Kathy
Classic silent movie with music.
Rated 5/5 Stars •
Rated 5 out of 5 stars
03/07/24
Full Review
Elvis D
Después de haberle dado vida al jorobado de Paris, Universal y Lon Chaney decidieron seguir con otra figura legendaria de la literatura francesa. The Phantom Of The Opera es la segunda entrega de la franquicia de monstruos clásicos creada por Universal. Es conocida como la primera adaptación de la novela de Gaston Leroux y que a diferencia de las demás adaptaciones, esta película es más fiel a la historia original, aunque Alemania ya había hecho una adaptación propia en 1916 que según se dice era mucho más fiel a la novela, pero actualmente esa versión es lost media. Aunque actualmente esta película no es vista como una película del género de terror, tiene los elementos que Universal utilizaría luego en las demás películas de esta franquicia que estaba naciendo. El género de terror estaba en su etapa de pañales en aquel entonces como muchos otros géneros cinematográficos. Lo que hacía que esta película inspirara temor en la audiencia de aquel entonces no era solamente la ambigüedad y el misterio que yace en el ambiente, sino la monstruosa apariencia de Erik hecha con un maquillaje que era bastante avanzado para la época. Lon Chaney logró asombrar al público como Cuasimodo usando un maquillaje que lo hacía ver como un auténtico hombre deforme. En esta película vuelve a repetir lo mismo, pero con una criatura que cumple los estándares del terror de aquella época. Tanto esta película como la anterior del jorobado, eran suficientes para que Lon Chaney se volviera uno de los primeros iconos del cine de terror. Al igual que Cuasimodo, lo fascinante de Erik es que se trata de un monstruo con un lado humano. Claramente, siente amor por Christine y eso es lo que manifiesta su lado humano que quedo enterrado por el rechazo de la gente. La película retrata a Erik como un criminal peligroso, pero hay más sobre él que es explicado en la novela o en la adaptación del 2004. La película resume bastante la novela, pero no pierde el enfoque principal de la historia. La película hace un muy buen uso de las gamas de colores como se han hecho en Das Gabinet Des Dr. Caligari, Nosferatu y The Lost World. Pero una de las cosas más memorables de esta película es la escena de la fiesta de máscaras hecha en Tecnicolor y viene con un guiño claro a The Masque Of The Red Death de Edgar Allan Poe. En conclusión, esta adaptación de The Phantom Of The Opera es otro antecedente del cine de terror que vale la pena echarle un vistazo por haber llevado a la gran pantalla otro monstruo legendario que quedo grabado en la cultura popular. Mi calificación final para esta película es un 9/10.
Rated 4.5/5 Stars •
Rated 4.5 out of 5 stars
04/14/24
Full Review
Avery R
Lon Chaney is awesome in one of the most iconic horror films of all time. The Phantom of the Opera from 1925 shows that even a classic film such as this could and will stand the test of time even centuries or decades later. The make up costumes and acting are all in perfect harmony with each other and their performances are so unique. Lon Chaney will never be forgotten for his immortal presence of the eccentric Opera Ghost, Eric. Gaston Leroux was right about everything and Universal Studios did a phenomenal job with the Technicolor masterpiece of The Masked Ball scene in the second act of the film. I'm very impressed of the success of the franchise becoming the most successful phenomenon of all time in any medium whatsoever of entertainment history thanks to Andrew Lloyd Webber for creating a musical that everyone could relate to.
Rated 5/5 Stars •
Rated 5 out of 5 stars
11/19/23
Full Review
Outer Splatter G
Coming back to this movie for the second time was really different from when I watched it the first time, it felted more engaged in it, wondering what was going to happened next was a real thrill for me. Lon Chaney performance as the phantom is amazing in this. Overall one of my favorite silent films.
Rated 5/5 Stars •
Rated 5 out of 5 stars
11/08/23
Full Review
Valerii Ege D
Rewatched this classic. Interestingly, even after 100 years, the best face prosthetic in the 25's version. Lon Chaney is still the best Phantom. For its era, the movie is a masterpiece.
