"Il Fantasma dell'Opera": the reviews

	Sign In Sign-Up

Il Fantasma dell'Opera
(The Phantom of the Opera)
The early reviews:

From: Osman Kaya Ozkaracalar <ozkaraca@Bilkent.EDU.TR>

A British friend of mine said he watched PHANTOM in Milan.. He says at first he didn't like it, then got more interested and bythe end he was applauding. However, he adds that he did not regard Asia's acting highly.-- Kaya

From: Matthew Rovner <mer5065@lapietra.nyu.florence.it>

The Phantom of the Opera, opened up this weekend in Italy. I went to go see it last night at the Gambrinus
Theater in Piazza Della Republica in Florence. It's a beautiful very European movie palace with one huge screen and good sound system. The extra plus about the evening was that Asia Argento and Dario Argento both made a personal appearence before the last showing which was at quarter to 11. I got some good pictures from a distance as Asia was surrounded by friends and reporters. It was a small affair although the theater was packed. Asia is quite pretty, she looks a lot better on screen, I think she has real film presence. They both introduced the film in Italian of course, unfortuneatly my Italian is not good enough to understand the natives when they speak quickly. But he told a few funny anecdotes (well, the audience was laughing) about The Bird With The Crystal Plumage.
He was very funny and genial. One gets the impression that he is rather personable and appreciative of his fan patronage. Although I did not get a picture taken with him (a cheesy thing to do but I don't think I would have complained if it had happened). I did get to briefly meet him in a quick fan signing right before the start of the film. Unfortuneatly, I missed the first minute or 30 seconds, but I'm sure I'll see it again. He was very nice about signing the original poster (the back of course) of the Bird With The Crystal Plumage that I had brought along. I thanked him very much and told him which poster it was in my broken cult-icon struck Italian. Then I rushed back up to the balcony to see the film. I'm not quite sure that I want to give too much away.
It is not a giallo mystery where twists and turns shouldn't be reveiled. However, I don't know how everyone here feels about knowing too much about the film before seeing it. If you don't want to know too much read no further.

