The Phantom of the Opera (1962) - IMDb IMDb 17 January 2017 4:34 PM, UTC NEWS There was an error trying to load your rating for this title. Some parts of this page won't work property. Please reload or try later. X Beta I'm Watching This! Keep track of everything you watch; tell your friends. Error The Phantom of the Opera ( 1962 ) Unrated | Terror strikes the London Opera House as a new opera is disrupted by the actions of a deformed specter of the show's past who has an obsession with one of the production's chorus girl.

Director: Anthony Hinds (screenplay) (as John Elder), Gaston Leroux (composition) Stars: From $2.99 (SD) on Amazon Video ON DISC a list of 32 titles created 22 Mar 2011 a list of 25 titles created 18 Jun 2011 a list of 33 titles created 03 Oct 2014 a list of 40 titles created 26 Jun 2015 a list of 31 titles created 20 Sep 2015 Title: The Phantom of the Opera (1962) 6.4/10 Want to share IMDb's rating on your own site? Use the HTML below. You must be a registered user to use the IMDb rating plugin. Loosely based on Josephine Tey's "Brat Farrar;" a man long believed dead returns to the family estate to claim his inheritance. Director: Freddie Francis When car trouble strands a honeymooning couple in a small Southern European village, an aristocratic family in the area reaches out to help them with sinister consequences.

Director: Don Sharp In 18th-century England, the Royal Crown sends Royal Navy Captain Collier and his crew to investigate reports of illegal smuggling and bootlegging in a coastal town where locals believe in Marsh Phantoms. Director: Peter Graham Scott 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 6.8/10 X In Spain, Leon is born on Christmas day to a mute servant girl who was raped by a beggar. His mother dies giving birth and he is looked after by Don Alfredo. As a child Leon becomes a ... See full summary » Director: Terence Fisher A disfigured violinist haunts the Paris Opera House. Director: Arthur Lubin Janet is a young student at a private school; her nights are troubled by horrible dreams in which she sees her mother, who is in fact locked in an insane asylum, haunting her. Expelled ... See full summary » Director: Freddie Francis Penniless, Baron Frankenstein, accompanied by his eager assistant Hans, arrives at his family castle near the town of Karlstaad, vowing to continue his experiments in the creation of life. ...

See full summary » Director: Freddie Francis Vampire hunter Van Helsing returns to Transylvania to destroy handsome bloodsucker Baron Meinster, who has designs on beautiful young schoolteacher Marianne. Director: Terence Fisher Count de Chagnie has discovered Christine's singing talent on a market place and sent her to his friend Carriere, the director of the Parisian opera. However just when she arrives ... See full summary » Stars: Teri Polo, Charles Dance, Burt Lancaster Dr. Henry Jekyll experiments with scientific means of revealing the hidden, dark side of man and releases a murderer from within himself. Director: Terence Fisher A centenarian artist and scientist in 1890 Paris maintains his youth ad health by periodically replacing a gland with that of a living person. Director: Terence Fisher Directors: Rupert Julian, Lon Chaney, and 2 more credits » Stars: Lon Chaney, Mary Philbin, Norman Kerry Edit Storyline The corrupt Lord Ambrose D'Arcy (Michael Gough) steals the life's work of the poor composer Professor L. Petrie. (Herbert Lom).

In an attempt to stop the printing of music with D'Arcy's name on it, Petrie breaks into the printing office and accidentally starts a fire, leaving him severely disfigured. Years later, Petrie returns to terrorize a London opera house that is about to perform one of his stolen operas. Written by Jeremy Lunt <durlinlunt@acadia.net> The most unusual tale of terror - and love - ever told! See more » Genres: 15 August 1962 (USA) See more » Also Known As: Das Phantom der Oper See more » Filming Locations: The film takes place in 1890 and December 1900. See more » Goofs During the flashback sequence, Ambrose D'Arcy writes his own name on the title page of one of Professor Petrie's manuscripts, which is called Symphony No. 1. The word 'symphony,' however, is clearly and incorrectly spelled 'symphany.' The spelling is corrected on the printed copies of the music seen later. See more » Quotes The Phantom : I am going to teach you to sing, Christine. I am going to give you a new voice!

A voice so wonderful that theatres all over the world will be filled with your admirers. You will be the greatest star the opera has ever known. Greater than the greatest! And when you sing, Christine, you will be singing only... for me. (Groningen, The Netherlands) – See all my reviews This version of "The Phantom of the Opera" is very different from the original and others. But fantastic nevertheless. The movie is approached differently compared to other versions, not only the story is different but also the characters. Especially The Phantom has become a bit of a different person. Personally I like this approach, it's up to you which approach you personally like the best. The typical Terence Fisher directing is very notable and he gives the movie a typical atmosphere. This movie is definitely one of Fisher's and the Hammer studio's best, even though the movie is now days a bit outdated of course. A surprising thing was the amount of humor used in this movie. It fitted the movie surprisingly well and worked out just great. The most fantastic thing is the cast. Herbert Lom plays as The Phantom a more of a tragic villain.

Michael Gough as Lord Ambrose d'Arcy plays the real main villain of the movie and he is simply brilliant in his role! He really steals the show in this one. The rest of the cast also pulls of quite well. Alas there are some flaws and the movie is simply too much outdated to can be considered a masterpiece. But the movie serves its purpose and looks visually great with excellent performances from the cast and a nice finale. 9/10 5 of 6 people found this review helpful. Was this review helpful to you? Yes Filmography | The Phantom of the Opera Filmography Filmography Prior to the 2004 movie version of The Phantom of the Opera, directed by Joel Schumacher and starring Gerard Butler and Emmy Rossum, the Phantom has undergone several screen adaptions.

