Featured Audience Ratings

• Chris W

  
  The sets, costumes, staging, and camera work are pretty good, but I think that Schumacher was the wrong choice as far as directing goes. I'm not one who thinks everything he does sucks, but still, this doesn't fit in with the rest of his filmography. There's nothing… More
  The sets, costumes, staging, and camera work are pretty good, but I think that Schumacher was the wrong choice as far as directing goes. I'm not one who thinks everything he does sucks, but still, this doesn't fit in with the rest of his filmography. There's nothing inherently wrong with trying to branch out though; it helps to do it well though, so let me just be kind, give this a "Gentleman's C" (or slight C+), and call it a noble failure. Emmy Rossum is quite attractive, and has some actual singing talent, so that helps the movie, and, even though I applaud Butler for trying his best to do his own singing, I must say that it doesn't work. He can't really pull it off. I mean, it is difficult part anyway, so even though he's so-so with the acting, his faults with the music kinda bring the rest of it down too. Perhaps this may find success as a camp classic? It certainly has all the trappings for it, no doubts about that. If you want a great movie musical adaptation from the 2000s though, stick with Sweeney Todd.

• Mike S

  
  To be perfectly honest, I've never been a big fan of musicals or musical-inspired movies. This, however, was a magical and spellbinding exception. The songs are absolutely wonderful and so is the cinematography and acting. Not many films of its kind have had the ability to… More
  To be perfectly honest, I've never been a big fan of musicals or musical-inspired movies. This, however, was a magical and spellbinding exception. The songs are absolutely wonderful and so is the cinematography and acting. Not many films of its kind have had the ability to impress me, but this one did in more ways than one. It's actually completely changed my view on musicals in general. And that is certainly no small compliment coming from me.

• Christopher H

  
  The sets and costumes are a visual treat, but the romance elements lack flare and the plot lacks any sense of danger or emotional intrigue. The acting is okay but nobody particularly stand-outs, and the phantom never comes off as scary. The music is fine but the near-constant… More
  The sets and costumes are a visual treat, but the romance elements lack flare and the plot lacks any sense of danger or emotional intrigue. The acting is okay but nobody particularly stand-outs, and the phantom never comes off as scary. The music is fine but the near-constant singing gets annoying as the film goes along. I know it is a musical but can people in this movie just say their dialogue and not sing it out loud all the time.

• Zach B

  
  Andrew Lloyd Webber. What can be said about him? He has created some of the most memorable musicals in modern day, helped make Sarah Brightman the singer she is, and recreated the complete enjoyment of musicals. But he has also been someone you will either love or hate. Love due to… More
  Andrew Lloyd Webber. What can be said about him? He has created some of the most memorable musicals in modern day, helped make Sarah Brightman the singer she is, and recreated the complete enjoyment of musicals. But he has also been someone you will either love or hate. Love due to his investment in musical theater. Hated due to how overrated he is. My opinion is that he is talented and he does create rather good musicals. I have never, as I am writing this review, seen any of his musicals in person, but from what I have seen via internet and read, I know he is fantastic. The only main problem is with how people transition his work to the screen. Just, something is lost. In some respects, this is the case with The Phantom of the Opera. Now, my introduction to this adaptation came from the legions of fans that go to my school who adore this film to no end. And by adore, I mean they know every line, every movement, and fall in love every time Gerard Butler is on screen (oh, don't worry. I will get to him). When I first saw the film, I was not impressed with anything. Yes, I like the musical arrangements, but nothing Schumacher done impressed me with the transaction with the story unto the screen. The exception would be the set designs. Watching this film, I had the same feeling I did when I saw Interview With The Vampire: complete aw. The sets in this film are stunningly beautiful and well crafted. But, while I adore the sets and musical arrangements, what saddens me is that you can tell that the budget went to the look of this film and nothing more or less. And, well, that is what lead me to give this film the rating I will. I will be open: I can't sing, and I know people who sing: the people in this film can not sing at all. EVEN more Butler. I mean, other then the obvious auto-tuning, he just is not impressive. Actually, I have no idea why they cast him in the role. I have asked people about their opinion on him, and the main reaction I get is that they love him for the sex appeal in this film. Okay, let me make this clear: The Phantom is NOT suppose to be a sex symbol! He is suppose to be a creature of horror whose face makes women faint and men angry to the point they want to put him out of his misogyny. Not to satisfy the sexual desires of people. Plus, he is not that much of a Phantom with how the mask is worn. The mask is meant to cover the face due to what is underneath. Not worn as a fashion item. Basically, the Phantom in this film is terrible. I hate this Phantom. The rest of the cast is okay, but not all that good. To me, it seemed like they knew that this film was going to make money no matter what and they are all: to hell with good acting. We are all going to be getting our paychecks regardless. Well, for me, with no believable acting, I just got bored. I know that this review looks like I hate this film. I don't. I just don't like the cast. What I do like is the glamour of the film and how beautiful the sets are and the instrumental aspects of the soundtrack. If you want to see beauty, watch this film. If you want to see a true Phantom, watch the original with Lon Chaney. If you want to see a true Phantom with the beauty, watch the stage play (original footage with Michael Crawford and Sarah Brightman).

• Matheus C

  
  Com o início de uma nova década, parecia que o filme musical havia caído novamente nas graças do público. Com as eventuais exceções, como "Grease' (1978) e "O Show Deve Continuar" (1979) e os musicais Disney nos anos 90, o gênero estava dormente desde a metade dos… More
  Com o início de uma nova década, parecia que o filme musical havia caído novamente nas graças do público. Com as eventuais exceções, como "Grease' (1978) e "O Show Deve Continuar" (1979) e os musicais Disney nos anos 90, o gênero estava dormente desde a metade dos anos 60. Provavelmente o público havia se tornado cínico demais para aceitar os enredos geralmente ingênuos e simplistas dos musicais, e foi necessário um diretor visionário como Bazz Luhrmann para injetar nova vida ao formato. Fazendo um melange de sucessos da música popular com uma edição ágil e moderna, seu "Moulin Rouge" (2001) criou uma verdadeira sensação, sendo até mesmo indicado ao Oscar de Melhor Filme. No ano anterior, Dançando no Escuro já havia recebido atenção em meio aos fãs de cinema. Já em 2002, a adaptação cinematográfica do sucesso da Broadway Chicago gerou uma das maiores bilheterias do ano, e a produção conseguiu a proeza de ser o primeiro musical a levar o Oscar desde Oliver! (1968). Infelizmente, os filmes que pareciam ter sido o renascimento do gênero logo mostraram ser outras exceções. Em 2004 chegou às telas O Fantasma da Ópera, baseado no popular musical de Andrew Lloyd Webber. Apesar do grande pedigree (cujo show bateu o recorde de tempo em cartaz na Broadway), o filme foi duramente criticado e sua bilheteria não fez jus à lucrativa propriedade. Apesar de Os Produtores de 2005 também não conseguir dar continuação à onda de sucessos, Dreamgirls se consagrou como um dos maiores filmes de 2006. Já adaptado anteriormente para o cinema (a versão mais popular continua sendo a de 1925, com Lon Chaney como o Fantasma), O Fantasma da Ópera tem início na Paris de 1919, em um leilão na abandonada Paris Opera House. Graças a um flashback, voltamos a 1870, onde o teatro estava em seus anos áureos. Ensaios estão acontecendo para Hannibal de Chalumeau, apresentando a estrela da ópera Carlotta Giudicelli (Minnie Driver). Quando a cantora sofre um "acidente" (causado na verdade por uma figura misteriosa), a corista Christine Daaè (Emmy Rossum) a substitui na peça, e recebe grande aclamação do público. Na sua noite de estréia, ela reconhece na platéia Raoul (Patrick Wilson), o seu romance de infância. Mas Christine é assombrada por sonhos de uma figura que ela acha ser seu falecido pai, e que se apresenta para ela após sua estréia. O homem misterioso logo se revela na figura do Fantasma da Ópera (Gerald Butler), que tenta fazer o máximo para levar Christine ao estrelato. Logo, esta sua relação se transforma em obsessão, e a jovem se encontra no meio de uma disputa entre o Fantasma e Raoul. O Fantasma da Ópera foi dirigido por Joel Schumacher, o homem responsável por transformar a franquia do Batman em um desfile de cores e carros alegóricos com Batman Eternamente (1995) e Batman & Robin (1997). Sendo este um musical suntuoso, Schumacher parece se sentir em casa com cenários e figurinos extravagantes e opulentos. De fato, o filme faz jus às suas indicações ao Oscar, pois, com suas luxuosas roupas e sua belíssima fotografia, é um dos filmes mais belos visualmente dos últimos anos. As canções de sucesso são as mesmas do musical da Broadway, das quais se destacam as memoráveis "The Phantom of the Opera" e "All I Ask of You". Com tantos ingredientes que fazem um musical de qualidade, é uma pena que a construção da história não faça justiça ao conjunto total. A história de amor e obsessão está presente, mas sem a paixão e o medo que se poderia esperar. Isto pode ser culpado à falta de desenvolvimento dos personagens que, pulando de um número musical para outro, não conseguem demonstrar muito a relação existente entre si. Deste modo, o triângulo amoroso entre Christine, Raoul e o Fantasma é enfraquecido, pois parece não haver tempo o bastante para os personagens se apaixonarem. O Fantasma da Ópera sempre foi um dos mais interessantes personagens da literatura, sendo um gênio que descabe a loucura graças à sua paixão pela sua amada. Podemos traçar as origens da história ao conto original de A Bela e a Fera, da alma torturada e deformada que implora por amor. Graças aos números musicais o Fantasma consegue expressar seus conflitos internos, mas ainda assim sentimos que mais poderia ter sido feito com o personagem, apesar da boa interpretação de Gerald Butler. Alguns fãs do musical original podem discordar, mas ele possui a presença e a voz para o personagem. A verdadeira estrela do filme, no entanto, é a bela Emy Rossum (de O Dia Depois de Amanhã e Sobre Meninos e Lobos), que ilumina a tela todos os momentos em que aparece. É impressionante que ela tinha apenas dezesseis anos durante a produção, pois ao mesmo tempo em que transparece uma inocência necessária para a personagem, demonstra grande segurança no papel, especialmente no que diz respeito a sua voz. O elo fraco do elenco é o inexpressivo Patrick Wilson, que torna o desfalcado triângulo ainda menos verossímil. Apesar das necessárias adaptações, O Fantasma da Ópera parece ser mais fiel às suas origens teatrais do que a maioria dos musicais. Assim como nos palcos, parte dos diálogos é cantada ao invés de recitada, o que pode incomodar alguns espectadores menos acostumados com o formato. A história é contada através de um flashback, e Schumacher comete o erro de nos trazer para fora deste em momentos inoportunos e desnecessários ao meio da narrativa, como se subestimasse que o público fosse esquecer o prólogo inicial (explicado na última cena). Apesar de tais deficiências, o filme ainda consegue agradar por sua grandiosa trilha sonora e fantásticos valores de produção. Provavelmente espectadores menos exigentes apenas se deixarão levar pela história de amor e pelas canções, e talvez não percebam suas limitações. Fãs do musical também deverão ficar satisfeitos ao ver seus momentos favoritos personificados na tela, especialmente os que não tiveram a chance de assisti-lo no palco. Ainda assim, é uma pena que entre um número e outro e entre tantas trocas de roupa, os produtores tenham esquecido de dar maior alma aos personagens.

