Thoughts on “The Phantom of the Opera”

15th March 2012 By 5 Comments

Because this music is such an all-consuming joy for me to listen to, this blog post may well continue to be refined and updated for some time to come. Perhaps indefinitely. I hope you enjoy reading along with me as I explore this musical.

Three of my favourite pieces from The Phantom of the Opera (2004) film. Emmy Rossum sings the role of Christine Daae, and Gerard Butler sings the role of the Phantom/Erik.* Jennifer Ellison plays Meg Giry, the first voice we hear in “Angel of Music”.

Angel of Music

Angel of Music/The Mirror

I prefer the original London Cast’s Michael Crawford as the Phantom, but I do prefer Emmy Rossum as Christine in “Angel of Music” and“Wishing You Were Somehow Here Again”. At fifteen, her voice gives a sense of vulnerabilty that Sarah Brightman lacks. Brightman seems focused more on technique, less so on emotion, and the end result is a technically near-flawless performance that doesn’t explore much of the character’s feelings.

I do believe Crawford is better in some songs vocally than Gerard Butler (“The Mirror/Angel of Music”, “The Point of No Return”); the resonance and power of his voice is spellbinding, particularly when we hear him for the second time in the show, as he is calling to his protege:

“Insolent boy, this slave of fashion
Basking in your glory!
Ignorant fool, this brave young suitor
Sharing in my triumph!“

Then, in his next lines, the sheer intensity of his passion for Christine resonates, blows my mind and gives me goosebumps.

“Flattering child, you shall know me
See why in shadow I hide…
Look at your face in the mirror
I am there, inside…” 

Butler, however, I enjoy better visually in “The Point of No Return”, but at the same time I adore the stage PONR for Erik’s physical reactions to Christine during the song: his hands shaking when she entwines her fingers with his, as though he can barely keep a lid on the raw physical lust burning within him. Rossum I prefer for WYWSHA. It really is a mix of emotions for me between those 2 interpretations.**

I really enjoyed the 2004 movie “Final Lair” scene more than the OLC. Emmy Rossum conveys more emotion than perfect technique (she flubbed/wavered on a note during “Think of Me”), whilst Sarah Brightman is more technically exacting, but less emotive. Compared to Rossum, Brightman sounds like a robot. Michael Crawford is far superior to Gerry Butler in terms of vocal talent and presence.

The 2004 did make me cry right at the end when Christine returns the ring (so did the live show), but I really had gotten pulled into the story by then.

Comparison of Two Versions

Here are Crawford and Rossum spliced together, singing “The Point of No Return”. The only problem with this is that they were unable to completely get rid of Sarah Brightman’s voice and replace it with Emmy Rossum’s during the final duet, which is understandable given technological limitations. Other than that, a fine recording!

Butler’s Phantom is, at times, more visceral and sexier, but remember that Leroux’s Phantom is meant to be older, much older than Butler’s portrayal, and in that, the film erred mightily. The stage portrayal of “The Point of No Return” offers a much more understated impression of the emotions the Phantom and Christine are feeling: fear, revulsion, longing, lust, trepidation, fascination. You can see it in the way Christine touches the Phantom’s hands as she stands behind him, and he trembles. In the 2004 film, it seems to be about just a few simple, primitive things…

 

Unfulfilled lust and public groping of a minor!

And let’s not forget Butler’s very obvious erection, when Erik and Christine step up on to the catwalk onstage and Erik whips aside his cloak at 5:06.

Has Lloyd Webber forgotten that the Phantom’s voice is what he was all about, that physical attractiveness was never, ever necessary to draw Christine to him? His ugliness was the point of the story, for God’s sake!!!!! His voice is what drew her to him.

I haven’t studied vocal performance formally, but I’ve been playing the piano since I was five. Therefore, I have a modest knowledge of music. The one thing Andrew Lloyd Webber did correctly for this film was to insist that the actors except for Minnie Driver do their own singing. The rest, I have to complain about:

-the budget was way too small (not enough for two chandeliers, and we all know he has enough money to afford it!)

-he wrote a sequel, god help us, that I will not name. (Though, as of April 2012…I am becoming curious about the upcoming Australian DVD release).

* In the 2004 film, the title character is referred to only as “The Phantom”, never “Erik” (as he is in Leroux, Kay, and various other film versions: Lon Chaney, Sr., Charles Dance, Robert Englund, to name a few). The other film versions I’ve seen would be better served in their own blog post, which I may do at some point.

** I have seen the Las Vegas production twice now, and was greatly impressed by Anthony Crivello’s performance. However, there are aspects of the show that I didn’t like as much. That will likely be another installment in this series of posts, if I can remember what my thoughts were.

Phantom of the Opera Glossary

TOM: “Think of Me”

AOM: “Angel of Music”

WYWSHA: “Wishing You Were Somehow Here Again”

PONR: “The Point of No Return”

And now, for something completely…the same!

