Phantom review

Just got back from seeing the movie version of Phantom of the Opera. Hhhmm. I can't compare it to the live version, 'cuz I haven't seen it, but I can tell you that there's something palable about going to see a live theater performance (isn't that why we pay to see our favorite musicians play in person?) and it is obvious that the movie is trying to recreate this magic for the audience of movie goers.

Unfortunately, what is also obvious is that theater magic is essentially unable to be recreated through alternative means.

Emmy Rossum is beautiful. Once a real opera singer for the Met, she sings wonderfully. The two male leads are good singers. Raoul is naturally, absolutely handsome. The Phantom, or the part of his face that you see through most of the movie, is also good-looking. The casting directors were also smart enough to have them have different looks-Raoul is fair, baby-faced and blonde, while the Phantom is dark haired and somewhat rugged-looking.

The sets, costumes, and makeup are fantastic.

In short, it has everything one would think it should have to be a fantastic adaptation of a well-loved Broadway show.

But that one thing that's missing, that certain something, was enough to prompt at least 5 people walk out of the show that I attended tonight. (And in New York, it's nearly $11 to go to the movies). I wish I could tell you that the movie was worth seeing, but really, save your money and see something else instead. ("In Good Company"had an early release here, so I think I might see that before I have to return to school on Monday. I'll let you know what I think about that if I do...)

Hope all of you are doing well.