• Jeff "

  
  Considering that this is a film by Joel Schumacher, The Phantom of the Opera is a surprising effort from a somewhat mediocre director. I had a chance to catch the musical in Toronto a while ago, and I loved it. This film on the other is quite good, and it's not as bad as everyone… More
  Considering that this is a film by Joel Schumacher, The Phantom of the Opera is a surprising effort from a somewhat mediocre director. I had a chance to catch the musical in Toronto a while ago, and I loved it. This film on the other is quite good, and it's not as bad as everyone says it is. Granted, it's nothing like the real thing, but for what it is, it's a stunning looking film with great visuals, and pretty good acting. The music is stunning, the talent involved is great, and really I don't see why the film has gotten so many bad reviews. Yes, it was made by Joel Schumacher and yes, it doesn't have the same effects as the real musical. Seeing Phantom of the Opera live is of course something special that can't be duplicated. However Joel Schumacher has a good attempt at bringing the play to the screen. The result is a film that is beautifully filmed with the great soundtrack that we come to love from The Phantom of the Opera. I enjoyed this film, and I thought that everyone involved delivered good performances, and it was a wonderful musical with horror overtones. The films negativity may attributed by the fact that "it doesn't beat the Andrew Lloyd Webber version" and it doesn't, but this theatrical adaptation is still very good nonetheless. One of Joel Schumacher's redeeming efforts along with Phone Booth and Blood Creek. An underrated film that fans of the Webber production should give a shot before judging too harshly.

