Customer Reviews

The Phantom of the Opera

5 star:		(12)
4 star:		(7)
3 star:		(11)
2 star:		(6)
1 star:		(30)

 

 

Not bad at all, though it can't compare to Lloyd Webber. There seems to be a syndrome among Phantom movies, that causes the drastic changing of dates--this one took place in 1911, twenty years after the events in the novel, as opposed to Webber's, which took place twenty years BEFORE. But that's minor. I liked the portrayal of Raoul as sweet, innocent (more so than Christine!) and deferential to Christine's career. Carlotta was a laugh riot (it ain't over 'til the fat lady sings!) as was Joseph Buquet, and the scene with the managers and the Phantom singing together was hysterical. The masqued ball in this film is pretty plain when compared to other versions, but it suffices. Staller's performance as the Phantom was surprisingly good, however. His voice echoed whenever he spoke, and is he's nowhere near Crowford in singing, he still manages to hold his own ("Perfect Music" was the best song in the piece). I loved the silver mask, the makeup was flawless, and Staller can really act! You could see the anguish in every expression, and his hand gestures reminded me a bit of Lon Chaney in this same role. I was glad they included the Persian 'Daroga' in this version, though I was disappointed with his background (the Phantom and the Persian are not friends in this film, only antagonists). My only real problem was at the ending. There was no kiss!!!!! I wasn't as upset by the Phantom going on to another girl, though. He seems younger in this play, and much more resilient than his fifty-year-old counterparts. All in all, worth the money and repeated viewings.

Well if you are an Andrew Lloyd Webber version of the Phantom phan, this movie would be an OK movie to you. The music wasn't as good as A.L.W.'s, and the voices of the characters were OK. But Sarah Brightman's voice over-ruled Elizabeth Walsh's voice, and David Staller's voice is not competition for Michael Crawford's amazing voice! The ending showed Erik as a undevoted lover to Christine. As it shows him going on to the next girl after Christine runs away with Raoul, but not in voice but in dance. OK, that was not anything like the original book by Gaston Leroux, as it is said to be on the back of the video cover! I give the 2 stars for the phantom's make-up. It's the best I've seen! Other than that, if you are an Andrew Lloyd Webber version phan dont get this video! It's a big disapointment! :)

This version of "Phantom" is by far my favorite. Although the time frame is a little messed up, the music makes up for it completely. While Lloyd Webber is fine, his version holds none of the humor and deapth of emotion David Staller gives this performance. If what the Phantom does to Carlotta at the masque doesn't tickle you, get it simply for the ending. That ending had me standing up applauding Erik. This performance was worth every cent I paid for it and then some, and I've been collecting Phantom things for some time now. I've seen every version of Phantom, including the clip from the Tony's, the Charles Dance version (which is my second favorite), the Meatloaf music video, Paul Stanley (whom I respect because he is a phan, even if he isn't the best Phantom), ect ect... and this one is still my favorite. Buy it, you won't regret it.
Raoul: "I could have been killed! What's wrong with you??"
Persian: "Oh, I am feeling fine, thank you very much."

I don't know how much I can stress the fact that this is not the Andrew Lloyd Webber musical. No where on the cover does it say Andrew Lloyd Webber. His name is not mentioned anywhere in the show at all. I urge you to not watch this if you are expecting to see Sir Andrew's show because this isn't it. I am absolutely disgusted with people who have reviewed saying "This show is awful because there's no 'Music of the Night' and it's not Micheal Crawford." Of course there isn't, becuase it's not that show.
It's a good show in it's own right, although I found DS's phantom to be a little more full of himself than I would think Erik would be. A must for any phan's collection, although some purists may frown on the ending. The music is good and the actors have very nice voices, though, that is just my personal opinion.
Again: If you're expecting the ALW show on DVD, this is not for you. If you are fully prepared to watch with an open mind however, it's a really nice show.

