Lloyd Webber's 'Phantom' horrifies the US film critics
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.It has taken Andrew Lloyd Webber 16 years to bring his stage musical hit Phantom Of The Opera to the screen, but according to American critics, he need not have bothered.
It has taken Andrew Lloyd Webber 16 years to bring his stage musical hit Phantom Of The Opera to the screen, but according to American critics, he need not have bothered.
The £50m extravaganza, financed mainly by Lloyd Webber, stars the Scottish actor Gerard Butler in the title role and has attracted indifferent to scathing reviews. The New York Post headlined its review "Crashing Chandelier, Crashing Bore" and its critic thought the film "campy, overdecorated, deracinated and interminable". Its "dirgelike anthems are repeated endlessly until they drill into your skull like a root canal," he added.
Butler, described as "an obscure Scottish actor best known for the second Lara Croft bomb" is "not much of a singer or an actor" while Minnie Driver as the diva Carlotta is "annoying". The reviewer considered the film's only redeeming feature to be the opera-trained actress Emmy Rossum.
The Los Angeles Times said Phantom had been "filmed, cast and art-directed to the point of collapse" and tended "to drift into a semi-conscious fog ... as through purposefully trying to lose us in all the murkiness and rococo design".
Daily Variety, the trade newspaper of the film industry, was more circumspect, confining itself to the critical comment: "Unlike Chicago, the film lacks the stars and Broadway pizzazz needed to attract a significant new audience."
Subscribe to Independent Premium to bookmark this article
Want to bookmark your favourite articles and stories to read or reference later? Start your Independent Premium subscription today.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments