|
|
|
The
Phantom Of The Opera
Hammer Horror Series
|
|
U.K.
/ 1962
Directed
by Terence Fisher
Starring
Herbert
Lom
Heather
Sears
Michael
Gough
Color / 85 Minutes / Not Rated
Format:
DVD (R1 - NTSC/ 2-disc set)
Universal Home Video
|
 |
|
|
|
Hold
your mouse pointer over an image for a pop-up caption
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
 |
|
The
classic novel on Audio CD
|
 |
|
|
 |

|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
 |
|
8 |
|
10
= Highest Rating |
|
Guest
Review by Troy
Howarth |
•
A look at one of the films in the Hammer
Horror Series
• DVD Rating is for entire set |
A
disfigured musician known as the Phantom (Herbert Lom) haunts
the London Opera House, wreaking havoc and falling in love with
a young singer named Christine (Heather Sears)...
Of all the films directed by Terence Fisher,
Phantom Of The Opera, apart from
being one of the most controversial, comes closest to fulfilling
his desire to helm a love story in the Frank Borzage mold. Wistful,
delicate and almost entirely devoid of 'horror', the film was
a critical and financial flop in 1962 and it remains hotly debated
to this day. Fisher enthusiasts tend to embrace it as one of
the director's best films, while others deride it as tedious.
Reportedly developed as a vehicle for Cary Grant (according
to producer Anthony Hinds, it was Grant's idea to do a horror
film, but he got cold feet at the last second), this unusually
genteel adaptation of Gaston Leroux's novella works very well
as a drama and less persuasively as a horror picture. Compared
to other versions of the story, it is neither the most faithful
nor is it the most far-afield of the original concept. I would
argue that it is, ultimately, the best film as a whole out of
the whole slew of filmic adaptations, but I would be in the
minority on that point. The film lacks the memorable Phantom
makeup of Lon Chaney in the 1925 silent version, but the point
of Fisher's take on the story is that the Phantom isn't a villain
to be despised — he's a sympathetic, misunderstood and abused
figure. In order to remove all the horrific deeds from the character,
screenwriter Hinds devised a dwarf sidekick (Ian Wilson) to
do all the dirty work, whether it be accidentally breaking the
chandelier that plays a role in the finale or stabbing a rat-catcher
(Scars Of Dracula's Patrick Troughton)
in the eye. The few flashes of horror do feel a trifle grafted
on, notably the sequence with the rat-catcher. There is no real
motivation for this action, making the dwarf character seem
more psychotic than the bulk of the narrative seems to suggest
that he is. An earlier moment, with the Phantom disrupting a
performance of his opera by thrusting a hanged man onto the
stage, is more satisfactory but still jars with the overall
tone of the film.
The most problematic aspect of the film is
the Salieri-like character of Lord Ambrose, played to reptilian
perfection by Michael Gough (Horrors
Of The Black Museum). The problem isn't with Gough, who
is superb, but with the resolution of his character — but the
problem goes beyond just his character to the very end of the
film itself. Having been established as a complete and utter
swine who steals the Phantom's music and attempts to force his
advances on Christine, he is set up as a villain of epic proportions.
Yet, when the Phantom confronts him, all we get is Gough ripping
the mask from his face and running off in fright. What happens
then? Does he get away scot-free, and if so, why? And if he
does indeed get some kind of comeuppance, what exactly is it?
Fisher and Hinds lose site of this as the film moves rapidly
to a close — the villain's fate left unresolved, the film then
sets about disposing of its tragic protagonist in a somewhat
hasty manner. As Christine performs the Phantom's masterpiece
to an appreciative audience, Fisher includes one of his trademark
sensitive touches — a close-up of the Phantom's eye as tears
stream down his cheek. However, the dwarf accidentally breaks
the chandelier and the Phantom leaps to save Christine from
being crushed, only to be crushed himself. All this happens
so quickly and suddenly, with the Phantom taking time to rather
pointlessly remove his mask so that we can get a perfunctory
look at his scars (a decent makeup job from Roy Ashton). So
much of the film is so good and so sensitively handled, and
yet Fisher and Hinds really drop the ball in these last 10-15
minutes. Were they running behind schedule? Was there more material
intended to go in to this section of film that they simply couldn't
film? It's hard to say, but the fact remains that what could
have been Fisher's masterpiece suffers as a result of such thoughtless
hastiness.