David Staller's attempt to seduce Christine in this live play SEDUCES ME each time I see it! His voice, his stance, his arrogance, his eyes, his golden curls, r sooo sexy to this Phantom Phan. Sure, some moments of action were silly, even malpracticed. Eric's rejection scene didn't touch my heart. And his face was NOT ghastly. But, his lips (the perfect side) look like they r begging to be kissed. The song, "Perfect Music, Perfect Love", is a sensual masterpiece.

For those who want Webber's version, this isn't it. It does, however, stand quite well on its own as a very beautiful and moving play with music that is very emotional, and in one or two cases, visceral. Elizabeth Walsh's voice is incomparable, both speaking and singing, and her acting is fresh and natural. Her Christine is quite believable. David Staller's performance is truly moving. He has managed to capture Erik's desperate desire for human contact, as well as his immature petulance and arrogance, not to mention his sense of humor and flamboyance. Mr. Staller portrays an entirely sympathetic Phantom. At times he's laugh-out-loud funny; at others the tears will flow.
Since I know of no Webber version on tape, this one is better than just a substitute. This one is phun.

While this little musical isn't the big-budget bravado production that Andrew Lloyd Webber's Phantom of the Opera is IMHO it's more than worth a watch or three...

There were two OTHER musical takes on POTO that came out about the same time that Webber's grand musical did. This small low budget production meant for a small theatre and PBS was one, the production of "Phantom the Musical" by Yeston and Kopit was another.

All three actually had their moments.

ALW's version went onto legend-hood. Yeston and Kopit's did quite well in regional theatres and eventually became sans music the Charles Dance mini-series, the third, this one, well that became what I can only call a "sleeper musical" in a lot of ways.

The fact that it's even available now is because it has quite a surprising and loyal following.

I first saw it in a neighborhood theatre on a rainy day and I had NO idea of what I was seeing. I just happened to walk by and saw the marquee and being a LeRoux's Phantom fan I decided to check it out.

I walked out with "Perfect Music" and David Staller's performance STUCK in my head. So much so that I had to see it again, and again. Three times that week before the film ended it's run I went back to see the little Phantom film because something about it touched me utterly.

Time went on, several years passed, and yet I never forgot that version, in fact I looked for a tape for quite a while to no avail. Then, one day, wandering the streets of NYC I came across a homeless guy selling a bunch of homemade tapes one of which was labeled POTO. I bought it, mainly to give the poor guy a buck, and much to my surprise and delight it was an audio tape of Staller in rehersals for the musical! It wasn't the whole play, just a few bits and pieces but it quite tickled me listening to it, and I found myself once again enchanted by Staller's Erik and in particlar the song "Perfect Music."

Oddly enough less than a month later I opened up the newspaper and there was an ad for a Cole Porter musical review at the Algonquin hotel starring David Staller an actor I had never seen in anything else!

Being a Cole Porter fan, and thinking that with his voice it was likely to be a lovely performance, I called the hotel's number, mentioned that I had seen Staller's Phantom and was interested in seeing his Porter show.

Much to my amazement I was connected to Mr Staller's room and about 10 minutes and one nice conversation later I found myself invited to the show as his guest!

It WAS a great show. Cole Porter and the voice of David Staller? Now that's a STUNNING combination! More than that the guy was just a lovely person besides!

At the time I asked him if his Phantom was EVER going to be released and he said it would depend on a lot of things, rights and so forth, but that he hoped so.

I think it was about a decade until it actually showed up, but you know what? Everytime I pop it in the viewer I really DO believe it was worth the long wait!

No, it's not a Broadway production. Heck it's not even an OFF Broadway production, but for a small locally-produced musical it's not half bad! The two main leads are lovely singers and can actually act, the supporting players are funny, and contrary to statements above I personally found at least two songs memorable enough that 10 years later I they were still in my brain enough that I truly wanted to hear them again!