It is not just the figure of the mysterious music lover that haunts the story of The Phantom of the Opera but also that of the remarkable American film star, Lon Chaney Snr., for, more than anyone else, he created the image most readily associated in the public mind with the tale – that of the disfigured man skulking through the labyrinths of l’Opéra masterminding the career of his beautiful protégée. Indeed, it is arguable that if Chaney, the Man of a Thousand Faces, had not starred in that hugely influential 1925 silent movie, Gaston Leroux’s story might well have remained in obscurity – as the original book most certainly has done for many years – instead of inspiring a whole series of screen and stage adaptations during the past half century. With that film, Chaney not only made himself an international star but placed the story of The Phantom of the Opera firmly alongside those other great horror classics, Dracula and Frankenstein.

The moment when Chaney snatched away the mask from his famous Death’s Head also provided one of the great moments of screen history, (reportedly causing many people among the early audiences to faint!) as well as setting a standard for all who have since played the role. Although the former stage manager turned actor was always reluctant to reveal just how he achieved his terrifying appearance, he firmly denied wearing any kind of mask: “It was the use of paints in the right shades and the right places – not the obvious parts of the face – which gave the complete illusion of horror,” Chaney said. The second version was made in 1943, this time with sound and in color, and starred Claude Raines as a revengeful Phantom who has been scarred by acid. Interestingly, all the sets for the original Chaney picture were used in this remake and the photography won an Oscar. Twenty years on, Leroux’s story was shabbily treated in a Spanish version, El Fantasma de la Operetta, which portrayed the Phantom as a blood-thirsty villain bent on murdering chorus girls.

Two years later, in 1962, Hammer Pictures revamped it as one of their series of ‘Hammer Horrors’ with Herbert Lom and Heather Sears. Most recently, the original concept was abandoned in The Phantom of the Paradise (1974) when the Paris Opera House became a New York rock ’n’ roll theater, and the Phantom a demented disc jockey preying on pretty teeny-boppers! The story has not fared much better on the stage. In France, strangely, it has scarcely appealed to dramatists at all, and there have only been two notable productions in England. The first was a much abridged version performed as part of a Grand Guignol season at the Little Theatre in London in 1935 and then, in 1975, the Actors Company mounted a performance with Edward Petherbridge in the title role and Sharon Duce as Christine. It is also a sad fact that the image of the Phantom has obscured Gaston Leroux himself – for few people knew his name and even fewer have read his books.

Yet, just as this new production will further ensure the continuation of the legend, it might perhaps help rescue his creator from the wings of literary acclaim where he has stood for so long. “The Opera ghost really existed. He was not, as was long believed, a creature of the imagination of the artists, the superstition of the managers, or the absurd and impressionable brains of the young ladies of the ballet, their mothers, the box-keepers, the cloak-room attendants, or the concierge. No, he existed in flesh and blood, though he assumed all the outward characteristics of a real phantom, that is to say, of a ghost.” – Gaston Leroux The Phantom of the Opera (1962) | Classic-Horror.com Our editor-in-chief Nate Yapp is proud to have contributed to the new book Hidden Horror: A Celebration of 101 Underrated and Overlooked Fright Flicks , edited by Aaron Christensen. Another contributors include Anthony Timpone, B.J. Colangelo, Dave Alexander, Classic-Horror.com's own Robert C. Ring and John W. Bowen. Pick up a copy today from Amazon.com!

The Phantom of the Opera (1962) Hammer Films Hammer’s The Phantom of the Opera is one of the most revered of all the Hammer horror films. Eerie? Check. Atmosphere? Right on. Over-rated? Absolutely. While The Phantom of the Opera is a welcome addition to the shelf of horror classics, when I hear Hammer experts talk about this film as director Terence Fisher ’s “best” or Hammer’s “best”, I have to wonder what the hell they are talking about. There’s no use adding a summary, as Hammer didn’t deviate much from the traditional Phantom plot that we’ve all come to know and love. This isn’t to say that this version is simply a rehash of what came before. The origin of the Phantom is brand new. Revealing the origin would ruin the mystery for most people, so I will just say that Hammer moves away from the “deformed freak full of rage” as seen in most versions of the Phantom, and instead gives him an intrinsically human quality. This made it easier to sympathize with him (for almost any classic horror monster to work, there has to be some level of sympathy), and it worked very well in the film.

Also, the origin actually gives a discernible reason for the Phantom to be haunting the Opera in the first place instead of the “oh, him? He’s always been there.” tactic that most versions have used. That just made you more emotionally invested in both him and the story, which makes it one of the better versions of the tale ever told. But as far as it being the “best” Hammer film or even the “best” Terence Fisher film? It is not. I’m going to talk about the negative points first, because that’s the type of girl I am. Let me just go on record by saying that these points are only meant to dispute the rampant overrating of this film. And the reason I do this is to prevent a backlash. When people go into a film that has been rated obscenely high, they will probably be disappointed if it was just merely good. And this is bound to be what happens with The Phantom of the Opera. It really is a good film for reasons I’ll mention later. I’d even go so as far as to label it as required Hammer viewing. The problem is that it’s being labeled “infallible”, and it isn’t.

So, with that being said, on with the pessimism! I’ll first dispute the “best Terence Fisher film” assessment. It’s certainly his biggest production by sheer volume of actors and the set design. But bigger does not always mean better. Fisher is well known for his signature eerie lingering shots. In this film, only one scene jumps to mind as being really exceptional -- a lingering upward shot when the Phantom is at the top of the stairs. It gives the Phantom a larger-than-life feel (much like the camera tactics used to play off on Christopher Lee’s height when he plays Dracula). But other than that, it's simply standard Hammer horror tactics. This is not a bad thing, as the film overall works. But to compare typical horror fare to Fisher’s ground-breaking Curse of Frankenstein ? That’s just crazy talk. Not to mention, there seems to be a lot of Crap No One Cares About. The love story between Christine and the manager of the opera is emphasized far too much (and the carriage scene really should have been deleted entirely). It doesn't deter your interest at all, but it doesn't contribute to the film’s ending, as the only thing that really matters is the Phantom’s relationship to Christine.

