SYNOPSICS
The Phantom of the Opera (1989) is a English movie. Dwight H. Little has directed this movie. Robert Englund,Jill Schoelen,Alex Hyde-White,Bill Nighy are the starring of this movie. It was released in 1989. The Phantom of the Opera (1989) is considered one of the best Drama,Horror,Music,Romance movie in India and around the world.
In New York, the Julliard student Christine Day meets her friend Meg in the library where she works and she shows a piece of music from the unknown author Erik Destler that she has found on the shelf. Christine decides to use the music in her audition on the next day for a role in a version of Faust in the New York Opera. During the audition, there is an accident on the stage and Christina faints. She relives her past life in the 19th century in London, when she is an aspirant opera singer and becomes the protégée of the Phantom of the London Opera House. The Phantom is the unknown composer Erik Destler who makes a pact with the devil in order to the world would love his music. In return, the devil destroys his face and tells him that he would never be loved by anyone and would be disfigured forever. After a tragic ending, Christine awakes in the present day and has a great surprise when she is introduced to the producer of the opera.
Fans of The Phantom of the Opera (1989) also like
Same Actors
The Phantom of the Opera (1989) Reviews
A good film criticized by Phantom Phanatics.
The problem with The Phantom of the Opera is that Andrew Llyod Webber has ruined any other representation of the classic novel. I love Webber's Phantom, but I also love the original Phantom. I have seen Lon, Claude Rains and now Robert Englund in the role of the Phantom, and I believe that this film (with Englund) is a fantastic adaptation of the story. Webber created his screenplay for his musical to bring out the romance of the Phantom while Gerry O'Hara and Duke Sandefur (The writers) did a great job concentrating on the less romantic phantom, but the obsessed genius who would do anything and kill anybody for the woman he was infatuated with. Anyone who has read Leroux knows that the Phantom was a composer and not a singer, so the fact that this version did not have the Phantom singing opera was alright by me. As I said before, Webber has made too many high expectations for any other version of this story. What I really enjoyed about Dwight Little's Phantom is that it took place in a Opera and actually had Christine singing. Though I do not agree with the Phantom's 'Faustus' like background instead of being a circus freak, I can appreciate this movie. The end was a bit 'blaah' and I don't know if I agree with the mixing of modern and flashbacks. I didn't like how they changed the place of Paris to London. I did however like how the ending did enforce the theme of this particular movie "Only Love and Music are forever". I think anyone who enjoyed the book, the musical and has an open mind to other people's interpretations, plus a good love for horror (since Phantom of the opera -is- a horror/Gothic novel) should see this movie and forget the musical numbers and scores of Webbers before they view it, or their expectations will be unfulfilled. 8/10
Very Strange and Interesting Film
This version of the Phantom of the Opera is by far one of the stranger films in its genre. Mixing elements of 80 slasher and old time horror this movie works on many levels and fails on a few. Now, everyone knows the story of the Phantom of the Opera, Right? Well, this story is basically the same except for a few differences. For one, a late 80's version of Christine is trying out for the lead role in an opera. During her addition, she is hit over the head and knocked out. When she awakens, she is back in time in late 1800's London. She seems to have no recollection of even going into the past. The rest of the story is traditional Phantom except for name changes and how disturbed this Phantom is and his origin. I really have to hand it to Robert England as the Phantom or Eric. This is by far one of the best roles I have ever seen him in. And the make-up job for him is astonishing. The fact that this Phantom makes a mask out of human flesh is actually quite creepy. And physically, he makes his character of Freddy look like a silly mess. Now, for fans of the musical and the original versions of the movie, I don't know if you would really like this version. But, for fans of 80's slasher mixed with some atmosphere, a good soundtrack, and good acting, I would have to recommend this. I give it an 8/10.
A Total Guilty Pleasure
My friend, a fellow Phantom Phan recommended this to me. I had my doubts when I picked this up but I sat down to watch it at about midnight, Ha! biggest mistake of my life. This was possibly the most disturbing, gory, creepy interpretation of Phantom ever, and you know what? I LOVED it. This is possibly one of my favorite film versions of this story, giving even Lon Cheney a run for his money. Robert Englund's Erik was insane but brilliant and amazingly witty. He had the most amazing lines ("Love and music are forever"). The story begins in modern day New York City when Christine Day and her friend Meg discover two pages of Don Juan Triumphant in an old archive, written by the mad genius Erik Destler. When Christine sings the piece for her audition, a sand bag falls on her and she passes out and is swept back to her past self and finds herself the object of the obsessive Erik. An amazing film in it's own right with beautiful music. But remember everyone, you are not sitting down to classic literature, you are sitting down to a gory slasher/horror film. It was a refreshing change from Andrew Lloyd Webber's musical which quite frankly I both hate and love. I'm a Leroux purist when it comes to Phantom but still this movie is one of my favorites.
Superb as usual!
~Semi-spoilers~ Robert Englund delivers another great one! In this film he's more of a romantic hero rather than just a murderer, as he was in all the Nightmare on elm street movies, but he pulls this off beautifully as he does with all his other work! This man is a genius as well as an accomplished actor, as any of his fans would be thrilled to agree with. If your a fan of Robert Englund, and lets face it, most of us are, or if you're just looking for a different twist on "The Phantom of the Opera" movies then you'll definitely love this one!
Fairly good, in this Phanatic's humble opinion
Yes, I am indeed one of those "Phanatics" as they're called (though I'm almost starting to think we have a bad reputation...), and I personally would like to say that I found this movie rather enjoyable. I think it could have done without the modern sequences altogether and stayed in the one time period, and yes, a few scenes are a bit cheesy or cheap. But believe it or not, I think that Robert Englund did a fairly good job. My favorite Phantom will always be Michael Crawford, but when one compares Englund to Gerard Butler's Phantom (even using Crawford as the standard), he practically blows that little pansy-ass out of the water. It's refreshing to see an old, decrepit Phantom again, with more subdued, majestic style than Butler's gaudy, emo character. Also, this time the Phantom isn't scared to spill some blood, restoring some respectable fear for Erik that the 2004 version kills. Englund's voice--at least when he isn't screaming--seems surprisingly perfect for the part, and all film critics alike will see that he can indeed act, but has merely been restrained by his previous Freddy typecasting. All in all, I'd say this film makes an excellent counter-balance to the 2004 film, and both those who like like Chaney's Phantom and Crawford Phanatics alike will definitely enjoy it.