What is the best movie adaption of the Phantom of the Opera?

Answer 1

It really depends on what you want in the movie. If you like old black and white movies and one that sticks to the original book written by Leroux I suggest the first movie; The Phantom of the Opera (1925) with Lon Chaney as The Phantom/Erik. There's also the 1943 version, which sticks to the plot (though Erik is disfigured by acid burning rather than a birth defect) pretty well and is in color. Love comedies? Then you check out a hilarious disco version called The Phantom of the Paradise (1970) which follows something more like Rocky Horror Picture Show rather than the actual story. If you want a frightening tale of horror that doesn't really follow the original plot of the story, you can check out The Phantom of the Opera (1989) starring Robert Englund as the horrific Phantom/Erik. There's also a mini-series that was on TV in 1991 which you can enjoy. Now if you want the famous musical by Andrew Lloyd Webber, then you should definitely check out the 2004 version of the famous broadway with Gerard Butler as The Phantom, Emmy Rossum as Christine Daae, and Patrick Wilson as Raoul. Keep in mind though that the movie adaption is somewhat different than the actual musical itself, such as the chandelier falling after All I Ask of You (Reprise), is not present in the movie but instead moved to after the song The Point of No Return.

http://www.imdb.com/find?s=all&q=phantom+of+the+opera

Hope this helps :)

Answer 2

Ouch.
A toughie.
If I could synthesize Lon Chaney's 1925 silent version with the production values and music of the Andrew Lloyd Weber musical, maybe that would come closest.
Chaney's portrayal of Eric comes the closest to the original conception of Leroux's Phantom, but the 1925 version is plagued with a really mis-cast Raoul and Christine, plus some terrible direction and multiple re-edits which make hash of the continuity---set design is excellent, and there are single scenes which are haunting and riveting.
On the other hand, the musical Phantom, while retaining many of the characters and incidents of the book, and creating a marvelous setting and some terrific songs, undercuts the whole horror of the Phantom's visage and his homicidal madness--- he becomes instead what is essentially a troubled young man with what looks like a bad sunburn making a pest of himself in the Opera House. And Raoul isn't any prize either.
The best adaptation has yet to be made.

Answer 3

I love every single one of them to bits. The original Lon Chaney is a very interesting one but I personally choose movies with actors speaking/singing over silent films but I still love that one. There was a televisions series in 1990 with Charles Dance and Terri Polo as Erik and Christine. I really like that one because it shows Erik's sensitive and more caring side...he also just makes a good and mysterious Phantom. I thought Terri made a good Christine because she is very innocent looking and has the pale hair and light eyes just like in Gaston Leroux's original book...they sing true Opera like the famous Faust in here. It's just a more...happier...story I guess. That really isn't the right word but compared to the other versions like with Herbert Lom...I also liked the horror film version with Robert Englund, his character of Erik is really evil and sick but he also showed Erik's musical side, his Erik was sensitive, VERY protective and he LOVED music more than anything...he cried when Christine sang his Don Juan and I just liked how this version showed that, as Erik says, "only music and love are forever"