Это видео недоступно.
Сожалеем об этом.
Originals Vs. Remakes: Phantom of the Opera (1925 vs. 1943)
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 15 авг 2024
- The Phantom of the Opera has been adapted countless times for film, TV, radio and the stage. To compare and contrast all versions would be a monumental undertaking, so this video simply compares the two film adaptations that share the most DNA; the 1925 and 1943 films by Universal.
Both The Phantom of the Opera 1925 and Phantom of the Opera 1943 fall under the banner of the Universal Classic Monsters. The 1925 original is widely known for its famous and majestic sets, as well as for featuring the signature role for Silent Era icon Lon Chaney. The unmasking scene has gone down as one of the most famous scenes in all of film history.
The 1943 remake updated the story and took more liberties with the source material, in order to create a fresh and exciting take. Boasting dynamic camerawork and a great attention to detail in terms of art production and costuming, it is a delight to watch. It is also a less horror-focused take on the story, dwelling more on pathos, pity, comedy and romance.
But which is the best?
Chapters:
00:00 - Introduction
00:42 - Original (1925)
22:27 - Remake (1943)
38:11 - The Verdicts
Check out HauntedBlowfish on Twitter for more horror and film chat: / hauntedblowfish
Previous Originals Vs. Remakes:
Black Christmas (1974 vs. 2006 vs. 2019)
Castle Freak (1995 vs. 2020)
Wrong Turn (2003 vs. 2021)
Godzilla vs Kong (1962 vs. 2021)
Thirteen Ghosts (1960 vs. 2001)
Cabin Fever (2002 vs. 2016)
The Most Dangerous Game (1932 vs. 1945)
Slumber Party Massacre (1982 vs. 2021)
Death Wish (1974 vs. 2018)
Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2 (1986 vs. 2013 vs. 2022)
Firestarter (1984 vs. 2022)
Fu Manchu (1932 vs. 1965)
The 1925 Phantom is like King Kong. No matter hiw many times its remade or retold, the original film still stands as the undisputed iconic version
Now I really want Peter Jackson to remake Phantom with Jack Black
2004>>>>
Nah, original King Kong is classic and all, but the Peter Jackson version is just objectively a better movie. The original is outdated and not as well written.
@@Kevmaster2000 Go to the dictionary and look up the word "objectively".
@@HauntedBlowfishnooooo!!!!!
The Phantom Of The Opera is one of my all time favorites. Went through an obsession period when i was a young lad, even going as far as to read the original book! (How many people can say theyve actually done that😂) Will always hold a special place in my heart
You just made me remember how superior I felt when I read Dracula when I was like 11. Needless to say, the smugness died hard years later when I realised it was a very abridged version made for kids hahaha. Learned a valuable lesson that day!
I really like the Robert Englund version. It's a cool little cult classic that has a similar feel to the Nightmare movies. The Lon Chaney version is probably still the best version I've seen, mostly because Lon Chaney.
Agreed. And a lot of the later Phantom films do have good stuff to offer, but they're fighting an uphill battle against a century-old icon. I doubt the '25 film will ever truly be surpassed.
Interesting! The director who took over and re-edited the original film was Lois Weber. Apparently, she had a prolific career in the early days of Hollywood. Also, I remember those horror books! Our school library had several of those Crestwood House horror books with the orange titles on the covers. I learned all about the Toho kaiju movies and the different versions of Dracula through those books!
Oooo Lois Weber, that name does sound familiar now you mention it, thanks! I really need to get a copy of Helen O'Hara's book on women's involvement in early cinema, a topic that is all too easily whitewashed.
I'm starting to feel like I'm missing out with these books now!
Yes Lois Weber did indeed edit the film into what you see now--that is the original 1925 version.
@@emilsuda4101 Thanks for the confirmation, Emil! Sounds like she did a fine job crafting the footage into the film we now love.
Weber was one of *four* editors hired at various during post-production to get a very inconsistent film into shape. She and Maurice Pivar were the last people brought in. Their job was to get the film down to nine reels.
