Review of The Phantom of the Opera (1925) by Kendall I — 01 Oct 2012

The wait is finally over.

PLOT:When the Paris Opera House is sold, the new owners hear about the Phantom (Lon Chaney) and don't believe it until they get a message telling them not to put stuck-up singer, Carlotta, on stage or bad things will happen. Luckily, she is sick her night of performing and the Phantom's favorite and secret lover, Christine Daae (Mary Philbin), takes over the stage. After the performance, they plan an escape plan from Christine's real boyfriend Raoul (Norman Kerry). Presence of the Phantom becomes known the next week when Carlotta sings and gets crushed by the chandelier falling. That night, the Phantom and Christine sneak away, but when she actually sees his face, she is terrified and forced to be kept there as a slave until someone can rescue her or she can learn to love him. It's a very good subject to touch upon, and it's executed very creatively.

ACTING:Most of the acting's good, but some roles are overracted. What can you really expect from a silent film though? The shiners are Daae and Chaney only.

SCORE:Unlike most silent horrors, this one doesn't have organ music troughout (Nosferatu) and the mood of the score matches the mood of the story (Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde). The score is absolutely perfect for this silent film.

EFFECTS:For it's time, those were as high as you could get in effects. Today the Phantom's appearance still scares and unnerves.

OTEHR CONTENT:This film still wasn't as good as I expected. The screenplay was creatively written, but it was jumbled up and rushed most of the time. On the other hand, this movie still has the power to disturb people today. I've seemd to cover all types of horror matches: mystery (House On Haunted Hill), romance (this one), political (Night of the Living Dead), and true horror (Nosferatu).

OVERALL,a great silent horror with a creative plot, somewhat overdone acting, perfect silent score, unnerving effects, jumbled up screenplay, and the power to disturb.