Defies_Gravity
|
What do you mean by the acting you saw in the live version? I thought the acting was pretty good.
|
Rumpleteazer4760
|
The acting was pretty good, but I liked the acting in the live show better. For me, it isn't really a question of good or not good. It's a question of which portrayal I prefer, because the two are very different, in my opinion. But then again, every actor who's performed in the live show is different from the others. Since I've only seen it once, I can only say that I liked that particular Phantom's performance better.
|
Defies_Gravity
|
 I'm still confused.
|
ICEcreamAssassin78
|
For one thing gerard Butler is way too hot to play phantom..I mean Christine wasn't threatened enough. They should have cast a real singer for phantom. Emmy did a good job but she was light in some sections. She doesn't have the voice for such material. The cinematography was great and the set/costume design were gorgeous. Good movie but it needed something more. Miranda Richardson is awesome!!!!!!!!! 
|
Defies_Gravity
|
| ICEcreamAssassin78 wrote: | | For one thing gerard Butler is way too hot to play phantom..I mean Christine wasn't threatened enough. They should have cast a real singer for phantom. Emmy did a good job but she was light in some sections. She doesn't have the voice for such material. The cinematography was great and the set/costume design were gorgeous. Good movie but it needed something more. Miranda Richardson is awesome!!!!!!!!! |
I agree that Miranda Richardson is awesome. (would have liked to hear her sing more, though.) The thing about the Phantom being "too hott" (which is not possible  ) is that it kinda makes up for the fact that he scares the snot outta ya'. And he can sing very well. And what do you mean hat Emmy doesn't have the right voice for such material? She was phenomenal. Her voice was good for this kinda thing, because she gives this innocence to the character's voice, which I think really helps the story, since Christine is so young. If you do math, she's only 16 when the actual story is taking place. (look on her tombstone at the end of the movie for her birthdate.)
|
Rumpleteazer4760
|
| Defies_Gravity wrote: | | I'm still confused. |
I mean that while Gerard Butler was good, I simply prefer the way Gary Mauer (the Phantom I saw live) portrayed the character. That's all. ^_^
|
Defies_Gravity
|
I guess everyone's entitled to there own opinion. Also, if you see one thing, and you think it's really good, that's kinda' set a standard in your mind. Like me and Wicked. I gotta go. I explain further, later.
|
broadwaybabe40
|
I thought the movie overall was good but I think Christine and The Phantom could have been casted better.
|
Defies_Gravity
|
| broadwaybabe40 wrote: | | I thought the movie overall was good but I think Christine and The Phantom could have been casted better. |
Maybe. I've heard worse suggestions for casting the Phantom ("Johnny Depp"...no!) My friend seriously thought JD would have been better than Gerard, and I said no. Don't get me wrong, I like Johnny's movies (particularly both "Pirates") but casting him as the Phantom? Nuh-uh!
|
Orestes Fasting
|
Frankly, I'd rather see Depp as Erik than as Sweeney. I don't know whether he can sing, but if he can, Phantom seems more up his alley and I wouldn't mind seeing that at all.
I mean, the man's a veritable chameleon, but I'd have an easier time picturing him in a mask than with a razor. And he seems more appropriate for the role than Gerard, who, to put it plainly, is too traditionally "hot."
|
Defies_Gravity
|
| Orestes Fasting wrote: | | Frankly, I'd rather see Depp as Erik than as Sweeney. I don't know whether he can sing, but if he can, Phantom seems more up his alley and I wouldn't mind seeing that at all...he seems more appropriate for the role than Gerard, who, to put it plainly, is too traditionally "hot." |
True, Johnny would is rather hott (I took a quiz, and, apparently, he's my TV hottie. Don't ask.) but Johnny just doesn't seem right for the role. Besides, as I stated earlier, there is no such thing as "too hot."
|
Ingénue
|
Johnny Depp as Presidentyeah.. I love Deep but yeah- he wouldn't make a good phantom. You need someone who CAN sing...
Gerard Butler just- no. I hear Micheal Crawford (my fav phantom) didn't want to do it and that's fine with me but I did NOT like the way Gerard sang the Music of the Night....