• Alexander D

  
  First and foremost, the Broadway musical production is (ha!) SO much better than this. Not to say that it was a bad adaptation: Gerard Butler sure did a fantastic job as the titular character. The main thing that really angered me about this is that a lot of the scenes were scrapped… More
  First and foremost, the Broadway musical production is (ha!) SO much better than this. Not to say that it was a bad adaptation: Gerard Butler sure did a fantastic job as the titular character. The main thing that really angered me about this is that a lot of the scenes were scrapped and/or changed--some of which would have even made more sense on camera than onstage, such as the graveyard scene where the Phantom throws fireballs at Raoul. Some of the altered scenes, I can say, were clearly done to make it appear as a film rather than a direct copy of a Broadway musical, such as the opening scene and the final scene (neither of which I will give away, because the majority of the film is in a flashback, so technically, giving away the beginning would be partially giving away the ending). Cinematically, though, THE PHANTOM OF THE OPERA is captivating and brilliant, if, as noted above, flawed.

• Lady D

  
  I hadn't heard great things about this film, however I do believe that Musicals are a required taste and most of the viewer's who enjoy Musicals tend to know a little about the stories, characters and music beforehand. I, myself have seen the production on stage and of… More
  I hadn't heard great things about this film, however I do believe that Musicals are a required taste and most of the viewer's who enjoy Musicals tend to know a little about the stories, characters and music beforehand. I, myself have seen the production on stage and of course nothing substitutes a live performance and the atmospheric feel of a theatre particularly with the Phantom as being part of the audience is being part of the show. Having said this, I do feel that the film was put together qs well as possible with the film, in the casting, the costumes, the colour, the scenery, which came across well on screen. The controversial part of course was the Actors miming to trained voices, which had put off of watching the film, but having now seen it, I can see it works perfectly well. The film was drawn out and it's a bit of a love-hate one for me!

• Sajin P

  
  A visually stunning and emotionally rich musical. Maybe a slight drawback of the movie could be the absence of a horrifying monstrous version of the Phantom. Another thing that gutted me a little was Gerrard Butler's singing. Though it's not that bad, it makes you feel… More
  A visually stunning and emotionally rich musical. Maybe a slight drawback of the movie could be the absence of a horrifying monstrous version of the Phantom. Another thing that gutted me a little was Gerrard Butler's singing. Though it's not that bad, it makes you feel like something is missing.. (Ok. just being nice here. On second thought.... his singing sucks) But he does compensate for that with some very powerful acting peformance, especially towards the final quarter of the movie.

• KJ P

  
  The Phamton of the Opera is a slowpaced version of the original play and does not succeed in giving ever fan what they want. I saw the play in theatres, and it is much better than this film tries to be. I like it for what it tried to do, but it's just nothing special!

• Cynthia S

  
  Gerard Butler can sing! Who knew?? Me, that's who...one of my faves.

• Spencer S

  
  Creepy, full of grandeur, and music that is both dramatic and operatic.

• John H

  
  Very impressive! I've always loved the Phantom of the Opera and this movie was just an extension of that. this comes close to the amzment and true magic that the broadway performance had offered. it was a thrilling experience. so much detail was put ...(read more)into this. the… More
  Very impressive! I've always loved the Phantom of the Opera and this movie was just an extension of that. this comes close to the amzment and true magic that the broadway performance had offered. it was a thrilling experience. so much detail was put ...(read more)into this. the songs and lyics were transfered perfectly. the acting at times was a bit disapointing. however, the beauty and passion that this film brought was enough to keep you entertained throughout all of this. another visually entertaining movie. I highly recomend this.

• Richard C

  
  B+

• Jennifer D

  
  Egregious music, but visually stunning.

• Wahida K

  
  How nice of Hollywood to make movies based upon books. I heard the Book was exciting.

• Carlos M

  
  The fantastic sets, costumes, art direction and cinematography make for a wonderful visual spectacle, even though the songs are not altogether great and Butler is a terrible singer.

• Thomas B

  
  andrew lloyd webber is an absolute genius. plain and simple. emmy rossum, playing christine, is sumptuous, however, it is her counterpart, gerard butler, who is the real focus of the piece. surprisingly adept at singing, butler makes the hair all over your body stand on end when he… More
  andrew lloyd webber is an absolute genius. plain and simple. emmy rossum, playing christine, is sumptuous, however, it is her counterpart, gerard butler, who is the real focus of the piece. surprisingly adept at singing, butler makes the hair all over your body stand on end when he goes from beautiful falsettos to incredible full bodied sound. a masterpiece.

• Cassie H

  
  This movie if I had to put it in one word....beautiful. The actors were beautiful and so was the actors beautiful singing and the music. Definetely recommend this to movie lovers that love movie art!!!

• Sarah G

  
  I absolutly adore this film! Fabulous musical, wonderful cast and score

Read all 20 featured audience ratings