Amazon Price:$26.99 $17.99 You save: $9.00 (33%). (as of February 15, 2017 10:41 AM – Details). Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on the Amazon site at the time of purchase will apply to the purchase of this product.
Musical Drama based on Andrew Lloyd Webber's celebrated musical phenomenon. The Phantom of the Opera tells the story of a disfigured musical genius (Gerard Butler) who haunts the catacombs beneath the Paris Opera, waging a reign of terror over its occupants. When he falls fatally in love with the lovely Christine (Emmy Rossum), the Phantom devotes himself to creating a new star for the Opera, exerting a strange sense of control over the young soprano as he nurtures her extraordinary talents.
Additional Scenes:"No-one Would Listen" Approx. 4 Mins.
DVD ROM Features
Documentary:Behind the Mask – The Story of the Phantom of the Opera
Featurette:The Making of The Phantom of the Opera in 3 Spellbinding Acts: Preproduction, The Director, Production
Actors: Gerard Butler, Emmy Rossum, Patrick Wilson, Miranda Richardson, Minnie Driver
Directors: Joel Schumacher
Writers: Joel Schumacher, Andrew Lloyd Webber
Producers: Andrew Lloyd Webber, Austin Shaw, Paul Hitchcock, Louise Goodsill, Ralph Kamp
Language: English (Dolby Digital 5.1), French (Dolby Digital 5.1)
Subtitles: English, Spanish, French
Region: Region 1 (U.S. and Canada only. Read more about DVD formats.)
Aspect Ratio: 2.35:1
Number of discs: 2
Rated: NR Not Rated
Studio: Warner Home Video
DVD Release Date: September 6, 2005
Run Time: 141 minutes
update product info: or give feedback on images?
A visual powerhouse and a musical delight for anyone willing to give it a chance!
326 people found this helpful.
on January 19, 2006
By J. Irwin
As a qualifier, I am an avid musical theatre fan and classically trained singer. Back in the 80s, I couldn’t be bothered with seeing Phantom, partly because I was too busy going to show after show of Les Miserables, but mostly because I couldn’t picture Michael Crawford as anything other than Cornelius, the wussy shop boy in Hello Dolly. His voice is nicely trained but his upper register is just simply annoying. I’m sorry to all his fans, but in my musical mind tenor does not equal dark and mysterious and emotionally tortured. The anger expressed by phans over casting the originals is just silly! Who wants to watch a 61-year old lusting after an older teenager? That is not entertainment, that is just gross…anyway, after relentless hounding by my niece, I broke down and took her to NYC to see it. It was wonderfully entertaining and I was glad to have gone.
PHANTOM is a solid and spectacular film musical
922 people found this helpful.
on December 25, 2004
By Hazen B Markoe
Many people will look at this film version of Andrew Lloyd Webber’s classic musical spectacular, THE PHANTOM OF THE OPERA with mixed emotions. There are people who will be upset that Sarah Brightman and Michael Crawford, who played the original Christine and Phantom respectively, were not allowed to recreate their signature roles. There will also be people who’ll be disappointed that this version is not a literal translation of the stage musical. Finally, we have the critics of both Webber and director Joel Schumacher, who have both been accused of wretched excess in previous projects in their individual careers. Taken as a film version however, this PHANTOM stands the test of time, not only as a wonderful musical film, but as one of the more faithful versions of Gaston Laroux’s romance/horror novel.
Haunting, romantic and truly memorable…………
248 people found this helpful.
on February 18, 2005
By Marcy G.
You know that a movie works when it follows you long after you’ve left the movie theater. I saw the Broadway tour of “Phantom of the Opera” a few years ago and it has been my favorite musical since. I love it more than Cats, 42nd Street, West Side Story, Les Miserables, Miss Saigon…you name it. Its romanticism and beautiful songs just blew me away.
Don’t let the critics fool you!
79 people found this helpful.
on February 17, 2005
This movie is superb! I really loved the stage musical but this is ten times better…no, a hundred times better. I even had people who said they disliked the stage version comment on how great this film is. I don’t understand why the critics are so harsh when the viewers are enjoying it. I should know, I’ve seen it nine times already…and I’m not the only one.