@@TheStockwell It is too bad that the Cemetary scene was not kept in, but it had already been deleated! There are those today (myself included) who feel it was important to the story line.
Nicely done, very entertaining.
No contest, Lon Chaney all the way.
Thank you :)
The 1925 is still a classic. It prevails over the Robert Englund one at best.
It prevails over all!
Univeral really should've put the original and the remake's sequel into their 30-film Classic Monsters blu-ray collection they had a few years back.
I can sort of understand their reasoning with the sequel as it is kind of it's own thing, but yeah the original is the most glaring omission from the set.
I don't think they could. Most of their silent films are now in the public domain, so they couldn't make any profit selling them.
@@jcrprod.co.6973That’s the point of public domain, everyone can profit off selling it.
I love both films, but prefer the 1925 film the best. Lon Chaney gave an amazing performance, one that is iconic and synonymous with The Phantom. That said, Claude Rains did a great job in the role. This is an excellent video comparing the two films. Great job man and take care!
Thanks Jared! Well said, and I'm glad to see some more love for Rains' portrayal. When I've shared this video across the internet, there was a fair bit of backlash against Claude, which I think is unfair. As you say, Chaney's version is iconic and so firmly attached to the idea of the Phantom, that Claude Rains never really stood a chance filling those shoes.
@LizardKing Oh yes, for fans of the novel, 25 is surely the way to go.
Its interesting how early universal seemed to love to emphasize an intense gaze. This, Dracula, Imhotep, the Bride.
True, and the impressive thing is, it works in every one of those films and doesn't become redundant (to me at least anyway)
Just like Bela Lugosi IS Dracula, and Boris Karloff IS Frankenstein's Monster... Lon Chaney IS The Phantom of the Opera. No matter how many remakes are made, this will always be so. But, hey, Claude Rains IS The Invisible Man, so he'll always have that.
Truer words have never been spoken. Icons, the lot of them!
I like the 1925 version overall, but the 1943 version does have it's moments, particularly when the woman throws acid on Claude Rain's face.
Agreed, that scene is a grim highlight and helps set it apart from the many other adaptations
I agree, of the two the 1925 version is my favorite. I also really like the 1990 miniseries with Charles Dance that might be my favorite all time.
I haven't seen that version but I really need to; Dance is a fantastic actor!
Still better than the musical adaptations which tainted the original novel’s horror aesthetic.
There's room enough in the universe for both the horror adaptations and the more romance focused ones. Horror is my preference of course but I must admit I love the soundtrack of the musical (organs AND 80s rock opera madness!?), and the base story still shines through enough.
Love it or hate it, Lloyd Webers Phantom immortlaized the character & story in pop culture forever. Not to take away from the book & films success before the musical came out, but it's the most successful stage show ever for a reason. I like it enough for someone who doesn't normally like musicals, the movie adaptation is awful but a guilty pleasure
I prefer the 1925 version from the Design by Lon Chaney Sr. down to the horror experience once the Red Death interrupts the masquerade.....but Lloyd Webber's version is still amazing! Not talking about the terrible Gerald Butler Phantom. The stageplay. Its just different. But I love it. The music, the comedy, and the very well done moment of The Red Death is pretty awesome to see. I disagree with this take.
I love both dearly and it's so hard to choose, but I've come to the conclusion that despite the beauty of 25 and its incredible accuracy to the novel; 43 stands as my favourite between the two and it's purely because of the character writing. Rains' phantom is incredibly tragic and it really makes me feel more sorry for the character. I especially love him at the end of the film where he finally gets to spend time with Christine who is just confused and horrified as any normal person would be, the way he acts specifically is what makes me love him so much. He's almost delirious and delusional in his actions as if the acid had reached his brain and cut off some ability to properly put together what he was doing and what reality is. Then the crowning piece is the chandelier drop, specifically the drop and not the miserably long cutting of the chain link. The chandelier was always something I found annoying in even the novel as I felt it was such a big event that is so underdone and I think the 43 film really did well with it, the silence as it drops, the crash and the screaming. It's all really chilling in my opinion.