Rated 3.5/5 Stars •
Rated 3.5 out of 5 stars
10/31/23
Full Review
Matthew B
In The Phantom of the Opera, the main point of focal interest for both the casual filmgoer and the serious film lover is the film's lead actor, Lon Chaney. Chaney was one of the best-known thespians of the silent period. He had a gift for playing deformed or mutilated characters, and managing to make them both terrifying and pitiful. The character may commit terrible crimes, but they are also capable of great sacrifice.
These grotesque figures were brought to life by the efforts of Chaney, who designed his own make-up. In the case of The Phantom of the Opera, he is even said to have directed many of his own scenes, including the most famous one where the Phantom (Chaney) is unmasked.
These effects were achieved in the following ways. Chaney painted the eye sockets black to look like a skull. He applied egg membrane to his eyeballs. He wore fake jagged teeth. He used fish skin and wire to pin his nose back and push the nostrils back, an act that caused some bleeding. His cheeks were built up with the use of cotton and collodion. His ears were glued back.
With so much prosthetics and a mask, Chaney's face was concealed, and he did much of his acting with his hands. Thankfully this was the silent era where gestures were more important than words.
Chaney's performance was the best part of The Phantom of the Opera, but it is not the only memorable part of the film. Another remarkable feature was the lavish and well-designed sets. For the purpose of the film, a Paris Opera House was specially constructed at great expense. Fortunately Universal Pictures got their money's worth out of this lavish, beautiful and enormous set. It would be used in hundreds of films and TV shows, and was only demolished in 2014.
It is also worth commenting on the sets which represent the catacombs wherein lies the Phantom's home. This is accessed through a number of secret entrances leading out into a black lake that puts one in mind of the River Styx, the entrance point for Hades. This underworld contains a dungeon and torture chamber on which the Opera House has bizarrely been built.
The back story of The Phantom is unclear, but he appears to be an escaped madman called Erik who was confined in these very dungeons. Was he tortured there, and does this explain the damage to his face? We do not learn.
The Phantom is the stuff of legend or myth. His shadow scares the dancers out of the cellar, and they exchange stories about him. Some say he has no nose; others say it is enormous. The stage hand Joseph Buquet (Bernard Siegel) claims to have seen the Phantom, and offers a ghoulish description of a malignant entity with yellow skin and eyes like the holes in a skull.
The story poignantly reminds us that looks do matter. The Phantom is fascinating to Christine only when he is unseen. After she has looked on his face, she once more gravitates to the good-looking Raoul. A man's devotion and striving for purity is not enough to compensate for his being deformed or disfigured. However much we say that looks are not important in a partner, they make some difference, and a person's chance of happiness can be affected by their appearance.
From a realistic point of view, the story is absurd. How did Christine take so long to realise that her secret admirer was the Phantom? When she decides to meet up again with Raoul, why does she choose the top of the Opera House during a masque, rather than finding a place at the other side of town where the Phantom is less likely to see them together?
Nonetheless, it is pointless to criticise the lack of realism in a story that is essentially a fantasy. One might just as well attack The Wizard of Oz, The Thief of Bagdad or La Belle et la Bête for having far-fetched storylines.
It hardly matters how the Phantom got to live in the dungeons, or where he got the items that furnish his lair. We do not need to consider the likelihood of the attachment between him and Christine carried out through a wall without their ever meeting. These exist on an entirely romantic and artistic plane.
The Phantom of the Opera is certainly sensationalist, but the same claim can be made about any horror movie. What matters is the effectiveness of its imagery, and the power and poetry of the storytelling. This is a film that weaves its own spell. It is unreal and yet that very lack of reality is what stamps it indelibly on the viewer's memory.
I wrote a longer appreciation of The Phantom of the Opera on my blog page if you would like to read more: https://themoviescreenscene.wordpress.com/2019/12/07/the-phantom-of-the-opera-1925/
Rated 5/5 Stars •
Rated 5 out of 5 stars
09/05/23
Full Review
Read all reviews
Post a rating
>
