2
7
3
(see it only if you like silent films)
(mild violence)
(nothing direct)
The story of the Phantom of the Opera has been around for quite a long time. My only exposure to it up to the point of this silent movie was the Webber Broadway musical so I have little basis of comparison as far as incarnations of the story goes. If you want to know how one version stacks up against another you'll have to get it elsewhere, but if you want some thoughts on the silent movie from an “outsider,” read on.
A strange, even monstrous, man lives in the caverns beneath an opera house and haunts it like a ghost. He has taken a liking (and by “liking” I mean obsession beyond all rationality) to Christine, a beautiful young singer. When he abducts her the girl’s fiancé and an investigator set out to scour the vast labyrinth of caverns beneath the opera house in order to reclaim her. The Phantom lies in wait for them and is prepared to defend his prize with lethal force.
Lon Chaney’s portrayal of the Phantom is one of the most recognizable horror icons in cinema history. One look at the face of this monster is enough to know who he is and where he comes from. That’s a testament both to his portrayal and the costuming used to create him. Considering he’s really just a man rather than a wolf creature or long-toothed vampire, the fact that he can be so creepy looking and distinct is really quite impressive.
Unfortunately, I don’t find the rest of the movie nearly so impressive. In fact, I found it hard to follow at times and far too long overall. We do find out the history of the “Phantom” which plays out nicely, but the clash between him and the would-be heroes is not laid out particularly well. There are a number of instances that left me wonder just what it was that the movie makers thought they were accomplishing. I think a cutting down of the arms-length conflict and a more direct confrontation would have improved the flow of the story.
I'm not particularly impressed nor put off with any of the actors outside of Chaney. The female lead, the kidnapped girl, does do a fair job with her role but makes it only slightly memorable. None of the others are memorable at all.
Morality
There is very little mild violence. Mostly it just tries to be creepy with its scary monster and abduction terror. There is no sex, nudity, or strong language.
Spirituality
The Phantom is a man who has essentially turned his lust for a particular woman into his god. Considering that he was a criminal before he kidnapped Christine we can assume that he's an unbalanced fellow in general, but even so he shows us the dangers of the attitude “if you want something you just take it.”
Final Thoughts
While the Phantom of the Opera story itself obviously endures through the ages, I don't get into its presentations all that much. I found the Webber musical enjoyable to see on stage, but I have yet to find an on-screen presentation that appeals to me. In this old, silent version all the running around in the caverns gets to be dull although the Phantom himself is nicely done. It may be worth seeing as an example of early cinema, but if you're looking to try out some silent movies for the first time, there are better ones available.
Buying Guide
A number of the old silent movie classics have been given the royal treatment on DVD, and "The Phantom of the Opera" seems to be up there with the best of them.
I've been able to identify at least 3 different official versions of the film with different run times, frame rates, and even aspect ratios. Most releases don't give enough information to determine for sure which version they offer.
Most notable is the Blu which has a lot to offer. There's a “Collector's Edition” DVD, a “SPECIAL Collector's Edition” of the 1929 re-release, a 2 disc “Ultimate Edition,” a DVDTEE offering, and any number of other stand-alone DVD's and multi-movie packs.
I'll do my best to get you started on your research of this film, but there are so many variations and I know so little about the movie that the best I can really do is point you towards a few that have something special to offer.
The Blu appears to be a definitive collection offering 3 different versions of the movie. The original version is said to be the original source copy, is color tinted, runs at 114 minutes, is a 1.37 ratio, and features a piano score. The 1929 reissue is presented twice at 20 and 24 frames per second, 92 and 78 minutes respectively, with a 1.2 aspect ratio, and different orchestral scores. The release includes the “rare” technicolor sequence, and is a high-def digital transfer. There is a commentary, interviews with the composer, an image gallery, the script, reproduction of the theatrical program, and other goodies. The 3 versions vary in quality according to one reviewer but at least one is presented in 1080p high-def and blows every other presentation away.
While I didn't see a DVD version of the Blu, the 2 disc Ultimate Edition appears to be the closest to it and is from the same company though it's labeled as being a part of the “Milestone Collection.” Each disc contains a different version with those being the original and the restored. The restored has an orchestral soundtrack and the original music from the 30's. A film historian provides a commentary; there are image galleries featuring missing scenes, dialogue sequences apparently not part of any final version of the film, interviews, and part of an opera. The quality is said to look better than what came before it though it has since been surpassed by the Blu.
The Special Collector's Edition (1 disc) is also by the same company but is older. It is remastered and had some work done on the score but only offers the re-release version and an essay as an extra.
The Collector's Edition also offers The Hunchback of Notre Dame, and is remastered. This appears to be the original print of the film and does not list anything else notable.
No other releases give enough details to be sure of what version they offer nor the quality of the presentation. I saw no other mention of restoration or extras.
Final Recommendation:
If you care at all about quality or extras go for the Blu or the 2-disc DVD. Unfortunately the prices I've been seeing for both of these put them out the reach of most potential viewers. The best alternatives appear to me to be the Collector's Edition with "The Hunchback of Notre Dame," or the older Special Collector's Edition of the 1929 re-release. If you just want exposure to the film to say you saw it there are plenty of cheap bargains like the 50 pack I have, but the poor quality makes it hard to sit through so get one of those only if it's a really good bargain.
I got mine in the “Horror Classics” 50 pack.
Video
1.33:
This is the TV standard “full-frame” ratio. It is scratchy, with trashy video and problems that include edges of the video being cut off and an image that goes from way too dark to extremely washed out.
Audio
2.0 mono:
The sound is thin with annoying pops.
Packaging
This particular disc is housed in a cardboard sleeve contained in a Velcro-fastened box (more recently repackaged in plastic). You can read about the set as a whole in great detail in the Horror Classics (50 pack) guide.
This version uses some classical orchestral tunes as the soundtrack. I noticed one tune by Schubert but am not up enough on my classical composers to say what all is included. I thought the Schubert tunes worked (then again I like his stuff so I could be biased), but most of the other music doesn’t seem appropriate for the mood to me which hurts the viewing experience. This one clocks in at about 1 hour and 46 minutes which doesn't match any other run time I saw listed so I don't know for sure which version this is. However, it does contain a masquerade ball that is colorized so I would suppose that makes this the reissue from 1929 which appears to be the primary one in circulation.
Extras
There are none.