Thanks for your comment - very well articulated. I wholly agree that the tragedy of the Phantom is the 43 films' strongest element. I love the buildup to his 'origin story' and as you mentioned, his moments with Christine at the end are fantastic too. However, I feel all the scenes inbetween are inferior to the 25 film (though admittedly still very good)
@@HauntedBlowfish The 2004 movie is the best!!! Also, Chaney’s phantom just looks like an old, wrinkled man. He is ugly because he has bad teeth, and marginally piglike nostrils. I have seen several people like him in my village....
@@ingridmay66 Haha in that case I am staying well away from your village! I do really like the 2004 version as well; Looking back, having Gerard Butler as the Phantom is such a strangely interesting choice, and of course the music is wonderful.
Honestly never saw 1943 as a remake, it is just so different and it did start out with the Phantom being Christine's father. It would have been great to see Lon Chaney jr in the role, given that he can sing. But oh well, I still will always favor the Lon Chaney film, being the most accurate Phantom so far and movie, minus how he died.
Yeah, I have no doubt that Chaney Jr would have been fantastic. He was kind of in his peak at that time too. But Rains is great too so I can't bemoan the outcome too much. But agreed, Chaney Sr will always be number one in this particular race.
Not a fan of 43. 25 is ICONIC and Genuinely unsettling. I don’t think Chaney Jr. would be a good Phantom 🤷♂️. Perfect Wolfman though. Also had Claude Rains makeup been more gruesome and the acid storyline taken away, might be better 🤷♂️. I don’t even consider 43 horror tbh.
Yeah, Universal definitely made a deliberate choice to focus less on the horror in 43, and expand upon the romance and spectacle. So I think it succeeds in those respects, but I'm a horror fan at the end of the day, so it always leaves me craving more (which I then receive from rewatching the 1925 film again and again hahaha)
Personally love both love 25 for its lavish sets use of shadow and chaneys unforgettable performace and also love 43 for its lavish sets nice bright technicolour like eye candy so nice to look at and claud rains who is well great in everything
Indeed, agree with it all. Both deliver the goods, depending on what mood you're in.
Oh my GOD!!! The first movie, or "Monster Movie" I ever got on VHS! I was having a rough year right before I turned 5 years old (I was in the hospital with salmonella poisoning from a supermarket by of milk, my mom suffered an aneurysm and almost died, I really didn't have any friends around, Iwas constantly physically abused by some older cousins, and I started school a year early......as always, I leave a run on sentence). My Grandmother notice how much I loved monster movies every time she took me to the library. I'd always get books about vampires and European folk tales, as well as books on horror films. It was great, because my Grandma had ran a movie theater before I was born, and had all sorts of posters and memorabilia to show me once I was mature enough to handle the materials and posters. We were at kmart, and VHS was just now starting to be more affordable. I think it's mostly because a lot of films were released on VHS that were public domain, so they didn't really need to charge all that much for them.
Staring at me right in the face was Lon Chaney and the phantom of the Opera box, from video treasures, a budget label VHS company that really put out some great films that were unattainable prior the VHS boom. Now, as much as I had already read up on all the old horror films, this would be my first lawn Chaney senior film. The wolfman was my favorite monster at the time, so I knew who won Cheney Junior was. My dad was also an avid fan, and we would spend every Saturday watching son of svengoolie, followed by samurai sunday. Well, my grandmother had seen the film when it originally came to theaters, and told me how much she loved on Cheney, and how much it scared the living poop out of her when she saw the scene where they take off his mask. I was so happy.
I just remember that day being very emotionally positive. Everyone was in a wonderful mood, despite what was happening, and my mother was home to be able to enjoy the film with me, so it made things much more enjoyable. My father was ecstatic too because he had never seen that film. All I can remember is reading about it in the Crestwood monster movie series. They were books aimed at 4 to 10 year olds that came out in the mid to late seventies I believe. They covered every monster. From the creature from the Black lagoon, godzilla, and the wolfman, to the phantom and count Dracula. If you look them up I guarantee you you will find them and you might have already read some. What was even cooler about that day was that my aunt took me to the library previously and let me take out about 10 of those books from the series. I had a lot of studying to do I guess. Hahaha!!