I daresay the romance angle is completely unwarranted in this version, and the film could definitely have benefited from deleting those scenes in lieu of spending more time developing the relationship between Christine and the Phantom. Also, the Igor character seems somewhat lost in the story. And when the script actually takes time to describe Igor’s origin, we get, “oh him? He’s always been there.” I guess that rule must be incorporated in every version of Phantom somewhere, but it comes off as weak. And see, I just disputed the “this is the best Hammer film” argument. Aren’t I efficient? All right, the icky stuff is done now. See, that wasn’t that painful. So why is it worth seeing? A couple of reasons. The main reason is that the Phantom’s backstory is written so divinely that it obscures all other missteps the movie makes. As mentioned previously, you know that this isn’t “just another Phantom.” This is a Phantom with a purpose, and his history is revealed in such a manner that you have to keep your eyes to the screen. It reminds me of watching a standard modern day “twisty” suspense tale.

You know upfront who the bad guys and good guys are, but how they GOT there is the whole ride. And in this vein, Phantom doesn’t disappoint. Being intentionally ambiguous as not to ruin the surprise for future viewers, his backstory is one of the most interesting and well thought out of all the Hammer characters, ever. And that’s a tall order to fill, folks. The main reason the Phantom’s backstory works so well is due to Terence Fisher. He drops subtle clues early on indicating that the Phantom holds a deeper secret than what is being revealed. As the movie progresses, more and more clues are revealed, but he leaves the “big bang” for the climax. This formula never seems to fail when Fisher is behind the wheel. A good comparison would be to Hammer’s Captain Clegg , in which the audience know there is something more to the story than what is occurring, and it is this suspicion that keeps the audience’s attention. I dare say Phantom does it better, because the secret is more subtle. Whereas Captain Clegg is just a series of random scenes that you have to “wait and see how they connect,” Phantom leaves you with the feeling that there COULD be a deeper secret, but it is entirely possible that there isn’t.

This subtlety is not often seen in Hammer, but when it’s done, it’s often done to perfection. Also, even though the film does not star anyone particularly famous, the actors are quite good. This is mostly because all the characters are one-dimensional, except of course for the Phantom (which, given the emphasis on the Phantom, is how it should be). Michael Gough, who is the Lenny Briscoe of English cinema, gives a great look to the evil Lord Ambrose D’Arcy. But the true star of the tale is Herbert Lom as The Phantom. He has the perfect blend of vulnerability, ambition, and sheer rage for the role. I’m actually surprised he didn't have more of a presence in Hammer films, given the sheer depth he displays here. He does a simply amazing job. The Phantom of the Opera is a Hammer classic that will be enjoyed by all those who love Hammer or classic horror monsters. But like most enjoyable Hammer films, it has flaws that can hardly be ignored, which makes it undeserving of the pedestal it is given. Go in with high expectations, as it will surely meet them.

Just don’t go in thinking this is the quintessential Hammer experience, as you’ll be setting yourself up to be disappointed. Login to post comments Background | US Tour | The Phantom of the Opera The man who created the Phantom By Peter Haining, September 1986 Gaston Leroux, the versatile French author who created The Phantom of the Opera, was a man with an abiding passion for the theatre and it seems appropriate that after years of struggle, writing newspaper reviews and a number of unsuccessful plays, he should have left his mark on literature with a novel about an extraordinary episode in the history of France’s greatest opera house. Admittedly, it has taken the magic of the cinema, and the art of the dramatist to familiarize the public with The Phantom of the Opera, but Leroux also managed to capture in his pages the atmosphere of the times he was writing about – the latter part of the nineteenth century when France was rampant with belief in the supernatural and the spirit world. Born in Paris in 1868, Gaston Leroux is himself as interesting as his story.

Photographs reveal him to have been a big, rather plump man with slicked back dark hair and a moustache, who dressed fashionably and sported a gold pince-nez. He was evidently a flamboyant character and once claimed that his family were directly descended from William the Conqueror. Although his literary inclinations put him at the top of his class, when his father decided that he was to become a lawyer, Gaston changed from an energetic pupil to an idle student. The theatre was obviously gripping his imagination and, it is not surprising that after he finally completed his legal study and was called to the bar as a probationer, he continued to write in his spare time. However, the course of his life was changed when his father died suddenly and left him heir to a fortune of almost one million francs. At once, Gaston abandoned the law and flung himself into a round of gambling, (poker was his particular vice) and pleasure in the colorful society of Paris. In less than a year he had squandered his inheritance.

Not downhearted, Leroux begged a job on L’Echo de Paris in 1890 and was asked to combine his knowledge of the law and love of the theater as court reporter and drama critic! It was as an investigative reporter that Leroux found the greatest satisfaction at this period of his life. His paper allowed him to probe suspected malpractice in the local police force and public administration and his hard-hitting reports not only exposed several corrupt officials but also made his name as a journalist. This passport to adventure took him from Finland, south to the Caspian Sea, through Italy, Egypt and Morocco, frequently disguising himself in order to be able to witness events at first hand. The strain on his health and a natural enough desire to settle down with his family made him give up the footloose life of a roving correspondent and become a novelist. His first books were unashamed pot-boilers, full of blood and thunder. Then, in 1907, he used his admiration for Edgar Allan Poe and Sir Arthur Conan Doyle to develop a young detective, Joseph Rouletabille, who solved a seemingly impossible crime committed in a locked room. The book was called The Mystery of the Yellow Room.