Gorgeous, sensual and exquisite
39 people found this helpful.
on June 1, 2006
I have to say that until the spring of 2005 I absolutely LOATHED the Phantom. My mom has seen it at least twice and has the original London recording on a cassette, and she used to make me listen to it when I was little…apparently I thought it scary. But when the movie came out, my friends were all dying to see it, and I was actually going to go along and humor them; never happened. We ended up waiting till it came out on dvd and rented it for Mother’s Day (b/c once again, my mom wanted to see it).
This movie moved me like none other.
34 people found this helpful.
on February 19, 2005
I have now seen this movie three times and cannot seem to get enough of it. I can’t remember a time when I have felt so emotionally moved by something in the theater. I agree with many of the other reviewers here, maybe the vocals are not laced with the experience of the stage production, but the depth of emotion and heartache conveyed by the characters, (especially the phantom) will take your breath away. I went down immediately and bought the soundtrack and that is all that has been playing in my car ever since.
The way the Phantom should sound!
51 people found this helpful.
on January 19, 2006
By Joanna Duarte
What is all this chatter about the ‘original’ Phantom? Andrew Lloyd Webber explained his choice of Gerard Butler as the Phantom: he said he wanted a ‘rock star’ persona, and Michael Crawford, no matter what age, would not have fulfilled that requirement; Gerard Butler did. I have seen the stage play, and the movie several times, and I own both the London stage and movie soundtracks, and one thing that stands out is the emotion in Mr. Butler’s version, which does not come across to me in Mr. Crawford’s version. When Gerard’s Phantom is sad, you know it — when he’s angry, you REALLY know it! I also believe Emmy Rossum is about as perfect a Christine as there could be . . . how lucky was that? She’s divine! And how about Minnie Driver? What a hoot! I love her “these things do happen” routine, who cares if she doesn’t sing? What professional opera singer could they have found who could have played the role 1/2 as well?
27 people found this helpful.
on February 17, 2005
By Aly Sunyear
This movie may not have been the best in the world, but it is damn mezmorizing and I had the soundtrack stuck in my head from the first moment I heard it. It still isn’t all out. The visuals and costuming are fantastic not to mention the lovely Gerard Butler, who if you don’t fall in love with, you are, in my personal opinion, a very sick person. 🙂 I love his rendition of Music of the Night perhaps because I got to see the power of his performance, but if you haven’t seen this, see it. If you don’t like it, I’m sorry.
38 people found this helpful.
on February 17, 2005
By Jack Dalory
I happen to be a mature movie-goer, but I totally disagree with the critics. PHANTOM OF THE OPERA was truly the greatest movie I have ever seen. Purely amazing in every way, haunting and very heartbreaking. The movie will leave you in tears for at least 3 parts of the movie. PHANTOM was purely spectacular. Why the critics say this movie is poor is beyond me. I have seen this 4 times and I am still not sick of it. Truly brilliant, artistic, and haunting…..this film is, in my eyes, a true marvel that towers over the rest.
I HAVE SEEN IT!!!
478 people found this helpful.
on October 24, 2004
By JR Pinto
I have just seen Andrew Lloyd Weber’s The Phantom of the Opera last night and I still don’t quite know how to feel about it. This is my favorite Broadway musical of all time. I have been privileged enough to see it twice on stage with the inimitable Michael Crawford. This Phantom is significantly different – both the production and the character. On stage, the Phantom is an older man who is missing most of his face. In this film, the Phantom is so young and so sexy we wonder why Christine would ever be interested in Raoul. The movie has more time and ability to go into the Phantom’s backstory – the problem is the backstory makes no sense! In the book, it was explained that Erik was the son of a master mason who grew up to be one of the contractors who worked on the opera house. In the movie, he is a child who is rescued from a freak show by Madame Giry who has grown up in the opera house. (Perhaps that gave him time to install a pipe-organ single-handedly.) Joel Schumacher has tried to “humanize” the Phantom, which is the wrong decision because – like Hamlet – the Phantom is a larger-than-life character. The worst filmmaking decision is to have the Phantom swordfight Raoul…and lose! The Phantom is like Hannibal Lecter – he would NEVER let anybody get the upper hand on him. In the play, the Phantom spends most of the time off-stage, creating an air of mystery. Also, in the play, he has more of a devilish sense of humor. The movie phantom does not move in the same way the stage phantom does – gone are the balletic gestures that accompany The Music of the Night.
The owner of this website is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon properties including, but not limited to, amazon.com, endless.com, myhabit.com, smallparts.com, or amazonwireless.com.