The Phantom of the Opera
The Phantom of the Opera
NR | 15 August 1962 (USA)
The Phantom of the Opera Trailers

The corrupt Lord Ambrose D'Arcy steals the life's work of the poor musical Professor Petry. In an attempt to stop the printing of music with D'Arcy's name on it, Petry breaks into the printing office and accidentally starts a fire, leaving him severely disfigured. Years later, Petry returns to terrorize a London opera house that is about to perform one of his stolen operas.

Reviews
Wordiezett

So much average

... View More
Matialth

Good concept, poorly executed.

... View More
Dorathen

Better Late Then Never

... View More
CommentsXp

Best movie ever!

... View More
InjunNose

My favorite version of the oft-filmed Gaston Leroux tale and one of the most attractive costume dramas ever committed to celluloid, Hammer's take on "The Phantom of the Opera" has, unfortunately, gotten lost in the shuffle. Part horror movie, part operetta and part melodramatic love story, it's easy to see how the film might try the patience of present-day viewers...but if you're familiar with this kind of cinematic storytelling, and especially if you're a fan of Hammer Studios and director Terence Fisher, you should see it. Herbert Lom plays a harsh, commanding Phantom, and Heather Sears--by virtue of the fact that she's not movie-star pretty--is a very believable, and likable, Christine. The cast is also enlivened by Michael Gough as the slimy, stereotypically villainous Lord Ambrose d'Arcy, and delightful Hammer regular Thorley Walters as his whipping boy. As Christine's love interest Harry, Edward de Souza is a little stiff, but he's the sort of goofy, overly earnest hero you expect in a movie of this type. The horror is restrained; the Phantom's unmasking doesn't occur until the end of the film (and it's a memorably gruesome moment, courtesy of makeup artist Roy Ashton), but you'll find it worth the wait. Seven and a half stars.

... View More
Spikeopath

The Phantom of the Opera is out of Hammer Film Productions and directed by Terence Fisher. Based on the Gaston Leroux novel, the screenplay is written by John Elder and it stars Herbert Lom, Heather Sears, Edward de Souza and Michael Gough. Filmed in Eastman Color, cinematography is by Arthur Grant and music by Edwin Astley.The latest opera production of Joan of Arc is beset with problems, prompting many to believe it's the work of a mysterious phantom who haunts those involved with the show.It has been the basis for a number of adaptations, the Leroux novel's core story proving to be fascinating enough to prompt writers, film makers and musical directors to produce their take on it. Of the film versions, it's still the Lon Chaney silent of 1925 that carries the highest horror value, but for style and substance I feel Hammer's version is the best of the bunch. Fisher's film is played wonderfully straight, the production is given much care and consideration, but in the main the makers let the story sell itself. The characters remain interesting and in the case of the phantom himself, he smartly gets a back story shown late in the day amid off-kilter camera angles. This really gives the film a dramatic thrust as it heads into the finale, where the pay off is exciting and emotionally tight (one of the finest tear sheds in cinema is right here).A voice so wonderful that theatres all over the world will be filled with your admirers.Cast wise the film is led superbly by Lom's performance as the sad and tragic phantom. Lom manages to elicit sympathy with minimal dialogue and pure body language, giving this phantom an irresistible vulnerability that hits home hard as the film closes down. Around him it's Gough who is having the most fun playing villain of the piece Ambrose D'Arcy, and he does it well. De Souza is adequate as love interest Harry Hunter, but Sears, whilst certainly pretty and a decent actress, lacks believability in the scenes shared with the phantom. Note worthy is a quality cameo that comes from Patrick Troughton; even if it does make us hanker for more of him in the picture.Fisher's direction is tight and smooth, if lacking some of the camera flourishes that other Hammer films have benefited from. While Grant's Eastman Color photography adds a zest to the period flavouring by bringing the well designed sets to the fore. Astley's music is standard genre stuff, but easy listening for sure. Bonus is to hear Toccata and Fugue in D minor, it's now disputed as to if it actually was composed by Johann Sebastian Bach, but regardless it's a haunting piece of organ music that has the power to induce chills down the old spinal cord area. Particularly when used location wise as it is here.A lovely adaptation of the source, Hammer's version may not be as horror based as some would like, but it more than makes up for that with style, substance and a quality turn from the leading man. 8/10

... View More
jonm11100

I never have been a big Hammer film fan but I have to say that the Hammer version of Phantom of the Opera is absolutely the best I've ever seen. The story is great, the acting is great and there are a few really terrifying moments. I even almost shed a tear at the end. Poor professor Petrie! Anyway, if you haven't seen this, you owe it to yourself to check it out. I've been looking for the DVD release for years and it finally got here, although I doubt you can get it by itself. The only one i've seen so far is a Hammer double feature, the other movie being Paranoiac, starring Oliver Reed and Janette Scott. This is Hammer at its best!

... View More
bensonmum2

Almost every movie fan knows the story – an opera house is beset with problems as a new production is set to open. At first it's strange, annoying occurrences like missing music or damaged instruments. But it goes beyond mere annoyance when a stagehand is murdered. What evil force is behind this series of events? As a fan of Hammer, there's a lot here to enjoy. The first thing I always notice, and it's hard not to, is the film's "look". Hammer made some wonderful looking movies and The Phantom of the Opera just might be at the top of that list. Beautiful is the way I would describe it. The colors, the sets, and the costumes are so incredibly pleasing to the eye. Everything from the rich burgundy curtains on the opera stage to the simple, but effective mask worn by the Phantom are perfect. You could spend three times the budget of The Phantom of the Opera and not come up with something that looks this good.Terence Fisher directed some of Hammer's best films. And his work on The Phantom of the Opera is among his best. I've read complaints that Fisher lacked imagination and was, at best, a workmanlike director who was lucky to be "in the right place at the right time". With The Phantom of the Opera, Fisher shows more artistic touches and allows the camera to be more fluid than at any time I can remember. Fisher was aided by an impressive cast. Other than Heather Sears in the female lead, the acting is solid. Edward de Souza, Thorley Walters, and Herbert Lom are all great in their respective roles. But, as usual and as expected, Michael Gough as Lord Ambrose d"Arcy steals every scene in which he appears. He's just so deliciously evil and over-the-top.There are several little moments in The Phantom of the Opera that make it special. Scenes like those involving the rat catcher or the opera house cleaning women might seem like throwaway moments, but they help add life and interest to the film. Or the dinner scene when Sears character turns down d'Arcy's advances. The look of contempt on Gough's face as he stalks out of the restaurant is priceless. Very well done!In the end, while there have been any number of versions of The Phantom of the Opera made over the years, Hammer's version is my favorite. It's definitely a movie that any Hammer fan or anyone interested in learning about Hammer should see.

... View More