In 1911 he published Le Fantôme de l’Opéra, introducing it to his readers by explaining how he carried out his own enquiries into the strange events that had occurred in the famous Opera House in the 1880s. He tells of how he visited the huge underground lake where the Phantom hid and even stumbled upon the skeletons of “some poor wretches who had been massacred under the Commune in the cellars of the Opera.” However, sales of the book were only moderate and the reviews – such as they were – were disappointing. The only kind of public interest seems to have been generated by the serialization of the story in French, English and American newspapers with suitably graphic illustrations of the Phantom stalking the dimly lit caverns of the Opera House. It was to be the reading of this serial by a researcher for Universal Pictures which set in motion the chain of events which were to bring the The Phantom of the Opera to the screen for the first time in 1925 and make a star of Lon Chaney Snr.

Tragically, Leroux did not live to see the full triumph of his Opera story, though it is believed he did visit the cinema in Paris to see the Universal film in 1926. He was by then in failing health and died of uraemia on 15 April 1927. He was 59 years old and had written over sixty novels, none of which had made him rich. Today, copies of most are difficult to find aside from The Phantom of the Opera and The Mystery of the Yellow Room. In the three quarters of a century of his existence, the Phantom had undeniably over-shadowed his creator and, at the same time, become a familiar term in everyday use. What a wry smile that would surely have given the former journalist and theatre lover after all these years! Paris Opera House – Andrew Lloyd Webber Anyone familiar with a large opera house would testify that it is an extraordinary labyrinth of people and passageways, but the Paris Opera House of the last quarter of the nineteenth century, in which Gaston Leroux set The Phantom of the Opera, was remarkable by any standards. The huge building was constructed to designs by Charles Garnier from 1861-1875.

It was a hotbed of politics and factions. From prima donna to stage hand the Opera House was governed by intrigue and rumour; everyone jostling for position, defending their own territory and scrabbling for new. At the time in which the novel is set, the Opera House boasted over fifteen hundred employees and had its own stables for the opera troupe of white horses underneath the forecourt. Even today it employs over a thousand people and contains two permanent ballet schools within the building. The Paris Opéra rose to pre-eminence in the eighteenth century. After the Revolution it was fully restored to its leading position in Paris by Napoleon in the reforms of 1807. Unquestionably among the most performed composers at that time was Salieri, whose music remained in the repertoire at the time of Leroux’s novel. Salieri had his greatest triumphs in Paris with Les Danaides (1787) and Tarare (1784). It is interesting that Mozart began to work with Da Ponte after the latter’s huge success with Salieri in France. Indeed Mozart was not performed at the Paris Opéra until the early 1800s and then only in a severely adapted form.

Salieri was hailed as the natural successor to Gluck, the main force at the opera in the third quarter of the eighteenth century, and was greatly influenced by his music. But perhaps it was Meyerbeer who reigned supreme. His grand operas were a masterful potpourri of ingredients. His music was accessible, his characterisation brilliantly aided by his command of orchestration and he relished stage spectacle. This writer was chastened to learn that the 1849 production of Le Prophète was the first to feature roller-skating as a key ingredient and also introduced electric light as an effect. Indeed the Paris Opéra always prided itself in its innovation. Aladdin (1822) by Isouard introduced gas lighting to the stage. King of all this was the Opéra’s chief designer Ciceri, the John Napier of the day, who reigned supreme from 1824-1847. Spectacle was all. Hugo in his preface to Cromwell (1827) wrote “The stage should make as complete as possible the illusion of reality”.

The Paris Opéra’s eruption of Vesuvius was legendary, employing real stones and the titles of the opera alone convey everything: Le Siège de Corinth (Rossini), La Muette de Portici (Auber), Robert Le Diable (Meyerbeer) (noted for its Phantom of the Nuns effect) and, of course, Gounod’s Faust, the opera which is the backdrop to the Leroux novel. Key also to the Paris formula was the ballet. This was usually at the start of Act 111. Thus gentlemen could dine before arriving at the theatre to see their various young ladies in the corps de ballet. Wagner’s Tannhäuser caused uproar with the Jockey Club because its ballet was in the wrong place. The Paris Opera House survives in much the same form described in the novel. It occupies a three-acre site and some idea of the labyrinthine nature of the building can be appreciated if one considers that the auditorium accounts for less than one-fifth of the total space. There are over seventeen storeys, seven of which are below the stage level. The stables for the opera horses still exist. There is a monument to La Carlotta.

More important, there really is a lake underneath the building. It is an integral part of the design, and the water level acts as ballast, raised or lowered depending on the weight on the stage, seven storeys above it. Andrew Lloyd Webber September 1986 Filmography Prior to the 2004 movie version of The Phantom of the Opera, directed by Joel Schumacher and starring Gerard Butler and Emmy Rossum, the Phantom has undergone several screen adaptions. It is not just the figure of the mysterious music lover that haunts the story of The Phantom of the Opera but also that of the remarkable American film star, Lon Chaney Snr., for, more than anyone else, he created the image most readily associated in the public mind with the tale – that of the disfigured man skulking through the labyrinths of l’Opéra masterminding the career of his beautiful protégée.

Indeed, it is arguable that if Chaney, the Man of a Thousand Faces, had not starred in that hugely influential 1925 silent movie, Gaston Leroux’s story might well have remained in obscurity – as the original book most certainly has done for many years – instead of inspiring a whole series of screen and stage adaptations during the past half century. With that film, Chaney not only made himself an international star but placed the story of The Phantom of the Opera firmly alongside those other great horror classics, Dracula and Frankenstein. The moment when Chaney snatched away the mask from his famous Death’s Head also provided one of the great moments of screen history, (reportedly causing many people among the early audiences to faint!) as well as setting a standard for all who have since played the role. Although the former stage manager turned actor was always reluctant to reveal just how he achieved his terrifying appearance, he firmly denied wearing any kind of mask: “It was the use of paints in the right shades and the right places – not the obvious parts of the face – which gave the complete illusion of horror,” Chaney said.

The second version was made in 1943, this time with sound and in color, and starred Claude Raines as a revengeful Phantom who has been scarred by acid. Interestingly, all the sets for the original Chaney picture were used in this remake and the photography won an Oscar. Twenty years on, Leroux’s story was shabbily treated in a Spanish version, El Fantasma de la Operetta, which portrayed the Phantom as a blood-thirsty villain bent on murdering chorus girls. Two years later, in 1962, Hammer Pictures revamped it as one of their series of ‘Hammer Horrors’ with Herbert Lom and Heather Sears. Most recently, the original concept was abandoned in The Phantom of the Paradise (1974) when the Paris Opera House became a New York rock ’n’ roll theater, and the Phantom a demented disc jockey preying on pretty teeny-boppers! The story has not fared much better on the stage. In France, strangely, it has scarcely appealed to dramatists at all, and there have only been two notable productions in England.

The first was a much abridged version performed as part of a Grand Guignol season at the Little Theatre in London in 1935 and then, in 1975, the Actors Company mounted a performance with Edward Petherbridge in the title role and Sharon Duce as Christine. It is also a sad fact that the image of the Phantom has obscured Gaston Leroux himself – for few people knew his name and even fewer have read his books. Yet, just as this new production will further ensure the continuation of the legend, it might perhaps help rescue his creator from the wings of literary acclaim where he has stood for so long. “The Opera ghost really existed. He was not, as was long believed, a creature of the imagination of the artists, the superstition of the managers, or the absurd and impressionable brains of the young ladies of the ballet, their mothers, the box-keepers, the cloak-room attendants, or the concierge.

No, he existed in flesh and blood, though he assumed all the outward characteristics of a real phantom, that is to say, of a ghost.” – Gaston Leroux 'Pink Panther' Actor Herbert Lom Dies | Hollywood Reporter 'Pink Panther' Actor Herbert Lom Dies 8:34 AM PDT 9/27/2012 by Scott Roxborough COMMENTS The Czech-born character actor played Chief Inspector Charles Dreyfus in the original "Panther" movies. BERLIN – Herbert Lom, the Czech-born character actor best known for his role as Chief Inspector Charles Dreyfus in the original Pink Panther films, died on Thursday at the age of 95, The New York Times reported . Born Herbert Karel Angelo Kuchacevic ze Schluderpacheru in Prague to Czech royalty (his father was a count), Lom fled to London ahead of the Nazis' 1939 invasion. It would be in England that he would find success on stage and screen.

Lom’s career spanned six decades and included roles as varied as one of the gang of incompetent crooks roles in Alexander Mackendrick’s 1955 Brit crime comedy classic The Ladykillers (remade by the Coen Brothers in 2004). He played a pirate captain in Stanley Kubrick’s Spartacus (1960) and took the title role in the Hammer horror film The Phantom of the Opera (1962). Typical for a foreigner working in Britain at the time, he was often cast as a villain. But his biggest success came as the long-suffering Dreyfus in the Pink Panther films, playing the increasingly manic straight man to Peter Sellers’ bumbling detective Clouseau. Kevin Klein reprised the role for the rebooted version of the Pink Panther films, but for fans of the franchise, Lom's will always be the definitive Dreyfus. Lom originated the role of the king in the London debut of the musical the King and I in 1955 and had stints on TV in the '60s in The Man From U.N.C.L.E. and the U.K. series The Human Jungle.

His other big-screen credits include 1957's Fire Down Below with Rita Hayworth and Robert Mitchum and David Cronenberg's 1983 film The Dead Zone with Christopher Walken. Amazon.com: Phantom of the Opera (1962): Herbert Lom, Heather Sears, Edward de Souza, Michael Gough, Terence Fisher, Anthony Hinds: Movies & TV Phantom Of The Opera Page 1 of 1 Start over Sponsored Products are advertisements for products sold by merchants on Amazon.com. When you click on a Sponsored Product ad, you will be taken to an Amazon detail page where you can learn more about the product and purchase it. To learn more about Amazon Sponsored Products, click here . By KT Liz on October 11, 2016 Format: DVD|Verified Purchase I have my issues with this version of Phantom, but I am more pleased than displeased. Of course changing the Phantom's history and identity rankles, but the choices made make sense to the rest of the story line and I can let that go. I think if you disregard the book entirely, Hammer makes a solid film. The music was lovely and Lom was spot on as our scarred, tortured genius.

He simply had a strong, commanding presence. So much so that I wish he had more screen time and there was more relationship development between him and Christine. Not necessarily a romantic relationship (though I do admit a happy ending for the Phantom is always on my wish list), but something that grows mutual respect and admiration. Given the movie's time constraints, I can see why this was not developed further. This is a nice addition to any PotO collector's video library, so I would definitely recommend picking it up. It's up there in my top 5 Phantom films.

