Cubussoli Very very predictable, including the post credit scene !!!

Voxitype Good films always raise compelling questions, whether the format is fiction or documentary fact.

BelSports This is a coming of age storyline that you've seen in one form or another for decades. It takes a truly unique voice to make yet another one worth watching.

Justina The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

adonis98-743-186503 A young soprano becomes the obsession of a disfigured musical genius who lives beneath the Paris Opéra House. He kidnaps the soprano and forces the owners of the play to keep her as the lead role of the play. The Phantom of the Opera is perhaps one of Schumacher's most underrated films it's packed with terrific sets, great perfomances by a very talented cast but also alot of singing that doesn't get painful as a whole. The storyline has this erotic, dark vibe to it that totally works on the big screen and it's definitely a movie that deserved better reviews. (A+)

The Jellicle Kat I watched the original London production way back '86 (I was 8 years old back then) and I watched it again... thrice... at Broadway. Then here comes the film version...Objectively, I know this movie has A LOT of problems, but I still enjoy watching it. This movie is a huge guilty pleasure for me and now that I'm older I can definitely see the flaws:The changing of lyrics to dialogue is a huge problem. If they wanted more dialogue (why?) then write NEW dialogue, not the odd rhyming couplets (didn't Rent do this around the same time as well? Dreamgirls is usually almost though sung and they changed that for the movie too- and shouldn't have but at least they gave them new dialogue not spoken lyrics).The Phantom's "deformity" is an unforgivable offense. It's ridiculous for another reason entirely, as well - his mask is obviously much smaller than his patch of bad skin, so they shouldn't have hidden anything. And you can see that his eye looks perfectly fine through the hole before he's unmasked. Unless he somehow had the world's fastest allergic reaction to Christine herself when she pulled his mask off, and that's what made him slightly less conventionally attractive, this doesn't make any sense. His makeup job and general demeanor make it seem like he's attempting a Prince Zuko cosplay, but couldn't be bothered making the burn-scarred, inflamed, uneven and big enough to cover a significant portion of his face - i.e. actually noticeable... Tom Hiddleston looked more Phantom-like at the end of Crimson Peak, for Pete's sake! Why didn't they just do the same makeup as the stage show? It's supposed to just be a cinematic version. What's the point of altering it?The movie version of Masquerade sucked. No colors other than black, white, and grey. The Phantom showing up in a very uninspired costume of the "Red Death" is almost a relief, and the song was sung way too quickly. LET ME ENJOY THE SONG!There's no sword fight in the musical so that really confuses me about the movieThe execution of 'The Point of No Return' is my biggest issue about the movie. I just assumed the Phantom taking Piangi's place was done with the rule of Shakespeare - if you're wearing a hat you are considered "in disguise. The "sexiness" of it all can't make up for the absence of tension (she knows it's the Phantom right away) or consistency (she should be afraid). Butler wasn't right for his role. Emmy wasn't right for her role. The director wasn't right (could have been worse... could have been directed by Michael Bay). It was all messed up. It was a very big disappointment because I am such a big Phantom fan. Anyway, The POTO film version is more watchable than "Dracula 2000".

CourDeParis Well, let us be honest. I never watched this on the account of really wanting to. Yet, since I adore the original story and the esquisitely done silent, I have to complain about this one. Firstly, the introduction was a bit off, and it went down from there. Of course, you could rave about the costumes, but most weren't that accurate for 1870 (except Christine's masquerade gown). Christine's costumes were reminiscent of Ella Enchanted glitter parties, and Raoul was wearing romantic/I'm so snazzy motorcycle outfits. Then, they decided to add in these new characters and change the cast. And where was the Persian? He is my favorite, and he didn't even make an appearance. Yes, my biggest fit is with the "off" characters. I feel as though the director felt they couldn't deal with the true, gritty nature of the story. Christine wasn't beaming with innocence, or was she in a state of great perplexity concerning the Phantom's nature. Mary Philbin captured Christine perfectly I think, in the 1925 film. Here, the actress is more, "I am going to sing a very lovely song, and I will be in love with all of you, but I don't really care...sorry." And the Phantom wasn't some ugly, beast of a man; mysterious to all, unloved and feared with his seemingly magical powers and his peverted, disgusting nature. Instead he is more " I am trying the David Bowie deal, and I seem kind of tough, but I am really fuzzy inside. Christine, love me! I have great legs. Calling all girls, love me!" Far too romanticized, too transparent, and soft. This is where the biggest mistake is I think. And Raoul? He is still on a motorcycle/white horse with randomly long hair. Also, they skip the best scene, which is the touture chamber... who skips the touture chamber? As I said, all the gritty horrors which make the story beautiful and less high school theatre are gone. The true beauty of the film and story have been erased by Hollywood ideals. Still, people obsessed with musicals with high budgets and romantic stories will enjoy this. Yet it is really bad if you have read the book or watched the silent ( and a historical costume nit-picker).

karenchapman-87572 I have been checking out films on IMDb for years but have never felt compelled to open an account and actually leave a review so that should say something. I loved this film from the opening scene but the last 1/2 hour was just spectacular! Gerard Butler was so much more than just eye candy (although he was this and more). Classic dramatic performance that actually had me on the verge of tears. Ignore any negative reviews this was quality.