Anyway, upon arriving at home, I ran directly into the house and showed my father the movie. He was super happy because we just bought a VCR earlier on the week so that Mom could enjoy some films at home since she couldn't really go to the movie theater at the time. This was the first movie that we had in the house. So, well if Laura and my grandmother were in the kitchen making dinner, we decided to turn the film on. Well after adjusting the tracking, like most people would have to do initially, we were adjusting the sound. I couldn't believe it. I felt like I bought a defective film! Turning the volume up and down and nothing would happen. I wasn't crying, but I literally felt the urge to. But....... I decided just to wait a minute and give it a few seconds. Then I realized that words were coming across the screen after people would talk. Grandma came walking into the front room and said "oh! I forgot to tell you. This is the silent phantom of the opera. This is the one I saw in the theater. Remember I told you that I was around when silent movies were still in the theater? This is a silent movie.".
Luckily I had just learned how to read much better than I had initially tried to do when I was starting kindergarten. So, my mom just said that I should look at it as a reading exercise so when I go into see my teacher, I can use this as maybe a sort of book report. And who wouldn't want to use an awesome monster movie as a book report? Immediately I was happy as hell again.
My grandmother kept walking back into the front room asking me if I saw the part yet. I kept asking her what part she was referring to, and all she could tell me was that I'll know when I see it. Let's just say I let her know when I saw the phantom being unmasked! Wow! I don't care how many times I had read about the movie, or how many times I had read about Cheney and his awesome makeup skills, or even how many times I saw publicity photos of his makeup skills. Nothing prepared me for him having the mask torn off of him to reveal his skeleton face. It was practically real and better than anything I had seen prior to watching that movie. That why my dad told me that lonchini was and always will be the best. I definitely believed him, and still do to this day.
My grandmother would watch the movie with me from time to time, and I would bring the film with me when I would go visit her in Wisconsin at the farm my grandparents lived on. I was always happy to hear stories from her childhood, as well as the things she had seen growing up in chicago, and dealing with her stepfather being the chief of Chicago Police during the time of prohibition and in the era of gangsters like Al Capone.
Thank you so much for making this. I'm at the library now before I go to work, and I'm watching this right as soon as I get done dictating this message on the comments page here. You do amazing work, and it's about time you are recognized for doing it such. This couldn't have come at a better time, either. It's been a rough few weeks for everybody in the family, so this is something that I can easily share with my mom or dad tonight or tomorrow, seeing as they are both sort of interested in the subject as well.
Also, I wholeheartedly apologize for the grammatical errors, and lack of sentence structure in these comments. I'm dictating this into the phone as I head back to campus, and sometimes it doesn't always translate as well. I only have so much time, so I try to utilize it the best I can. Keep up the amazing work, and I'll reach out to you soon.
.
Also......and I swear I'm done after posting this......but thank you for tolerating me being so long winded this afternoon. Much love to ya,good sir.
Thanks for sharing, Fletch. No need to apologise again, I was rather hooked to be honest. Lots of great little details and in a way I'm jealous. I've had nice bonding moments with family and what not, but they are very rarely related to this wonderful genre we love. As such I had to do most of my digging into horror alone. I've not read those books but i know the type - invaluable!
Thanks for the comment and the nice words, as usual. Being my longest video to date, and being about such an important film(s), I put a lot of effort into it so I hope it lives up to expectations!
I think it's clear that 1925 would be your winner, but I'd be interested to know your feelings on the 43 movie too.
Sorry to hear that things haven't been the best with you and your kin. Hope things improve soon!
@@HauntedBlowfish man...thank you. I really appreciate the concern kind words. They do help.