By Reymund Alvarenga on October 24, 2014 Format: DVD|Verified Purchase I Finally Can Say That This Movie Has One Great Story A Diffrent Cast & One Of Thoes Cast Members Is Michael Gough Who Here In America Was Known Best For Playing Alfred Bruce Wayne/Batman's Servent This Film Was Remade Countless Times Then But When Universal Studios Sold There Rights For Thee Universal Monsters The Phantom Of The Opera Was One Of Thoes Monsters This Version By Hammer Films Is Right Up There With The Legendary Villan Himself Sir Lon Chaney Who Gave An Iconic Performance For The Phantom Now Herbert Lom Was To Take The Mask To The Next Level In Diffrent Way & I Will Say This He Did It Brilliantly The Set's Are Amazing The Mask Is Beautiful & Herbert Lom Gives A Performance I Will Never Forget He Takes It Beyond With This Tale Monstrosity Of Gorgeous Music Kind Soul That Never Meant No Harm Of A Story This Film Is In My Horror Collection For All Eternity I Hope Ever Reads This Will Do The Same Never Judge A Brilliant Book By It's Magnificent Cover Of Great Sets Awsome Cast & Breathtaking Directing By Robby of Maui on November 2, 

2013 Format: DVD|Verified Purchase By far, the best version of Gaston Leroux's novel, although some elements of the original story have been changed, i.e., Leroux's Phantom haunts the l'Opera Garnier in Paris (not a theatre in London), the central female character, Christine, is Swedish in the original novel, not a Londonite, Christine's love interest is a French viscount, not a theatre producer, and Christine is kidnapped by the Phantom himself in the French original novel, not by the Phantom's dwarfish hunchback mute as in this film.

Still, the clarity of sadness of an unsuccessful love triangle as in the novel comes through extremely well in this film version. Additionally, no one can doubt the incredible impact of the musical score and Christine's singing throughout the film (although I am not certain Heather Sears' Christine did the actual singing). I based strongly my jaw-dropping, primarily hand-made 2013 Hallowe'en costume on Herbert Lom's Phantom w/ a few dramatic variations, changing the cape to a snow-white one w/ deep purple lining, white formal parade gloves, all-black clothes under the cape and real, turn-of-the-century button-down white spatterdashes (spats) around my shoes. Mr. Lom would have been flattered, I'm sure. One last note: the impeccable Michael Gough makes a fantastic vile and vicious (Herbert Lom's Phantom's words) Lord Ambrose d'Arcy, the opera house general manager and pseudo-composer, in this film version. In recent past, I found Michael Gough also playing parts in several other Hammer Studios films and even in one or two of Rod Serling's early Twilight Zone episodes. Mr.

Gough's sinister, remorseless, apathetic persona as Lord d'Arcy often surpasses that of Mr. Lom's Phantom in some scenes, esp. in his not-so-subtle lust for the film's heroine. A captivating period-style film w/ a triumphant, albeit sad, ending. By V. Risoli on March 9, 2012 Format: DVD|Verified Purchase I had nightmares after seeing 1962's Hammer/Universal version of "Phantom of the Opera." It was the organ music especially that caused me what had become a claustrophobic feeling in the nightmares. (Roger Corman's "The Premature Burial" and Alfred Hitchcock's "The Birds" were the other two films to cause nightmares). But Hammer's film which thankfully did not star Cary Grant (who is touted to have been considered for the part) in the Edward de Souza role was especially noteworthy as it was a Hammer film tailored for kids of the G-rating variety. I was a kid then but they let me in to see a disturbing film like "The Birds" with no question.

Despite critics who found the film straying drastically from the classic original, it is the most satisfying entertainment-wise except the villain does not significantly get his just desserts all too apparently, but then the main characters investigate the truth of the matter so thoroughly during the course of the film that one can be certain they will set the matter straight. Herbert Lom has one of his best roles here as the sympathetic Phantom, perhaps the film's greatest asset, the portrayal of the Phantom in Lom's performance and the script by Hammer's John Elder. The film was directed by Terence Fisher, the prolific director of a vast amount of Hammer's successes, and in my opinion, is at the top of his craft here. De Souza as the hero and Michael Gough as the villain are commanding and Heather Sears is a very good "Christine." Everything about Hammer's version succeeds in making the film memorable. Universal, which had presented this film as part of their Hammer Horror Series, which froze and locked on my DVD players upon a second viewing as this discs degraded, had provided a beautiful transfer as were all of the films in the set.

This Universal Vault Series edition (which had previously produced a very faulty edition of Curtis Harrington's 1967 "Games" wherein all copies should have been recalled for a speeding up of the last ten minutes which took them months to correct and causing me to be stuck with a defective product that I have to overlook every time I watch it) is not as good a transfer. Universal has become the most notoriously shameless studio going. The Phantom of the Opera (1962) The Phantom of the Opera (1962) **� It�s amazing how few generations it can take for adaptation drift to render a story unrecognizable. Hammer Film Productions� The Phantom of the Opera was only the third movie to be made from Gaston Leroux�s novel of the same name� or at any rate, it was only the third movie that can be confirmed as such.

(There are a few lost films from the 1910�s that sound intriguingly like possible ancestors of Universal�s classic silent interpretation , but the surviving information about them is too sparse to support any firm conclusions one way or the other.) Yet this third version has already strayed just as far from the source material as the famously unfaithful adaptations directed by Dwight Little and Dario Argento in 1989 and 1998, respectively. On one level, that might be taken as simply another example of the old Hammer formula� after all, neither The Curse of Frankenstein nor Horror of Dracula displayed more than the occasional stray codon of their predecessors� DNA. What�s curious, though, is that there was a very specific reason why those first two Hammer gothics came out looking the way they did, and that reason doesn�t seem to apply here. In both cases, Hammer�s primary objective was to inoculate themselves against copyright lawsuits by differentiating their movies as far as possible from the iconic versions released by the famously litigation-happy Universal in 1931. But by 1962, Hammer had been in partnership with Universal for some years.