I liked it a great deal. It is quite handsome looking with a beautiful music score by Ennio Morricone. I don't know how that man keeps turning them out so consistantly good especially because he's like 100 (well, not really). Asia's performance is solid. It is very good. I was impressed and I am often a tough customer. She is very interesting, expressive, beautiful on screen, and highly watchable. It was 100% improvement over her weak and stilted performance in Trauma. I forgot that I was watching the same actress. I hope she will continue to develop into a talent with much range. Julien Sands on the other hand, I felt was a rather bland phantom. I felt that he simply did not have the sex appeal to carry his role. Asia also has a rival suitor whom I felt was much more appealing tham Mr. Sands' phantom. Julien Sand's character brutally and viciously murders some interlopers, in the beginning of the film, he didn't really win my empathy until maybe the last part of the movie. Granted, I could not understand most of the dialogue, but I got the jist of the scenes.
The costumes and the opera house itself look very good. As well as a set, constructed to be the roof of the opera house, has a very magical fairy tale type look. I could be wrong but this appears to be Argento's biggest budgeted film. I still got the idea that he was working within some confines of budget as all of the movie takes place in the opera house, except for a scene at a turkish bath. However, this also gives the film a unity of place which works in its favor. The catacombs beneath the opera house are rather fake looking. This I'm 99% certain of saying is intentional on Argento's part. The film is loaded with little ironic nods and winks to older horror movies, like the Lon Chaney fantom, as well as some Val Lewton type touches, and sets reminiscent of Francis Coppola's Dracula. That too, had obviously fake looking sets.
Argento revels in and plays with many cliches such as creepy crawly spiders, worms, bats and snakes. He has a great deal of fun indulging in these images and at the same time keeping his tongue in cheek. I don't think that this is a justification. As much of the movie is intentionally funny. I've never laughed so much during an Argento film. He surprisingly has a real flair for straight comedy as well as the grotesque and the perverse. The film is extremely grotesque and grand guignol. An intentional nod to the Paris of 1877 where the film takes place.
It is also very fairy tale like. Julien Sands is not so much a phantom but a prince of the rats in the sewers. His origins in this film are of an abondened child in a cradle that floats through the sewers to the opera house and is raised by rats. If you don't like rats. Stay away from this film. I have never seen so many rats do so many strange things to so many people and have strange things done to them in turn.
The film is extremely violent. It would also work well without the gore quotient for a US release. I think that this film could also appeal to a female audience. The opening murder seems to be a deliberate tribute to Lucio Fulci. All the gore effects are very realistic looking in the film except for the first scene. A sewer worker being lowered down a long tunnel chips away at a brick wall. A blinding light comes through the opening. He screams as he is pulled in by some unseen force. When he is raised back to ground level by his fellow workers he is nothing but a chopped in half legs and torso. Very fake looking. Fulci territory, I think, the scene could have been in THE BEYOND.
The supporting performances are good. Memorable is the fat bitchy opera diva. Here Argento uses some of his straightest comic relief. I don't want to ruin the chandelier scene, all I'll say is it is one of the goriest things I've seen in any movie. Shocking really. The two most perverse examples of comedy in this film are (You're not going to believe this) a machine built by a midget stage worker and his friend to kill rats in the catacombs. It looks like a combination of H.G. Welles' Time Machine, a vacuum cleaner, and a lawnmower. The midget and his pal gleefully cruise the catacombs at high speed massacering rats right and left. As well as cutting off their tails manually. It is absolutely hilarious, surreal and grotesque. I think that Bunuel would have approved highly. I think that this rat/vac or rat/mower is destined to become a classic reference staple of Argento's films. It's insane.
Argento also wickedly includes Degas sketching little ballerinas in the film with a hanger on friend who is a filthy old pedophile. Degas was one in real life. Thankfully, the Phantom kills this old bastard and lets the little girl go. The exact point when I started to like his character. We get a great shot of the girl looking through her hands covering her eyes as the Phantom rips the crap out of the guy. There was one scene where I jumped out of my seat, but I won't give that one away.
This is Argento's most accessible film in terms of plot construction (all though I haven't scene his films pre-Profondo Rosso, or The Stendhal Syndrome) character and story. He has gotten a lot better at character development but he still isn't quite there. Perhaps this opinion is due to the fact that I lost quite a bit of the dialogue. It is difficult to understand Asia's attachment to the Phantom after she runs away from his lair in disgust after witnessing him in the erotic throes of pleasure from having rats crawl over his body (the scene cuts after he opens his pants for a rat to crawl in). The Phantom is supposed to be this tragic figure, he becomes less rat and more human towards the end of the movie. However, the connection isn't made smoothly enough. By the time the Phantom becomes a noble hero at the end we are a bit confused by his change of character. Having to make the connection ourselves that he has become more human because of his love for Asia's Christine.
However, I think that Argento's best work is possiblyahead of him. And that it is admirable that he is trying to learn new tricks and for the most part succeeding. If Phantom is any indication about what he's capable of in the future then I think good things are in store for Argento fans. The film did not appear to be composed in wide screen. I'm guessing it was 1:85 but it was so squarish looking that I was tempted to think 1:66. However, I don't think that this aspect ratio is used anymore. The sound mix is good, the dubbing improves as the film progresses. I wish that Argento would use production sound as the sound quality can be infinitely more realistic if it is not all done in post. However, I suppose there are problems then with the dubbers' union.
One big gripe. There is a scene which should be completely excised from the film. It is terribly cheesy as well as bad looking. The phantom sits contemplatively on the top of the opera house against a beautiful magical moonlit sky. The scene would be great if it stopped there. However, the Phantom invisions this ludicrous image that literally appears in the sky, of rat-people stuck in a rat trap burning. This is replaced with a beautiful image of Asia dressed all in white. The scene is redundant as well as silly looking. I could really do without it and it bugs me. Aside from that I await the English language version of this film.
I'd go see it again. I don't think that I am overdoing it in saying that it is Argento's most ambitious film, in terms of look, character development, mass appeal (all though he certainly does include some of the goriest possible scenes), and successful attempts at straight comic relief. It is not his best film, nor his most original. But it is certainly no dissapointment. It is a good deal of fun for horror and Argento fans. That is my take on the new Argento film. Thanks for reading this novel. -- Matt Rovner

From Colin <<01moon@concentric.net>>:

At the risk of causing jealousy meters to peak, I feel compelled to share the events I was privileged to experience this last week. I have to first and foremost thank my most special friend Alan Jones (author of Mondo Argento and Cinefantastique correspondent) for making this all possible.
I was in Rome for the last week with Alan and we did all things Argento for the whole week. I arrived on Monday and we went to a screening at Phono Roma with Dario, Asia, Claudio (Argento) and other various members of the crew. I saw the Italian print and liked the film, but wasn't crazy for it (Matthew Rovner's post is all you need to see for plot points and the like). The next day, we went to Medusa to see the English language print with reviewers from Variety and Screen International (they both HATED it).
When I talked to Claudio, he said the the English Language print used 80% direct sound for the actors - Asia does her own voice, Julian too, and it was sort of refreshing for the lips to match the voices in an Argento film. Wednesday we had went to the Italian press conference where Dario and Asia fielded all sorts of questions. That night there was a full cast and crew screening - Dario, Asia, Corallina Tassoni, Andrea Di Stefano, etc. and none other than Ennio Morricone showed up too!!! Claudio Simonetti...wow!!!
Thursday, we went to lunch with Dario's assistant - who is so nice, I love her a lot! Then we visited Luigi Cozzi at Profondo Rosso. Friday was the Rome premiere, Dario and Asia introduced the film and shared some stories. They stayed for almost the whole film and then ducked out. Well, after the film, Alan gave Dario's assistant a call, and it turns out they were just around the corner eating dinner. So we joined Dario, Asia, Claudio and Carla for some dinner, wine, and conversation! -- Colin