From what I understand David Staller's career has been a modest one. Frankly, I don't see why. The man has far more range than you'd think, this simple production doesn't even begin to cover it. This guy really SHOULD have stepped into Crawford's shoes on Broadway or at the very least made a lovely Raoul...

But at least there's this....

This modest but IMHO truly enchanting Phantom....

:)

I watched the VHS version of this, and while I didn't find the music too impressive, I was still moved by the performances that Staller and Walsh gave. I would have liked to see Walsh perform Christine in the Lloyd-Webber version. Staller's version of the phantom was poignant, and I loved the fact that, as in Leroux's book, there was more of an attraction between Christine and Phantom in this version than in Lloyd-Webbers. Additionally, Christine is portrayed as being more, well...intelligent in this version. Her character is less of a wilting violet ready to run to the arms of the nearest man for safety. At one point she even engages the Phantom in a sort of philosophical debate while in his lair!
For pitchfork wielding purists, this version is as close to the original novel as I've seen. The character of the Persian is included, and many of the smaller details excluded in the Lloyd-Webber version are included here(i.e. the phantom appearing at the ball, Don Juan Triumphant never actually having been performed, the relationship between the Persian and the Phantom).
Missing was the chandelier scene, and the ending is a rather blatant departure from the novel, but given the fact that it appears they were working with a limited scenery budget, the fact that they couldn't design a mirrored room and use live scorpions is understandable.
As for the other characters, I enjoyed the humor incorporated into Carlotta's character, a sort of comic relief that is just that- a relief from the dark themes of the story. However, I was thoroughly disappointed in Raoul's performance; one was inclined to think he was suffering from strained vocal cords-he sounded like a dying cat!
All in all, I feel it has great potential, and is a must see for Phantom Phans.

Today it is vital that "Phantom of the Opera" be about MUSIC. The Lon Chaney version is marvelous as a dramatic presentation, but a viewer does miss the music (even if they have a version with an instrumental sound track). This awful production does not have one decent or memorable song. In fact, you wish it were a silent version. The only memorable piece of music is the classical "Danse Macabre" played at the masked ball. The "original" music for this production is a waste of time. There is not one number that can be remembered even 10 seconds after is has been played. After hearing the first number, you want to grab the remote and push the "mute" button whenever another song is started.

The script is unbelievably inept. Not one scene builds to a dramatic climax. They just sort of end without reason or emotion. One of the great things about any other version is that the audience is made to care about Eric (the Phantom), Christine and Raoul. The only feeling this script envokes is BOREDOM. A few scenes are mildly (and I stress "mildly") amusing, but this is the only emotion a viewer can hope for.

In the novel, Christine and Raoul go off and their future is not revealed, but it is stated that the skeleton of the Phantom is discovered years later wearing the ring he had given Christine and she returned when she left. There is none of the "pick the next Miss Phantom Girl" that ends this version. Even with Eric being a monster both in looks and actions, there is a certain pity for him in all other versions. This version leaves you with a feeling he got what he deserved when Christine left.

It was filmed before a live audience and even their reactions are only half hearted, applause after some scenes and songs, no reactions after others. It almost seems that the audience is in disbelief about what they are seeing. The sets are all small and cheap looking. The theater stage obviously could not accomodate decent settings.

This is the worst version of "Phantom" that can be imagined. Even if you find it in a half priced bin, skip it.

I was thoroughly disappointed when I purchased this DVD from Amazon. I have a 12 foot screen and incredible sound system, so I got a bunch of my friends together for "A night at the opera", thinking it was the stage version of the play. Indeed it is, EXCEPT - it's not the Andrew Lloyd Webber words and music. I thought it to be closer to a amateur production, with bad lighting and sound to go with it! We we unanamously disappointed and didn't get through it. It was a waste of money and shipping exspence. If this is indeed the production that you are looking for - all the more power to you, but if you are looking for the production by Andrew LLoyd Webber - Buyer BEWARE!