As for Emmy Rossum- she was fine- though for some reason her pronunciation of "angel" bugged me... I don't know why.
the movie was alright though *shrug*
although when I feel like listening to phantom I turn to my Orig Cast Broadway CD. mmhmmm
yeah- the movie? I agree... needed bigger actors- for phantom-
Raoul was good- i hated him... which is good because I've always hated Raoul's character- since I read Leroux's book.
Yeah- better phantom. I ABSOLUTELY LOVED ANDRE AND FIRMIN THOUGH!
|
Orestes Fasting
|
| Defies_Gravity wrote: | | Orestes Fasting wrote: | | Frankly, I'd rather see Depp as Erik than as Sweeney. I don't know whether he can sing, but if he can, Phantom seems more up his alley and I wouldn't mind seeing that at all...he seems more appropriate for the role than Gerard, who, to put it plainly, is too traditionally "hot." |
True, Johnny would is rather hott (I took a quiz, and, apparently, he's my TV hottie. Don't ask.) but Johnny just doesn't seem right for the role. Besides, as I stated earlier, there is no such thing as "too hot." |
Oh, I don't object to attractive Phantoms (would I have been okay with Depp otherwise? XD), but they played Gerard up as the wrong physical type: tan, muscular, a freaking beefcake of a Phantom. I prefer mine more androgynous, or with a refined older-man appeal. Not a hunk, ew.
The weird thing is that they could have gone for the slightly androgynous or ethereal angle on Gerard--look at him in Dracula 2000. Not even androgynous per se, just... pale and skinny, lol. I like 'em that way.
|
Music of the Night
|
I'm glad they didn't cast people like Johnny Depp and stuff...because if they did that I would be weird...I wouldn't want very well known actors...because with them you have seen them as so many other characters...they are kind of predictable...but yet...their not...with fresher faces just see them as the character they are playing...not as a million other characters...
|
Defies_Gravity
|
Re: Johnny Depp as President | Ingénue wrote: | Raoul was good- i hated him... which is good because I've always hated Raoul's character- since I read Leroux's book.
Yeah- better phantom. I ABSOLUTELY LOVED ANDRE AND FIRMIN THOUGH! |
Raoul must die!! No, actually, I thought Patrick Wilson did a pretty boy...uh, I mean...pretty good job. He's a good actor, I just have this...thing against Raoul (Stupid fop.  ) the fact that I read the book by M. Leroux didn't help that grudge. (although, in the book, the Phantom's description made me almost be like: "Ok, Christine was smart for leaving you)
Andre and Firmin were cast very well. I was watching this interview they had with...the guy who played Firmin, I think. He was talking about the other guy (who is shorter than him). They didn't know which of them would be cast as which manager, and he asked "Andre" (can't remember the actors' names) one day who he thought he'd be, and Andre said, "Oh, the tall one, of course." haha.
|
obsessivewickedfan
|
What happened????????Good movie. 'nuff said.[img]C:\Documents and Settings\The N Dude\My Documents\My Pictures\Le Fantome de l'opera\phantomopera07[1].jpg[/img]
|
Defies_Gravity
|
Re: What happened???????? | obsessivewickedfan wrote: | | Good movie. 'nuff said. |
Amen!
Haha. Okay, this was really stupid. I was reading back over older entries, and I couldn't help giggling. Oh, well...*stares dreamily at picture of Phantom:*
|
Glinda Upland
|
Re: What happened???????? | Defies_Gravity wrote: | | obsessivewickedfan wrote: | | Good movie. 'nuff said. |
Amen!
Haha. Okay, this was really stupid. I was reading back over older entries, and I couldn't help giggling. Oh, well...*stares dreamily at picture of Phantom:*
|
*sigh* I love the shirt he is wearing- all open like that!
I like Butler AND Crawford.
|
Defies_Gravity
|
I want that shirt! No...wait. I take that back. Let me start over. *ahem-hem*
I WANT THAT PHANTOM!!!!!
Heh-heh. So sexy.
Tee-hee.
Okaaay...ramblings over.
|
Da_Dark_Dude
|
gerard butler is too damn good looking for his own good - but i'd loved to have seen anthony warlow play phantom on screen.