That sucks you had to do the research in regards to your favorite childhood film genre alone. It always helps to have SOMEONE at that age to at least feign interest in to what you are doing. It more than helps in regards to making your interests and passions seem validated
Yeah, it's interesting, I was surrounded by friends and family who loved film and books, but horror was basically a no-go for all of them hahaha (apart from Scooby, everybody adored that mutt). At least the internet then came long - now my social media pages are nothing but other horror fans who obsess over the genre too!
I was sad i got the Universal Monster movie collection on bluray. nice package of their early horror films but they had the remake instead of the original which i think is much better.
We might possibly own the same set, and I had very much the same reaction. Mine has 8 films, but I've always been jealous of the Region 1 boxset that has about 30 films (yet still doesn't include 1925 Phantom!). I have to presume it is because the original film is now public domain so they didn't bother, but it does feel like a glaring omission particularly for the larger boxset. BFI have given it a nice release in HD though.
@@HauntedBlowfish Grrrrr the BFI one is region B only.
@@rtsgod I've said it before and I'll say it again; can't believe region locked discs are still a bloody thing!
@@HauntedBlowfish rabble rabble rabble (mob chasing after the phantom of the region locking)
🤣
I laughed a lot during this video but 30:32 is where I lost my shit and hit the subscribe button. Phantom '43 is so underrated in my opinion. It may not be the best adaptation, but I enjoy it for what it is, and I'm a huge fan of Claude Rains. His Phantom was and still is very different from other adaptations, and much more sympathetic. I so badly wish that they had kept the plot that he was Christine's father as his support of her career and his later fixation with her would make a lot more sense. As for the Chandelier cutting scene, I actually thought it was really suspenseful, how the shots were all edited together between him sawing it and the Opera going on down below. The first time I saw it, I was biting my nails, thinking "Oh god, it's gonna drop any minute now and nobody is noticing what's happening!" I was on the edge of my seat, but to each their own!
I also understand why you chose the 1925 version. Perfectly understandable. Lon Chaney Sr. remains one of the best Phantoms ever if only for the make-up alone. Thank you for covering these films and with so much humour too!
I will admit I prefer the 43 film ,because I love the lavish techniolor look,Claude Rains and Susanna Fosters performances and I personally dig the comedy.I also had the opportunity to see it on the big screen a few years ago so that might be a factor..I will admit the 25 film is better and Chaney is the best Phantom,but 43 Phaantom is a film I just enjoy more
Firstly, I'm immensely jealous that you got to see it at the cinema; I can totally envision the grand spectacle aspects working much better in that environment. But on the whole, very fair reasoning!
Thanks for watching and commenting too! I'm currently hard at work on another Originals vs. Remakes video regarding another Universal Monsters classic. Hope to release it soon in February.
I love that film. I used to have it on VHS and would watch it when I was home sick from school.
The baritone holding a note sequence was funny AK 😀
Haha thank you!
Between 1925 & 1943, 1925 mainly for how close it is to the book. It's not a perfect adaptation, but Erik grabbing Christine & fleeing makes it so insanely thrilling for me!
Yup! That ending really elevates it above many of its contemporaries, and other Phantom films.
Love the original
Indeed, I imagine most people here will prefer the original. A classic in the true sense of the word.
I'd buy a place for cheap because it had an invisible roommate.
Looking at house prices these days, agreed!
Great subject matter!
Thanks, yeah, just love all the horror classics!
Personally, the ending in the 1925 film makes me mad. The first ending they had planned was the ending of the original novel! We were this close to getting the perfect Leroux-faithful adaptation😭.
The fact that Erik doesn't try to take Christine with him after crashing the carriage seems so out of character, given how much he wanted her for himself.
I guess I'm part of those who love the original novel for its sentimental aspects, those that make you care for Erik despite the horrible things he does, this ending kinda dilutes the Phantom to a downright villain.
I understand that opinion completely, and even relate to it somewhat. For his obsession over Christine to be essentially pushed aside at such a pivotal moment is a bit iffy. Then again, I long ago accepted that different adaptations of the book focus on different aspects, and as you say, the 1925 gives us the most villainous portrayal really. For the emotional iterations of the character, we just have to seek out other versions.
