It is accessible and ordinary, and since it is almost entirely sung (with very little dialogue), there are none of those awkward “they were just talking, then all of a sudden they started singing” transitions that can be so off-putting to newbies. Andrew Lloyd Webber and Charles Hart’s lavish spectacle has catchy tunes and is not overly complicated or intellectual. Which is a shame, because on stage, “Phantom” is a good way of introducing people to the art of the musical. “See?!” they’ll say as they stagger out of the film 143 minutes later.
“Chicago” revived the genre and brought in audiences consisting largely of people for whom musicals aren’t usually their “thing.” Some of those people, having been eased into the genre by the swinging razzle-dazzle of “Chicago,” might wander into “Phantom,” too, only to be numbed, annoyed and confused. Those of us who love musicals will not be thrilled with the new big-screen version of “The Phantom of the Opera” - not because it’s a terrible film (though it is), but because of the bad name it gives movie musicals.
0 kommentar(er)