Steve
|
Sweeney Hyde
|
i will now use my mdn trademark to reply...:
 WHO IN THEIR RIGHT MIND WOULD PUT ANTONIO BANDERAS AS THE PHANTOM?!?!?!?THAT IS ABOUT AS WORSE A MATCH UP AS DAVID HASSELHOF AS JEKYLL AND HYDE!!!!!!! YOUR OTHER EXPLAINATIONS AS TO WHY THE MOVIE WAS "BAD" ARE OFF PACE AS WELL!!!!!
|
Defies_Gravity
|
| Sweeney Hyde wrote: | i will now use my mdn trademark to reply...:
WHO IN THEIR RIGHT MIND WOULD PUT ANTONIO BANDERAS AS THE PHANTOM?!?!?!?THAT IS ABOUT AS WORSE A MATCH UP AS DAVID HASSELHOF AS JEKYLL AND HYDE!!!!!!! YOUR OTHER EXPLAINATIONS AS TO WHY THE MOVIE WAS "BAD" ARE OFF PACE AS WELL!!!!! |
Woah, hey! Chill dude. Besides, I didn't understand a word you just said.
|
Glinda Upland
|
Ummm... Ok dear I agree with you, just chill out though ok? 
~*~Helena~*~
|
Bagpiper 24601
|
The movie left room for improvement, however I did like many of the effects.
|
panda
|
I thinkI think that the film is really nicly done becuse it has allowed them to do so mch more with this masterpieace and theres only so much you can do on the stage.
I think that in this film the songs have a lot more power due to being able to have like a 100 piece orcerters which u cant do in a theater. I think that the good thing about the film is that it hasnt taken any of the maric away from the show it actually i think has helped becuse now people who have seen the film and seen how amzing it is on film they will be like i want to see the show on stage and see the diffrences.
the non famous people in the major role helped becuse it gave audiance a diffrent reson to go and see the film other than going i am going to see it becuse bard pitt is in it.
I think some of it has been bigged up but then again evry film dose that becuse they can afford to. I liked the way the actos where young i think this helps the romance of the story flow much better and cna appel to younger people.
the songs are just as good if even better. the costumes are beautful made with swasvki cristyal sorry cant spell the name and I think that britan when comes to fims and set they go all out. and I hope that one dya they do another one like whisel down the wind .
|
kozafluitmusique
|
I'm not sure if this has been mentioned yet, but Emmy can sing really nice.
I really enjoyed the movie (my mom's watching it now in fact); I'm going to see it at a local professional theatre in July.
|
Dvarg
|
Re: I think | panda wrote: | | I think that in this film the songs have a lot more power due to being able to have like a 100 piece orcerters which u cant do in a theater. |
I found the extramaterial on the DVD kind of bizarre, because so much was dedicated to uninterresting aspects, like the size of the orchestra! Why care about that? And I wasn't able to find anything about the lyricist and book writer! To me, this is just incomprehensible priorities.
| panda wrote: | | the costumes are beautful made with swasvki cristyal. |
This brings me to the most bizarre aspect of the extramaterial on the DVD - a long commercial for the company that made fake crystals for the chandelier 
|
shakalakababy
|
Re: I think | Dvarg wrote: | | panda wrote: | | I think that in this film the songs have a lot more power due to being able to have like a 100 piece orcerters which u cant do in a theater. |
I found the extramaterial on the DVD kind of bizarre, because so much was dedicated to uninterresting aspects, like the size of the orchestra! Why care about that? And I wasn't able to find anything about the lyricist and book writer! To me, this is just incomprehensible priorities.
|
I actually found the information about the orchestra quite interesting. Mainly because I'm really a musician at heart and i always pay lots of attention to the orchestra in any show. And a big orchestra really makes a world of difference when your able to utilize it. Sure in the theatre the orchestra sounds great but when the orchestra is ten times its usual size it sounds phenomenal. in my opinion that was the best thing about the movie. and they talked a lot about the lyricist, atleast in my copy of the dvd. They talked about the whole process of finding the lyricist and how they found charles hart and i think they interviewed him too. But since your in Norway the extra on the dvd might have been different
|
Dvarg
|
Re: I think | shakalakababy wrote: | | But since your in Norway the extra on the dvd might have been different |
That's possible.
|
Salome
|
| kozafluitmusique wrote: | I'm not sure if this has been mentioned yet, but Emmy can sing really nice.
I really enjoyed the movie (my mom's watching it now in fact); I'm going to see it at a local professional theatre in July. |
she can sing but she is a worse actress than Sarah Brightman..and that says volumes.
|
Orestes Fasting
|
Emmy Rossum can't sing for beans. Not in the style the role requires.
|
QuaxoCoricopat
|
Will people just get over it? Its been two years already.
