“ THE PHANTOM OF THE OPERA.”

Star (Christchurch), Issue 17575, 27 June 1925, Page 20 (Supplement)

“ THE PHANTOM OF THE OPERA.”

EXCEPTIONAL FILM MASTERPIECE. Mystery and terror and romance go hand in hand to make “The Phantom of the Opera,” the Carl Laemmle 1925 super-special, a picture that will draw thousands, perhaps millions, to the box offices oi' the theatres in which it is shown (writes George C. Warren, the dramatic and motion picture critic of the “San Francisco Chronicle.”) It had its world premiere at the Curran Theatre last night, a first night that was attended with all the pomp and curiosity that goes to make these occasions memorable. ■ A romance by Gaston Leroux is the basis of the film, and Rupert Julian directed its making. So much for the record. Julian has accomplished something that had not before been done in pictures. He has put real mystery on the screen, the sort of mystery that makes the blood run cold and gives one a sensation of helpless terror. Something is going to happen, you are not exactly sure what, and in fear of its coming you cower and shiver and quake at the unknown horror which seems just around the corner. The production is massive, magnificent. with a sequence in colour, the Bal de l'Opera, wonderfully beautiful in its surging crowds and its gay costumes. The reproduction of the Paris Opera, exterior and interior, stage and vaults under the building, is wonderfully well done. There is vastness about the building and the great staircase and foyer are so beautiful there was applause for them whenever they came on the screen. As mystery and its attendant dread are the chief ingredients of “The Phantom of the Opera” it seems unfair to tell anything of the story other than to say there is a thread of lovely romance running through it. The love of a man of distinguished family for a little opera singer, understudy for the prima donna. At first the love is carnal, but the purity and sweetness of the girl convert the evil in the man's heart into an adoration of her womanhood and beauty that makes it almost a holy thing, this love. There are barriers mountain high between them, but they surmount

them all and ccme safely into the haven of happiness. This is only one thread in the pattern of the picture. The others are terror, jealousy, the life of people in a great opera company, the workings of a diseased brain. There is a scene in which the great chandelier in the opera house falls during a crowded performance and kills and maims hundreds; there is the wonderful ball scene; the mob that rushes through the streets and into the vaults under them, a torchlight mob; there are intimate glimpses of the ballet and scenes showing the performance of “Faust.” And there are shadows, sinister figures that one seds in silhouette; figures that strike the heart with dread. Several thousand people were used in making the picture and a fine cast of principals is seen in the leads. Lon Chaney is featured, he’ playing the Phantom of the title, but the character has little variety, although Chaney brings all of his art to make it a hideous thing, repulsive to sight, repulsive to the moral nature. The real star is Mary Philbin, whose work has a maturity and finish that show her to have already arrived. She is a great emotional actress. Pretty, too, without being beautiful. She is at her best in the first part of the picture, for in the second half there is too much repetition of the same situation for variety in acting. Norman Kerry does a good piece of work as the lover, and others who figure prominently are Arthur Edmund Care we, Gibson Gowland, Virginia Pearson, John Sainpolis and Snitz Edwards.