Clearly
designed to reach a wider audience than their earlier horror
films, Phantom has impressive production values. The decision
to switch the setting to the London Opera House was a practical
one, and the settings and set dressings are nicely rendered
throughout. Reportedly shot on a higher than usual budget, it
doesn't necessarily put the earlier run of Hammer films to shame
for the simple reason that Arthur Grant's cinematography isn't
as impressive as Jack Asher's. Grant creates some impressive
images here and there, but overall his approach is more realistic
than lyrical, thus clashing somewhat with the mood Fisher is
trying so hard to maintain. While not unattractive, his lighting
has a pedestrian quality to it that detracts from the mood somewhat.
Edwin Astley's score is more on the money, though the Opera
snippets aren't exactly high art. (In fairness, the actual music
is very nice... the lyrics, however, could have benefited from
some polishing.)
The cast is, once
again, first rate. Herbert Lom is absolutely brilliant as the
Phantom. He makes for a credibly eerie presence —
there are some marvelous shots of him lurking in the shadows
—
but he goes beyond being a stereotypical bogeyman to become
a tragic hero. Lom handles the neurotic aspects of the character
without overacting and is even granted a nice flashback sequence
to show the audience, approximately, what he really looks like.
As with Clifford Evans in Curse
Of The Werewolf, one can't help but wonder why Hammer didn't
capitalize on their core audience by casting Peter Cushing or
Christopher Lee in the role —
either actor could have played the role very well, especially
Lee whose gifts with mime acting were displayed in Curse
Of Frankenstein, The Mummy and
others. It would seem that after Grant dropped out of the project
they simply sought to find somebody "fresh" and free of horror
connotations, perhaps in the hope of selling the film to a wider
audience. Supporting Lom is a fine gallery of character actors.
Heather Sears (Sons And Lovers),
another odd choice for a Hammer leading woman, gives a sensitive
performance as Christine. She credibly conveys her character's
iron will while also displaying her more vulnerable qualities.
Edward DeSouza (Kiss
Of The Vampire) makes for a likable romantic lead,
while Gough steals his scenes with ripely overplayed villainy
and lechery. Fisher favorite Thorley Walters (Frankenstein
Must Be Destroyed) is also on hand as Gough's meek business
associate, while Michael Ripper (Dracula
Has Risen From The Grave), Miles Malleson (Hound
Of The Baskervilles), Harold Goodwin (The
Mummy) and others pop up in smaller supporting roles.
|
|
|
| Phantom
Of The Opera
(Hammer Horror Series Disc 1, Side B) has been transferred
at the odd aspect ratio of 2.0 and while early speculation on
the 'net worried that it would be overmatted, this seems to be
the ratio at which it was framed. Granted it takes a little while
to get used to seeing the film looking so wide as this, but compositions
look balanced throughout. Bearing in mind that this was conceived
as something of a 'super production' by Hammer's standards, it's
not inconceivable that they opted to lens the film in a wider
ratio to play up the improved production values and so forth.
Compared to the fullscreen laser disc edition, there is appreciable
image gained on the peripheries, while some dead space is missing
from the top and bottom of the frame. Print quality is lesser
than the other films in the set, I'm sorry to report, but it still
looks very nice. The eerie pre-credits/credits sequence looks
unacceptably blurry, but once the main action starts the image
is far sharper. Colors are a little muted, but this seems to be
the general tone of Grant's cinematography. Some minor print damage
is evident, but overall the image — which is enhanced for widescreen
TVs — is in good shape and is an improvement on MCA's original
VHS and laser disc incarnations. There are no bonus materials
or supplements included.
10/04/05 |
•
Home
| Reviews | Top
•
|