Everyone acts like something "went wrong", but they were deliberate choices made by ALW. Nobody put a gun to his head to make him cast Emmy Rossum/Gerard Butler/Whoever everyone's whinging about. If ALW were dead I might understand, but he achieved his artistic vision. Just because you didn't like doesn't make it wrong.
Personally, I thought the movie rocked, I play the film cast more than I ever played the original cast.
|
Dvarg
|
| QuaxoCoricopat wrote: | | he achieved his artistic vision. Just because you didn't like doesn't make it wrong. |
Just because he achieved his artistic vision does not make it right either.
|
Orestes Fasting
|
Nor does it mean we have to enjoy the results, or shut our faces if we don't like the way it turned out.
|
Dvarg
|
| Orestes Fasting wrote: | | Nor does it mean we have to enjoy the results, or shut our faces if we don't like the way it turned out. |
Good
|
pish123c
|
I've seen POTO on stage, and I loved it.
The other week I was watching the movie and I wasn't even an hour through when I turned it off. It was so boring and drawn out and dry. It definetly could have been more interesting. 
|
Nedame
|
I think the thing that annoys me most about the movie is the way they portray the phantom. I didn't get the same feeling about the Phantom when I watched the movie. I feel like in the movie he's younger and just misunderstood. Live he's old, crazy and a stalker and the movie just made it so much easier for people who'd never seen it live to love the phantom, and you should feel a little bit bad for him but I don't think you should wish Christine chose him in the end.
Like why'd they change his costume in Masquerade?
Idk that's just my opinion a lot of people disagree with me.
|
Chemical_Red
|
I really hate the movie. I hate Emmy the most. WHY would he cast her?? And I don't like the idea of people fangirling over the Phantom... Bothers me.
Overall, I hate the movie. 
And I agree with you, Nedame.
|
Sweeney Hyde
|
I liked the movie. Yes, it was not perfect. Yes, there were some miss casting (I think that Erik, Raoul, and Christine all should have been 5-10 years older). No, I didn't get the same rush from the movie's version of many of the songs and moments. However, I WAS ENTERTAINED. I was brought out of reality and into the world of the Paris Opera. That is what we as actors, writers, and directors strive to do in both movies and stage. We are trying to bring an audience into a reality and tell them a story. If they leave loving it, great! If they leave hating it, that's too bad. If they feel they really got something from it, what more could we ask?
|
Gwen
|
[quote="Nedame"]I think the thing that annoys me most about the movie is the way they portray the phantom. I didn't get the same feeling about the Phantom when I watched the movie. I feel like in the movie he's younger and just misunderstood. Live he's old, crazy and a stalker and the movie just made it so much easier for people who'd never seen it live to love the phantom, and you should feel a little bit bad for him but I don't think you should wish Christine chose him in the end.
Like why'd they change his costume in Masquerade?
Idk that's just my opinion a lot of people disagree with me.[/quote
This just reminds me:
Question: has anyone read the book? I haven't read it, but would be interested to hear an opinion from someone who has. I don't know if it's parallel to your description Nedame, and am curious to find out a comparison of the book to the stage and film version.
|
Nedame
|
| Quote: | This just reminds me:
Question: has anyone read the book? I haven't read it, but would be interested to hear an opinion from someone who has. I don't know if it's parallel to your description Nedame, and am curious to find out a comparison of the book to the stage and film version. |
The book isn't very much like the musical at all. I thought it was good but I didn't really find I could compare the two because they weren't that alike. At least as far as I can remember, nothing really stood out to me. And what do you mean by my description?
|
Sweeney Hyde
|
The book is phenomenal. I love it dearly. However, it is not too much like the show. The order of events is a little different and the ending is entirely different. It is worth reading though...and it is not that long at all.
|
Da_Dark_Dude
|
yeh the book contains stuff like extra little characters and stuff raoul has 2 do - the scorpion bit and stuff. i love the book2
|
Sweeney Hyde
|
I can earnestly say that The Phantom of the Opera was the first book that made me cry at the end. The last 50 pages or so is just great writing. I love the bit about the torture chambers. I also like how the early stuff is presented like a mystery and you don't know what is going on.