Indeed, Universal would distribute this Phantom of the Opera in the United States. And beyond that, to the extent that the Hammer Phantom owes anything to earlier iterations of the story, it borrows most recognizably from Universal�s own 1943 remake . Somebody really has it in for Saint Joan, the new opera by up-and-coming London composer Lord Ambrose D�Arcy (Michael Gough, of Horror Hospital and They Came from Beyond Space ). Everywhere producer Harry Hunter (Edward De Souza, from The Kiss of the Vampire and The Golden Compass) goes around the Aberdeen Theater on opening night, he sees evidence of a mysterious grudge at work. The advertising broadsheets outside the building have been mutilated. The orchestra is suffering from an epidemic of slashed drum heads. Rossi the conductor (Martin Miller, from Latin Quarter and Children of the Damned ) complains of stolen sheet music. And Maria the lead soprano ( The Devil Rides Out �s Liane Aukin) is on the verge of hysterics� something about a one-eyed man in black appearing from nowhere in her dressing room, and then vanishing just as inexplicably.

Meanwhile, Lattimer (Thorley Walters, from Twisted Nerve and Vampire Circus ), the Aberdeen�s manager, must explain to His Lordship why he�s reporting a sellout crowd even though one of the mezzanine-level boxes� normally reckoned the best seats in the house� is conspicuously empty. Lattimer says he�s actually given up trying to sell the seats in that box. D�Darcy may believe what he likes, but it�s reputedly haunted, and none of the theater�s regular customers will sit there. All the commotion prevents anybody from noticing the gimpy little hunchback (Ian Wilson, of Old Mother Riley Meets the Vampire and The Day of the Triffids ) skulking around backstage, but I�m thinking he�s really the thing they should all be watching. Odds are he�s the one who waylays one of the stagehands, hangs him from the set rigging, and tosses the body out where the whole audience can see it right in the middle of Maria�s first solo. Maria wisely decides that she wants nothing more to do with Ambrose D�Arcy or his opera after that.

The police may rule the stagehand�s death a suicide, but she isn�t buying that for an instant. Given, however, that The Show Must Go On, Hunter begins auditioning sopranos to take Maria�s place. He quickly finds a very promising young singer named Christine Charles ( The Black Torment �s Heather Sears). Christine is inexperienced at the required level of performance, and will clearly need some work before she�s ready to play the title role in Saint Joan, but anybody with ears can tell that she�s well endowed with native talent. Hunter fails to realize, though, that D�Arcy prefers to recruit his divas on a casting-couch basis. Christine�s real audition is yet to come, when His Lordship has her back to his place after taking her out to dinner. Interesting, then, that someone should speak to Christine from an invisible hideout in the makeup studio, warning her what to expect from D�Arcy. You figure this unseen informant is also the mastermind behind all the opening-night sabotage? Lord Ambrose does indeed perform as advertised that night.

Luckily for Christine, Harry coincidentally goes to dine at the same restaurant, and she is able to use him as her escape route from a �private lesson� at D�Arcy�s flat. After all, it would only make sense to have the producer of the opera on hand for such a session, but D�Arcy�s intentions are such that there�s no point in the exercise unless he and Christine can be alone together. Outmaneuvered, Ambrose sullenly withdraws, leaving Christine to join Harry for dinner instead. Inevitably, the pair start the accompanying conversation by talking about the opera, which is the one thing they already know they have in common. Harry mentions the vandalism and weirdness that have plagued Saint Joan since it began preproduction, and that leads Christine to tell him about the voice in the makeup studio. Suspecting at once that there may be a connection, Hunter suggests an investigatory visit to the theater� a visit which yields rather more than either one of them bargained for.

Although they are unable to find the hiding place from which Christine was given her anonymous tip about D�Arcy, they both hear the mysterious voice once again, and while Harry is distracted (the hunchback�s somewhat excessive idea of a diversion is to murder the night-shift rat-catcher!), Christine actually meets its owner (Herbert Lom, from Mysterious Island and Asylum ) in person. Would you believe he�s a black-clad man wearing a featureless mask that obscures everything of his face save a single, baleful eye? It seems that the masked man means to abduct Christine, but her screams bring Harry running to her before the Phantom of the Opera can carry out the kidnapping. Harry and Christine will have plenty of time to mull over their eventful night at the theater, because D�Arcy gives them both the sack in revenge for his cock-blocking. As it happens, though, they spend most of the next day chasing down what Hunter initially believes to be a totally unrelated mystery.

Christine rents a room in the boarding house run by the widow Tucker (Renee Houston, of Repulsion and Legend of the Werewolf), and while the girl gets herself ready for a commiseratory day out on the town with Harry, he chats with the landlady in the parlor. Most of Mrs. Tucker�s lodgers are musicians, and she passes the time by telling the tragic story of Professor Petrie. Petrie had been a music teacher at the academy (wherever that is), and a composer of considerable ability. His work was never published, however, except presumably a few pieces which Mrs. Tucker herself sold after the professor�s death. That�s a bitter irony, too, because as she recollects, Petrie actually died in the act of negotiating a publishing deal. He was killed in the fire that gutted the offices of G. Piggott, Jobbing Printer, several years ago. Intrigued, Harry convinces Christine to put off lunch in favor of calling at Piggott�s, where an interview with master printer Weaver (Keith Pyott, from Village of the Damned and Bluebeard�s Ten Honeymoons) sheds interesting new light on the subject. Mrs.