Claude Rains was fine in the 1943 Version. But I wonder how it would have been if Karloff or Chaney Jr. had played the Phantom. Also, I didn't like the way the Phantom's origin was changed in the 1943 Version. And I liked the idea of The Phantom being Christine's father was abandoned!
Yeah, as much as I love Karloff (and Rains), Chaney Jr would likely be my preferred choice for this
I prefer Iron Maiden's version starring Daley Thompson ;-)
Hahaha he slow-mo sprinted right into our hearts!
I liked it better in the 1925 Version where the Phantom is a born freak, not an acid scarred madman!
I quite enjoy both explanations, but ultimately yes I think it's more effective when The Phantom has been suffering for life.
Maybe 2+ minutes is on par for sawing through a massive chandelier chain?
Perhaps, but if they really were going for realism they should've added a part where he gets a cramp in his arm and has to stop.
@@HauntedBlowfish 😆
In the 1943 remake, the casting for the Phantom was a challenge because there was one other star besides Karloff to take the role before Claude Rains filled in. It wasn't just a film actor, but an opera singer: the great Russian operatic bass Feodor Chaliapin. Sadly, he died in 1938 due to pneumonia.
That's a shame, as a genuine operatic performer could lend a lot of legitimacy to the role.
@@HauntedBlowfish Exactly and it would have equally challenged Nelson Eddy in the film with more of an operatic approach. Both the bass Chaliapin, Eddy the baritone, and the soprano Susanna Foster all together. He would have been a great choice because he also performed roles in the same makeup style of choice that Chaney had. IMHO, Chaliapin was the real Phantom of the Opera and the man of a thousand operatic faces.
Great video
Thanks, Hunter! Much appreciated
I know I'm in the minority, but I actually prefer the 1940s version. Despite its lousy makeup job, I just love how it recenters its focus on the abuses of the opera industry itself. It's not totally overt, but I got the impression that the movie was really deeply criticizing an industry that favors its art and finances over the well-being of its performers and workers, and even audience. They'll fire you, throw you away, without any hint of loyalty, and they'll act like gentlemen while doing so as though that gives them the high ground. The Phantom in this version is really the product of a cold and emotionless world.
Very valid point; next time I rewatch I'll keep that theme/thought in mind!
Nothing compares to the first one . That horrible face was quite scary.
True true, and still effective even a century later.
Damn, how long is he gonna hold that note?
Some say he's still going to this day
@@HauntedBlowfish oh dear!
Your sass is pun perfect for this vid. 😆
Haha the gothic theatrics must bring out the worst in me
Full Movie of Remake 1943? Please!!
The bluray is wonderful
Where is James Arness?
Too busy being a Marshal, no doubt
Does anyone know where i can watch 1925?
Because the 1925 film is public domain, you can find it practically everywhere. Many people have uploaded the full movie to RUclips itself.
Your voice patterns match that of my friend
Then may I say your friend has some damn fine voice patterns!
Great video! I still really love the "Lullaby of the Bells" piece from the '43 Phantom film, and my childhood love of that movie is one reason that Claude Rains became one of my favorite actors from that era.
Thank you, and agreed, Claude was one of the greats!
My mom and step dad went to go see the musical during their honeymoon. I've never seen any of them.
Highly recommend both of these version and the musical as well, brilliantly emotive music in that one
27:09 cursed image
Nobody Loves Raymond
Definitely disagree on Phantom and Jaws theory. We get to see their monstrosity in full after they are revealed
Very true. And it just adds to the terror if you happen to have a phobia of sharks and/or Lon Chaney!
The best version is the 1925 Version.
Agreed!
First off i heard lon chaney jr was upset that he never got the phantom remake,
Second. And this is just my opinion but the Claude rains one. Really is sh*t, it lacks. Horror or suspense,
And his scar is laughable compared to chaney
While I do agree with your individual points (lacking in tension, underwhelming scar reveal), I can't call the film shit as I still appreciate the lavish sets, more romantic style to separate it from the '25 film a bit, and Rains' performance.