If anyone doesn't want to read the book should watch the original 1925 (?) film with Lon Chaney for the most accurate representation. However, the very end is changed in true Hollywood style.
|
jcstar
|
I enjoy the film, but they used too much AutoTune on the voices. It was very noticable with the managers, Emmy and Raoul. They probably used it on Gerry, but I can really hear some sharps in a lot of his songs. Which is okay.
I would have cast Paul Stanley as the Phantom if they wanted a rock voice that could really do the role.
I also don't like the mask in the film. I keep expecting it to fall off, because I don't see a string holding it on. Plus, the mask doesn't have a full nose.
Andy.
|
Quique
|
The film was the biggest load of crap that I have EVER seen!
I've never been so disappointed. It was cheesily shot. The stupid Mme. Giry flashbacks were unecessary. Everything about it was God-awful. Ugh!!!
|
Dvarg
|
| Quique wrote: | | It was cheesily shot. |
Isn't cheesyness part of it's appeal?
I liked the movie more than I expected. I particularly liked that they cut down the endless title song.
|
Quique
|
True, true.
But it just looked even more cheesy on film! Come on, what the hell was Christine doing on a damn horse! lol.
|
Orestes Fasting
|
Stage show = pseudo-gothic cheese.
Movie = tacky Frederick's of Hollywood cheese.
|
jcstar
|
| Quique wrote: | True, true.
But it just looked even more cheesy on film! Come on, what the hell was Christine doing on a damn horse! lol. |
I STILL have to say that was a direct reference to the 1925 silent film. Am I the only one who sees it that way?
Andy.
|
Sweeney Hyde
|
| jcstar wrote: | | Quique wrote: | True, true.
But it just looked even more cheesy on film! Come on, what the hell was Christine doing on a damn horse! lol. |
I STILL have to say that was a direct reference to the 1925 silent film. Am I the only one who sees it that way?
Andy. |
I agree. And if anyone has read the book, there is certainly a stable kept in the Opera house. I believe that he even steals one at one point...can anyone verify this? If so that means that he certainly would have a horse.
|
Orestes Fasting
|
| jcstar wrote: | | Quique wrote: | True, true.
But it just looked even more cheesy on film! Come on, what the hell was Christine doing on a damn horse! lol. |
I STILL have to say that was a direct reference to the 1925 silent film. Am I the only one who sees it that way?
Andy. |
Actually, if anything it was probably a reference to the book. That's where the part in the 1925 film came from.
Sweeney's right; the Opera Garnier did in fact have a stable at one point, and in the book one of the horses goes missing, abducted by "the Phantom." Instead of dragging Christine down travellators to his batcave, Erik in the book heaves her unconscious body onto the abducted horse and leads her through the catacombs to the underground lake.
|
operafantomet
|
| jcstar wrote: | | Quique wrote: | True, true.
But it just looked even more cheesy on film! Come on, what the hell was Christine doing on a damn horse! lol. |
I STILL have to say that was a direct reference to the 1925 silent film. Am I the only one who sees it that way?
Andy. |
Not just that.... They originally wanted a horse for the title song in the original stage production. They came as far as trying out a dummy horse, but accordign to Claire Moore (original Christine alternate) it looked absolutely hilarious and the idea was dropped. But the movie script was written in the early 90's, and the idea had not left Andrew Lloyd Webbers mind entirely. So it was adapted into the movie during the same sequence they tried it out in the stage version.
I agree that it could be a nod to the Leroux novel and previous movies. But keep in mind that Cćsar (the horse Leroux wrote about) was all black, not parody-white like the horses in Schumacher's movie. And to be honest, they seemed to have wanted to incorporate too much into the scene. The horse is quite random and pointless for what appears to be a short distance, especially when they pour out all kinds of elements earlier and later in the song (the hands holding the candelabras appears to be a direct rip-off from "Angels in America", by the way...). Too messy, too golden, too parodic, too much!
|
Dvarg
|
| operafantomet wrote: | | And to be honest, they seemed to have wanted to incorporate too much into the scene. The horse is quite random and pointless for what appears to be a short distance |
Good point
|
ChristineDaaeLittleLotte
|
I don't think Antonio Bandaras would be a good choice for the Phantom. Yes he is a good singer, but he is definitely a bit too Spanish to be the Phantom.
|
