This is a reasonably pleasant remake of "Phantom of the Opera", but that is all. It's not exactly a remake, but more of a re-working of the story, as it bears less semblance to Gaston Laroux's novel than the original film--especially since all the back story they give about how the phantom came to be has NOTHING whatsoever to do with the original story. It's interesting but pays little respect to the source material.

The movie is filmed in lovely 1940s Technicolor--not the most realistic, but bright and enchanting nonetheless. But color is NOT the biggest difference between this and the old Lon Chaney film. This new version has a huge emphasis on singing--with lots and lots and lots of music that will enchant opera fans and bore everyone else to death. I really hated the glossy production numbers--they were sumptuous BUT also got in the way of the story. For much of the film, the Phantom seemed ancillary at best--and was more a chance for the studio to show off Nelson Eddy and his co-star.

As for the horror, it's so muted and uninteresting that I can scarcely call this a horror film! And, most disappointingly, when the big unmasking scene occurs, you see that the Phantom's face looks pretty nice--so why is the big idiot hiding it under a mask?! I saw nothing of the scary Lon Chaney in this silly Phantom!! I am a devout classic horror fan and really could have cared less about the film--and I felt frustrated that the film just wasn't scary or suspenseful--and that the Phantom really wasn't terribly important to the producers! To me, this film is like a cake from the average grocery store these days--it looks nice but tastes fake! By the way, although the original is by far the best, the early 1960s version by Hammer Films is greatly superior to this 1943 version. It ain't great, but IS still a horror film. Instead, the 1943 version seems too much like a glossier Jeanette MacDonald-Nelson Eddy film with another woman sitting in for Jeanette!!

This 1943 film of Phantom of the Opera has much to like, but also has a lot wrong. Far from a bad film but underwhelming as well considering the talent involved, for fans of opera and visually beautiful films this is for you, for horror fans and purists not so much. Before getting on the many things good about Phantom of the Opera there are things that did let things down. The pacing is plodding too often, not helped by direction that was very skillful but lacking urgency. The comedy scenes vary in effectiveness- too much of it was not very funny really- and would feel much more at home in an Abbott and Costello film, the type of humour did feel out of place here for a story that is essentially a horror drama based on a disfigured man and opera.

Nelson Eddy was a wonderful singer, with handsome looks and a nice personal charm but his acting is wooden here, even more so than his performance in Naughty Marietta. And the horror is under-utilised and significantly diluted. The scariest it gets is the phantom's entrance, the death scenes are somewhat silly, with a lack of tense atmosphere and build-ups, and the phantom's face reveal is not shocking enough, even Foster didn't look that shocked.

For all the film's problems though, you can't still dismiss it entirely. The lavish production values are just gorgeous to look at and in producing them there is nothing overblown or over-produced about them. It's beautifully shot and filmed as well. The music is sublime too,- then again you are talking to a massive classical music and opera enthusiast who'd if she wanted to would spend hours talking about music, operas and performers she loves- the opera scenes are crucial to the story and are sung, produced and choreographed with so much brio and attention to detail. There are even orchestral pieces like Tchaikovsky's Symphony no.4 adapted into song, that was interesting to hear.

Suzanne Foster is beguiling in every single way, and Nelson Eddy gives some of his best ever singing here.(and this is coming from someone who is a big fan of his voice, quite possibly the most beautiful baritone voice on film with Howard Keel too a very close contender). Phantom's entrance and the chandelier scene are very effective, the dialogue is serviceable at the least and some of the romance is sweet. Phantom's back-story was interesting and moving, though it is very understandable why there'd be those who prefer him more ambiguous. Aside from the production values, the best aspect is the subtly menacing yet movingly sympathetic performance of Claude Rains, a really wonderful performance from a screen icon that deserved a better film.

Overall, a film of pluses and minuses where either point of view(love or hate, also like, don't care for and mixed feelings) is understandable. 6/10 Bethany Cox

It is rare that horror films can be considered objectively great movies but this can.

The story has a great deal of potential. In 19th century Paris, lives Erique Claudan, a violinist who works at the Paris Opera. Though a veteran of 20 years, he is fired because his hands have developed a condition which interferes with the quality of his playing. However, he is interested in helping the career of Christine Duboise, a young, rising star in the Opera. But he himself needs the money to pay for her lessons, and attempts to have an entire book of music he has written published. When his publisher refuses to give it back to him, Claudan accuses him of stealing his life's work and murders him, in the process horrifying a young woman who throws a pan of acid at his face, disfiguring it. Claudan hides in the sewers, steals a mask to cover his face, and starts terrorizing the Opera into allowing Christine to sing, going as far as to murder the Opera's biggest star, and cutting the chandelier down to crash into the stage. All the while, the Paris chief of police and one of the Opera's biggest male stars, bot of whom are trying to win the affections of Christine, try various plans to catch Claudan after one of them confronted him high up in the place from which the Opera's effects are operated. Claudan However has plans to capture Christine and take her to his hideout under the Opera house, will Claudan be caught?

This movie is absolutely outstanding. The Technicolor is beautiful, and the cinematography is well done. Phantom of the Opera should have won the following Academy Awards.

Best Picture Best Actor Best supporting actress Best art direction Best cinematography Best costume design Best adapted screenplay Best original song Best original score Best makeup.

The sets and costumes are fabulous in taking you back to the era. The Opera sequences are very impressive and well done with powerful music. Claude Rains performance as Claudan is perfect, he is tragic, sad, and menacing all st once. This is certainly one the the best movies of all time and it's a shame that it's so obscure.

So if you want to see a truly great film from another era of film-making, choose this one!