Horror
1 hour and 33 minutes
Rated: Not Rated
Written by: Frank M. McCormack
Directed by: Rupert Julian
Produced by: Carl Laemmle
Cast:
Lon Chaney
Mary Philbin
Norman Kerry
Arthur Edmond Carewe
Gibson Gowland
A Million Thrills to Thrill Millions
Following the enormous success of their 1923 hit The Hunchback of Notre Dame, producer Carl Laemmle and Universal Studios decided to keep the ball rolling with the audience interest in gothic horror by adapting another French horror classic, Gaston Leroux's The Phantom of the Opera. Keeping another main part of their successful formula, Lon Chaney was cast as the titular villain, a wise move given Chaney's capabilities to deliver outstanding performances while covered in enormous amounts of makeup and prosthetics. Not surprisingly, The Phantom of the Opera also was an enormous success, which solidified, along with The Hunchback of Notre Dame, the foundation for what would become the iconic Universal Monsters canon.
For a lot of the same reasons that made The Hunchback of Notre Dame such a great film, one can see why The Phantom of the Opera has too become such an iconic motion-picture in the annals of cinematic history. For starters, the film essentially does not stray very far from its source material. Like with Hunchback, producer Carl Laemmle likely knew that Leroux's story was thrilling enough for it to translate well from the medium of literary fiction to that of film with virtually nothing needing to be tweaked. Because the film remains nearly identical to Leroux's book and was not subjected to the tendency to change the source storylines that the Universal Monster films would later be in the habit of doing, The Phantom of the Opera does feel quite literary at times, largely in its first and second acts. While this may feel exhausting and slow - probably even more so for modern audiences given that it is a silent film - this slow burn of a pace allows for the fast moving tension of the climax and conclusion of the film to really be built up to the point that the last twenty minutes of the movie are really quite breathtaking to behold. This pacing must be attributed to director Rupert Julian, as well as Carl Laemmle who no doubt had creative control over the movie just as he did with Hunchback.
Again, like its predecessor, the set pieces within The Phantom of the Opera are incredible and their enormous size and ancient appearance really do give the impression that the film was shot in and under the Palais Garnier. Production designer Ben Carré did a terrific job in turning Hollywood sets into reality, so much so that one has to be impressed at the pure skill of it all. Rare is it within a modern Hollywood film that a set does not look inauthentic in some way. Perhaps designers ought to take pages out of these early Hollywood playbooks.
The film's music, the most important ingredient to any silent film, is absolutely remarkable. Composer Gustav Hinrichs creates an atmosphere that moves the audience along throughout the piece, playing with our emotions in such an effective manner. While The Phantom of the Opera relies more heavily on cutaway dialogue than most other silent films, it is Hinrichs's score that pulls at the emotions of the audience, not the read speeches and perceived actions. One always feels at ease, terrified, on edge, or contented purely by the orchestral sounds created by the film's brilliant music.
From a technical perspective, the film's makeup effects are beyond remarkable. Chaney's appearance as the disfigured Erik has become so iconic that it is in fact how most perceive of the Phantom character whenever they first think of him. Like with The Hunchback of Notre Dame and many of his other films, Chaney did much of the makeup effects work himself. His bulging eyes seem all the more menacing in their black, lidless sockets. His fangs appear ghostly white against his black, decaying lips. And the bulbous nose and nearly bald head give the overall skull-like appearance its final, perfect touches. All other Phantoms that followed couldn't hold a candle in comparison to how downright creepy, inspiring, and iconic Chaney's Phantom appears.
And while the music may be the driving force behind all silent films, the performances remain equally important, since they cannot rely on the subtleties of speech, the physicality of the performers within silent films becomes essential in either selling the film as a success or as a laughable failure. The supporting cast within The Phantom of the Opera does do a convincing job delivering their parts, however, they are so overshadowed by the pure, physical talent of Chaney that they all become completely forgettable by the film's end. Chaney could do and say more just by moving his eyes, or gesturing with his hands than most performers could do by giving a performance all that they've got. Indeed, the finest moment of Chaney's career comes at the very end of Phantom, when Erik is cornered along the Seine. Doomed, he pulls something from his pocket, keeping the angry mob at bay. Upon opening his fist, the Phantom reveals he holds nothing and laughs as the mob beats him to death and tosses his corpse to the bottom of the river. In this one moment of gestures and actions, Chaney captures the essence of the Phantom and the essence of fear. Both are empty threats, and both are powerless to the mob mentality of humans. It is an incredibly powerful moment that rightfully has placed this film as one of the most iconic motion-pictures ever made.
With beautifully constructed sets that look and feel authentic, a slow pace that builds effectively to a riveting and suspenseful climax, a powerful soundtrack, horrifying makeup effects, and a performance by the eternally iconic Lon Chaney that may in fact be his best, The Phantom of the Opera remains not just one of the greatest horror or monster movies ever filmed, but one of the greatest movies overall ever to be photographed. It is, and always will be, an absolute masterpiece.
10/10
No comments:
Post a Comment