Tucker�s memories are a little off on the details; there was a fire at the printer�s, and somebody was caught in it, but if the poor bastard died, he certainly didn�t do so on the premises. The victim broke in after hours, presumably to ransack the place for something saleable, and must have dropped some tobacco embers in the voluminous litter of paper scraps that virtually covered the floor of the shop. He apparently tried to put out the fire, but the jar he dumped on it contained not water, but nitric acid for use by the engravers. The policeman who saw him flee described injuries more consistent with a face full of acid backsplash than with exposure to heat and flame. Hearing that sends Harry to the nearest police station, where Sergeant Vickers (John Harvey, of X: The Unknown and The Stranglers of Bombay ) adds one final detail: the acid-scarred burglar leapt into the Thames, where the current quickly carried him out of sight. One might ask at this point why Hunter cares what happened to Professor Petrie� Christine certainly does. It all comes down to Saint Joan.

Harry couldn�t understand how a philistine like D�Arcy could write an opera at all, let alone one as good as that. Now he has his answer, or so he believes. Lord Ambrose didn�t write Saint Joan, but rather bought it from Mrs. Tucker after its real author, Professor Petrie, was dead. To those who�ve been paying any attention at all, it should be obvious by now that the operative clause in the sentence before last is �or so he believes.� Petrie, of course, is not dead at all; he�s the masked man prowling around the Aberdeen Theater and making life difficult for everyone attempting to put on his opera. And the reason Petrie has been making such a pest of himself is that D�Arcy wasn�t the person to whom Mrs. Tucker sold some of the professor�s old sheet music. Rather, D�Arcy screwed Petrie on a major publishing deal, giving him only �50 for ten years� worth of compositions, and then underhandedly passing them off as his own work. The fire at Piggott�s was no random accident, either.

Petrie broke in expressly to burn the entire print run of the misattributed Symphony #1 in A Major, and to destroy the printing plates by pouring acid all over them. He just wasn�t expecting the fire to build so quickly, or the acid to be so splattery. None of that, however, is as important now as the fact that Petrie has heard Christine sing. With her in the lead role, he wouldn�t mind so much for Saint Joan to go into performance, but first (as we�ve already established) she�s going to need some extra training. That�s okay, though� there�s nothing wrong with Christine�s singing that a little kidnapping and captivity wouldn�t fix� In general, I would not consider it a positive sign that a Phantom of the Opera movie proceeds primarily from the innovations of the Claude Rains version; I refer you to my review of the �43 Phantom for a detailed discussion of why not. Director Terrence Fisher and writer Anthony Hinds have thus done something most unexpected, devising a retelling of the story that redeems much of what didn�t work in its immediate predecessor.

By removing all trace of a romantic attachment between the Phantom and Christine, so that he regards her strictly as the one singer worthy to interpret his work; by pushing the events that left Petrie disfigured and insane far enough into the past to make it plausible for legends to spring up around him; by making the unscrupulous music-thief not just a major character, but the movie�s true villain� in these ways, Hinds has restored the power and credibility that the character lost when he was redefined as a kindly old composer driven mad by a dirty business deal and a face-full of engraver�s acid. By showing us enough of Saint Joan for us to follow and grasp its story; by putting some effort into its staging; by setting it to a score that doesn�t suggest a B-grade 30�s musical comedy with delusions of grandeur� in these ways, Fisher has made a virtue of the previously annoying focus upon what happens on the theater stage, conveying a serious sense of what is at stake here from Petrie�s perspective. The simplest and most effective improvement, though, is the bare fact that we aren�t introduced to Petrie as Petrie.

The film begins with him already a fearsome and enigmatic figure, and only gradually are we given to understand how he became what he is. Not only does that give the Phantom back some of the menace that he had in both the book and the 1925 film, but it also gives the official protagonists something worthwhile to do in the hour before Christine�s abduction. Whereas before the various Raouls and Anatoles and Christines were pretty well useless on their own, this version makes the central couple both proactive and effective. They solve the mystery of the Aberdeen Theater (well, okay� so mostly Harry solves it), without the help of any skulking Persian detectives-ex-machina. And while we�re on the subject of The Phantom of the Opera�s mystery aspect, I really like the unusual touch of realism whereby none of the people Hunter interviews while trying to figure out what became of Professor Petrie can agree on the details of the story� and whereby none of their versions turn out to be accurate except in the overall contours, anyway. Nevertheless, I can�t fully get behind this Phantom of the Opera.

It�s a little too diffuse, for one thing, not least because Hunter makes the connection between the supposedly deceased Professor Petrie and the masked malefactor at the theater only after Christine is kidnapped. All that detective work over Petrie�s disappearance seems a bit much to do on a lark, and it isn�t as though Harry doesn�t already have ample reason to believe in the Phantom�s reality the first time he hears the professor�s name. The murderous hunchback is insufficiently developed and insufficiently integrated with the other aspects of the story. The burn makeup Herbert Lom wears when he is unmasked (under circumstances that don�t make any sense, I might add) is both unimaginative and risibly bad� as in, very nearly Evil of Frankenstein bad� with the result that Lom�s is the only movie Phantom I�ve seen who is scarier with his mask on. (To be fair, that�s also partly because the mask itself is as brilliantly unsettling as the face beneath it is half-assed and silly.) The most frustrating thing about Hammer�s The Phantom of the Opera, though, is that Lord D�Arcy receives no meaningful comeuppance.

I�m not quite sure what would have been an appropriate fate for him under the terms of the story as presented here, but surely his conduct throughout calls for something a little stronger than to see Petrie�s true face, and then to run away screaming like a Mantan Moreland character. This Phantom of the Opera doesn�t deserve the virtual invisibility that has been its lot for most of my lifetime, but I can see why nobody�s been in any great hurry to rehabilitate its reputation.

Question: Who played the title role in the 1962 Hammer film version of The Phantom of the Opera ?
Answer: HERBERT LOM