The Phantom of The Opera (1989)

Or to use it's full title 'The Phantom of the Opera: The Motion Picture'

I should mention that I have never read Phantom, and I'm not familiar with any of the film versions, or the Andrew Lloyd-Webber musical, so while I can attempt to judge this 1989 version as a movie / story in it's own right, I cannot comment on how it serves as a version of Phantom, which is a shame, as I am lead to understand that this version is far more faithful to the spirit (if not the text) of the book than most; apparently the book (like this version) is not as romanticised as most versions, with more emphasis on horror element.

This version opens in modern day (late 80's) New York, where an opera singer (Christine)  and her agent are preparing for a big audition, the agent is especially happy with herself as she has just come across some virtually unknown, but very beautiful, sheet music for an unfinished opera by  Erik Destler (The Phantom - Robert Englund).

During the audition, a stage hand slips with a sandbag and Christine is knocked out. The action then cuts to Victorian London, where Christine (a different Christine, played by the same actress) is just coming around, after being knocked out during rehearsal by an errant sandbag.

England puts in a great turn as the phantom, and it's always nice to see him in a proper roll, post-Freddy, rather than the usual 'look; we got Robert Englund' cameo that we got used to through the 90's

On that subject, the phantom's disfigurement is  (in this version at least) caused by the devils touch, part of a deal that would see the world love Erick for his music, but leave him so disfigured they would love him for nothing else. Sadly the decision was at some point made to make his disfigurement look like fresh burns; the poster for the movie even cheekily obscures the non-burned parts of his face, leaving him looking like Freddy!

Englund's other (non burned) markup is superb; rather than hold a mask over his face, Erick stitches prices of his victim's skin directly to his own flesh, then covers his face with thick foundation to hide the joins, the result is an unsettling almost-normal face, barely recognisable as Englund.

The kills could have been gorier for my taste - especially as the movie is, at times, very much a slasher in presentation, but the movie as a whole was above average.

The New York epilogue suggests that the sequel (England was contracted for 2 phantom movies) could have been very interesting, and may well have launched  Erick as another franchise big-hitter, alas in 1989 (an the hight of the Lloyed-Webber version's popularity) the world was not ready for a horror themed phantom and the movie tanked at the box office.

I can't quite give this one a 'recommended' tag, as it was a little slow in places,  but there are certainly worse movies to spend an hour and a half with.

I still say this could have kicked ass as a franchise though...