Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to In The Balcony. We hope you enjoy your visit.

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Plus, you'll be eligible for the monthly $1 million prize. (Not really.)

Join our community!

If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Phantom of the Opera (1925)
Topic Started: Sep 19 2005, 09:02 PM (1,080 Views)
The Photoplayer
Member Avatar
Charter Member
[ *  *  * ]
TCM's movie list only shows films that they have the copyrights or licenses to (not what they actually have). If you inspect it closer, you'll see titles like LONDON AFTER MIDNIGHT and TOWER OF LIES that are obviously lost.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Laughing Gravy
Member Avatar
Look for In The Balcony on Facebook!
[ *  *  * ]
Posted ImageUniversal Horror Classics #2
The Phantom of the Opera (1925/29)
Prod. Carl Laemmle, Dir. Rupert Julian (& a slew of others, uncredited)

I dunno, if you asked me to a point to a film where nothing works except one solitary performance, I might well point to this, although the sets are very nice, too.

The newly formed Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer snapped up Lon Chaney, then a free agent (after completing The Hunchback of Notre Dame), for its first feature, HE Who Gets Slapped (one of Chaney's best pictures). Lon then signed with Paramount for what by all accounts was a weak melodrama, The Next Corner, directed by Sam Wood. And in the fall of 1924, it was back to Universal for a lavish production of Gaston Leroux's The Phantom of the Opera. A lot of money went into sets and costumes and Chaney, but alas, the director was Rupert Julian, who took the blame for what turned out to be a, well, uninspired mess. Chaney couldn't stand him, and the two men didn't speak on set, with Chaney reportedly directing his own scenes, which are, unsurprisingly, the only good scenes in the picture. Norman Kerry as the leading man looks ridiculous, possibly because throughout the various cuts of the film (more on that in a second) he kept going back and forth between being a romantic hero and being a lovesick moron. I like Mary Philbin as Christine very much. And the chandelier DOES fall, a nice bit of filmmaking.

So, nobody at Universal seemed to think it was a very good picture, and they previewed it in L.A. and the audience reaction was that the film stunk when Chaney wasn't onscreen. Due to the nature of the Phantom, naturally, he was off-screen a LOT. So, they brought in the guys who were making cheap but profitable Hoot Gibson westerns to re-do the non-Chaney bits, and they pretty much rewrote the film, which looked much different when it had its exclusive four-week "world premiere" showing in San Francisco in April. Audiences reported that the film STILL stunk when Chaney wasn't onscreen, and so director Eddie Sedgwick came in to work on it some more, and he actually brought back Chaney (who had to be rented from his new home, MGM) to shoot a new climax. The third version of the Phantom played the Astor Theatre in New York, quite a showcase, and was profitable, although audiences reported that the movie stunk whenever Chaney wasn't onscreen. There are a few 2-strip Technicolor sequences in the film, very impressive, particularly Chaney as the Red Death.

With the debut of sound, Universal decided to reissue the film with synchronized effects and new dialog sequences; Chaney was, of course, unavailable, but Kerry and Philbin weren't. The new "talkie" version was released in 1929; a foreign-shores version, made up of alternate takes and different camera angles, was released in 1930; this fifth version is the one we're most familiar with as The Phantom of the Opera, as it came down to us in the best shape (it's the one, for example, that Milestone uses, and it stinks when Chaney is offscreen, in case you're wondering). The 1925 general release version, nearly complete, would be lost except for a few battered "show at home" prints Universal sold in the 1930s and which still survive.

Perhaps because of his lousy experience back at Universal making Phantom, Chaney took himself off the free-agent market and signed an exclusive one-year deal with MGM, with two 1-year options. The films were huge successes, and Chaney's contract was re-negotiated more than once; he'd never make another film away from MGM.

Universal was going to need to find another horror star.
"I'm glad that this question came up, because there are so many ways to answer it that one of them is bound to be right." - Robert Benchley
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Frank Hale
Balcony Gang, Foist Class
[ *  *  * ]
"You're RIGHT, Mr. Gravy, sir!"

Except that I think the film is dullsville even when Mr. Chaney is on screen. I have no desire to see it again.

And except that it should be "two-color" Technicolor. The process used only one strip of film negative, although it separated out the two colors in the lab.

The 2005 discussion of Chaney and his films on this thread is interesting. In the interim I've seen all the Warner Archive and Kino offerings and have come to appreciate him a bit more. The two I enjoyed most were Tell It To The Marines and the sound version of The Unholy Three, the common thread perhaps being that he was portraying something reasonably close to a human being.

I can't argue he was a great actor and he usually carved off a pretty big slice of ham. But definitely a movie star. I can’t take my eye off him when he's on screen.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
panzer the great & terrible
Member Avatar
Mouth Breather
[ *  *  * ]
I don't much care for Phantom either, but Chaney certainly had presence. I saw He Who Gets Slapped at the San Francisco Silent Film Festival two seasons ago, and the audience, about 800 of them, never made a sound. They were glued to it. That film is so much better on a big screen with live music. I had seen it once before in Dave's room at college, and wasn't impressed. I've seen many films I saw back then in the last few years, and liked many that I didn't like before. Either I've grown up or gone senile.
Life is just a bowl of cherries, it's too mysterious, don't take it serious...
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
The Batman
Member Avatar
Charter Member
[ *  *  * ]
panzer the great & terrible
Jun 10 2013, 05:23 PM
Either I've grown up or gone senile.

Probably a little of both, Mr P.

Always be yourself! Unless you can be Batman...then always be Batman!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
panzer the great & terrible
Member Avatar
Mouth Breather
[ *  *  * ]
Gee, thanks, Bats.
Life is just a bowl of cherries, it's too mysterious, don't take it serious...
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
The Batman
Member Avatar
Charter Member
[ *  *  * ]

I've always got your back, Mr P. :D

Always be yourself! Unless you can be Batman...then always be Batman!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Laughing Gravy
Member Avatar
Look for In The Balcony on Facebook!
[ *  *  * ]
The Unknown is another one... I get calls every time TCM plays it.
"I'm glad that this question came up, because there are so many ways to answer it that one of them is bound to be right." - Robert Benchley
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
panzer the great & terrible
Member Avatar
Mouth Breather
[ *  *  * ]
I like that one too. Its really sick.
Life is just a bowl of cherries, it's too mysterious, don't take it serious...
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
« Previous Topic · Silents, Please · Next Topic »
Add Reply