Still in the thrall of the evil vampire Radu, Michelle yearns to be taught the skills of the vampire. Meanwhile, her sister Becky tries to free her from his evil clutches, and this time, she's brought some help.
In New York, the Julliard student Christine Day meets her friend Meg in the library where she works and she shows a piece of music from the unknown author Erik Destler that she has found on the shelf. Christine decides to use the music in her audition on the next day for a part in a Faust version in the New York Opera. During the audition, there is an accident on the stage and Christina faints. She relives her past life in the Nineteenth Century in London, when she is an aspirant opera singer and becomes the protégée of The Phantom of the London Opera House. The Phantom is the unknown composer Erik Destler that makes a pact with the devil in order to the world would love his music. In return, the devil destroys his face and tells that he would never be loved by anyone and would be disfigured forever. After a tragic ending, Christine awakes in the present days and has a great surprise when she is introduced to the producer of the opera.Written by
Claudio Carvalho, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Producer Menahem Golan reportedly sunk so much money into the release of the film, with prints and advertising, that when the picture bombed, he had no more funds to release any future 21st Century Film Corporation productions, and had to sign various U.S. distribution deals to get them out. See more »
When Christine first leaves to visit her fathers grave, she has pink and white flowers. When she arrives at the grave, she has only five red roses. See more »
There is nothing that you could ask for that I would refuse.
See more »
This Motion Picture is not associated with any current or prior stage play or motion picture of the same title. See more »
The following scenes were trimmed for an "R" Rating:
A scene were the phantom skins Joseph the stagehand.
The scene were the Phantom kills the three thieves was quite a bit longer. When the Phantom attacks the second theft, he cuts of his head with a knife, the original scene showed the knife being stabbed into the theft's neck and cutting it completly off. But it was trimmed to show Mott's expresion and then shows the phantom holding the head and trowing it at Mott.
Harrison's death in the sauna room was quite a bit more violent. Originally The Phantom puts a towel around his face and squeezes it tightly and shows a close up shot of the bones in Harrison's face breaking and blood sporing through the towel and then showing the Phantom throwing his body aganist a burning water heater without the towel around his face and showing has broken face burning on the heater. It was trimmed for being a bit to violent and The water heater seemed for a death scene. This was replaced by showing Harrison being thrown aganist the wall and then sliding down with the towel still wrapped around his face.
Yes, I am indeed one of those "Phanatics" as they're called (though I'm almost starting to think we have a bad reputation...), and I personally would like to say that I found this movie rather enjoyable. I think it could have done without the modern sequences altogether and stayed in the one time period, and yes, a few scenes are a bit cheesy or cheap. But believe it or not, I think that Robert Englund did a fairly good job. My favorite Phantom will always be Michael Crawford, but when one compares Englund to Gerard Butler's Phantom (even using Crawford as the standard), he practically blows that little pansy-ass out of the water. It's refreshing to see an old, decrepit Phantom again, with more subdued, majestic style than Butler's gaudy, emo character. Also, this time the Phantom isn't scared to spill some blood, restoring some respectable fear for Erik that the 2004 version kills. Englund's voice--at least when he isn't screaming--seems surprisingly perfect for the part, and all film critics alike will see that he can indeed act, but has merely been restrained by his previous Freddy typecasting. All in all, I'd say this film makes an excellent counter-balance to the 2004 film, and both those who like like Chaney's Phantom and Crawford Phanatics alike will definitely enjoy it.
16 of 17 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?
| Report this