)]



I agree that this thread stopped being worth reading some time ago.

Everyone knows that the Phantom doesn't sing (but plays the jungle drums rather well), and will beat up anyone who is evil, unjust, or says bad things in reviews without having a justified argument.


crg

Old jungle saying from Bangalla should always be quoted as "an ANGRY Phantom has the strength of ten tigers", for we all know that the ghost who walks (man who cannot die) is really a sensitive new age guy, who gets on well with women, children, minority groups and animals (especially Devil).

Ah, now the purple-lycra-clad Phantom starring in Phantom of the opera - THAT I would fly across the world to see:-)

Yes! How about a musical "The Real Phantom of the Opera House", where the man who cannot die slides down the sails of the Utzon creation in Sydney Harbour (or was it Ken Done who designed it ;-) I forget).
Anyhow, sliding down the tiles, guns blazing, underpants on the outside, speeding across the harbour in a motorboat, rescuing Diana Palmer from pirates in Luna Park -- that would be a musical to see.
Special guest appearance by Mandrake and his faithful assistant Lothar.
I swear on the skull of my father this would leave "Phantom of the Opera" for dead.

Well, I guess that sucks for you, Craig. Thank you for insulting me in a way my retarded 90-year-old Religious Studies teacher would. Hey, I don't give a damn what you think about the film but I am a mentally deformed, Phantom of the Opera obsessed girl and who's to say I can't scream out what I want. At least I am not afraid of saying what I desperately want to say instead of clogging it up in my mind... god almighty!

if so i would prefer for it not to have sound thanx.

How would it be named a musical by Andrew Lloyd Webber without sound!? Lol

Enough already!!!!

This post started Boxing Day!!

Get a life!!!

Thou spleeny fool-born canker-blossom!