I'm not into stage musicals. Some DO intrigue me, and when I go see them, I sometimes end up liking them a lot, such as with "Grease" (but that doesn't really count), "Rent," and "Jekyll & Hyde," which is awesome. For the most part, however, I avoid stage musicals like the plague. Another one that I always wanted to see was Andrew Lloyd Webber's "The Phantom of the Opera." I didn't know much about it, but I liked the idea of it, and it seemed like it would have great potential. Unfortunately, I never got to see it.
Musicals in Hollywood were written off a few years ago, but then came "Moulin Rouge," an excellent movie that suddenly made musicals cool. Maybe not quite profitable, but musicals were accepted once again. A year later, "Chicago" was released, and even though I didn't like it (and it wasn't NEARLY as good or original as "Moulin Rouge"), it not only made a huge profit, but it also won the Oscar for Best Picture. Studios were no longer afraid to invest in musicals, so the next one was sure to be a big one... and it is. "The Phantom of the Opera" is big, lavish, and grandiose. It looks great, it's an impressive film, but I didn't like it. I thought it was boring, and I think we're supposed to sympathize with "The Phantom," but I found that to be impossible, being that he was a cold-hearted killer and all.
When it was first announced that a feature film version of Andrew Lloyd Webber's play was finally going into production with Joel Schumacher at the helm, I cringed. For one thing, I felt that Baz Luhrmann, the director of "Moulin Rouge," was the obvious choice to direct the film, and though Schumacher's name had been attached for a while, I was hoping that wiser heads would prevail and the studio would give the job to Luhrmann. "The Phantom of the Opera" was one of the few musical plays I wanted to see, but since I never got the chance, I really wanted the feature film to be great. Eventually I found out that Andrew Lloyd Webber personally hand-picked Joel Schumacher to direct the film, so I accepted it. Not only that, after thinking about it, I decided that Schumacher really was the perfect choice. Sure, he's the same man who destroyed the "Batman" movie franchise by making the abysmal "Batman Forever" and the catastrophic "Batman & Robin," but he's redeemed himself since then, having made "8mm," "Tigerland," and "Phone Booth." Besides, before his "Batman" disasters, he made some decent movies like "Falling Down," "Flatliners," and "The Lost Boys." But strangely enough, I think that his shitty "Batman" movies help make the case that Schumacher is perfect for "Phantom of the Opera." Does that make any sense to you? Perhaps it doesn't, but it does to me.
With every Joel Schumacher film since the "Batman" shitty shits, he's redeemed himself more and more, and even though I didn't really like "Phantom of the Opera," I think that Joel Schumacher has done a fantastic job. I can't comment on how it is compared to the stage production, but the movie that I saw looked great, and was extremely well directed. I've heard that there are some subtle differences, but I don't know what they are, and being that I haven't seen the original stage production, it wouldn't matter anyway.
The screenplay was written by Andrew Lloyd Webber & Joel Schumacher, and like I said, I don't know what was changed from the stage production. However, the fact that Schumacher is given screenplay credit means that he must have had some influence during the writing stage. I have no idea if it made things better or worse than the play, but all in all, I really didn't like the story. Still, the look of the movie is so great that it makes up for a lot of the shortcomings of the story.
Oh, for the sake of giving credit where it's due, I should point out that the movie (and therefore, the stage musical) is based on the novel by Gaston Leroux.
The cast is pretty good, I guess, but I wasn't blown away by any of 'em. Well no, I take that back. Emmy Rossum (she was Sean Penn's daughter in "Mystic River"... she was also in "The Day After Tomorrow") is awesome as "Christine." She's got great acting skills, but her singing is what will really amaze you. What a pair of pipes on that girl! Out of everyone in the movie, she's the one who REALLY impressed me. As for the pivotal role of "The Phantom," he was played by Gerard Butler ("Reign of Fire" and "Lara Croft Tomb Raider: The Cradle of Life"). He's an actor I like, and I think he has a bright future, but I don't know if he was the right guy for the role. Don't get me wrong, his acting is really good, and his singing isn't bad at all, but I think that the role required someone with a bigger presence (that's the same problem I had with him when he was cast as "Dracula" in "Dracula 2000"), as well as a more powerful, booming voice. Also in the film is Minnie Driver, and I've read good things about her performance, but I thought it was a little over the top... as well as annoying. Well, that's how the character is supposed to be (an annoying drama queen), so maybe she was perfect. Depends on how you look at it, I guess.
"The Phantom of the Opera" isn't a bad movie at all, it's just that the story isn't my thing. Visually, the film is awesome, but the story didn't grab me. Maybe it works a lot better on the stage, I dunno. The next time I go to New York City, or whenever the play comes to Miami, I'll check it out, so I can compare the two.
Scale of 1-10: 6