 

Filed Under: Play Tagged With: , , , , , , , ,

The Works of Vincent Bugliosi

6th February 2012 By Leave a Comment

Vincent Bugliosi is the American prosecutor who put Charles Manson, and three of his followers, behind bars for the murders of Sharon Tate, her houseguests, and Leno and Rosemary LaBianca on two broiling nights in August, 1969. The case was said to be so untenable that all the prosecution had was “two fingerprints and Vince Bugliosi”. In other words, diddly squat.

Eat your words, Mister District Attorney!

 

I have 4 of Mr Bugliosi’s books:


 

I really enjoy rereading them, because there is so much complex information that it’s difficult to retain all of it each reading. The detail of explanation is not difficult for a layperson to understand. Particularly, “Outrage” does feel, as Bugliosi intended, like an extended personal conversation with the reader, which makes it that much more enjoyable to read.

Does this qualify me as an obsessive fan?

I haven’t yet read And the Sea Will Tell – possibly because I am as yet unfamiliar with the case. But it’s sitting on our bookshelf.

I haven’t read his books about the assassination of John F. Kennedy, yet. I had to cease and desist reading Reclaiming History because of its physically gargantuan size. Its heaviness made it painful to hold for long periods.

However, his Four Days in November, a smaller volume that deals only with the four days around the assassination, is lighter in weight and might be more comfortable to hold.

I haven’t finished The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder yet, and I’ll have to start it over because it was a long time ago that I read it. Very sad, from what I remember. I’m a Canadian living in the UK, so my perspective of events is likely a little different from American readers. I have no love or loyalty for the former American president – indeed, he made a hash of his tenure. The book merely confirms and explains the reasons behind my suspicions. It is rather hard going because of my lack of extensive knowledge of American jurisprudence…

But that’s why Bugliosi is a great writer. He has that rare ability to make complex legal issues and matters readable, even enjoyable to learn about – for the lay reader. A good sense of humour generates the unexpected laugh while reading about very serious events. 

For example, in “Helter Skelter”, Bugliosi related the question an inept defense attorney asked one of the witnesses during the Manson trials:

Paul Fitzgerald: Have you, or any member of your family ever been the unfortunate victim of a homicide?

The judge interrupted this scintillating line of questioning to remark that, if the witness had, they probably would not be sitting on the witness stand.

Read and enjoy!

Filed Under: Play Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , ,

Book Review: “The Escape of Alexei, Son of Tsar Nicholas II: What Happened the Night the Romanov Family Was Executed”

1st January 2012 By Leave a Comment

This book was ghostwritten by someone hoping to make a name for himself, and he tells the story of one Vasily Filatov, who claimed to be Tsarevich Alexei Nikolaevich of Russia.

The Tsarevich Alexei died, along with the rest of his family and their servants, by firing squad in the basement of the Ipatiev House on the night of 16-17 July, 1918.

There’s only one word to describe this travesty of a book:

Ridiculous. 

…especially in the light of discovering the remains of the last two missing Romanov children – Tsarevich Alexei and one of his sisters in 2007.

Although this book was written before that discovery, the premise that a sickly haemophiliac thirteen-year-old boy could have survived being shot several times and then finished off by a shot directly into his ear (see Robert K. Massie’s “Nicholas and Alexandra” or his follow up “The Romanovs – The Last Chapter” for further, infinitely more accurate information*) could have survived the massacre of his family in the basement of the Ipatiev House defies credibility and common sense.

I hope that the authors feel significantly chastised, or at least regret being pulled into ghostwriting this nonsense. There have been many pretenders, over the years, claiming to be one or more of Nicholas’ children that “survived”, and now, at last, those stories can be put to rest. This book only adds fuel to the fire of the extremely bad taste of people who have wanted to capitalize on fame at the expense of historical accuracy.

Here is a picture of where the Romanovs’ bodies, along with that of their faithful servants and doctor, were thrown down into a mineshaft on the night of 16-17 July 1918. Five churches have now been built there in memory of them, all without the use of nails.

It’s pretty hard to claim you’re still alive when your bones are lying buried in a shallow grave.

Alexei Nikolaevich’s remains, and those of one of the missing daughter’s (I believe it was Grand Duchess Maria Nikolaevna), have been re-interred with the family’s at the Peter and Paul Cathedral in Saint Petersburg.

I’ve been there, and it’s a moving place to visit. All of the tsars and tsaritsas (empresses) are buried there, beneath the floor. Over each grave is a massive marble block that resembles a coffin. When I saw them, I assumed first that the bodies were actually inside those structures, but I was told that the bodies are under the floor.

Here is a photo I took of the tomb of Peter the Great.

He was seven feet tall. You did not mess with this tsar.

Something amused me greatly while I was there in 2003: I noticed that Tsar Peter III is buried next to his wife, Empress Catherine the Great.

They hated each other in life; she is rumored to have ordered his execution soon after she seized power from him. Now, alas, they are lying next to each other for all eternity. I wonder what they'd have to say about that?

Nearby is the tomb of Empress Elizabeth, aunt of Peter III, who doted on Catherine.

Nicholas and his family are interred in a separate room from the main hall; you can’t actually go in because it’s cordoned off, perhaps out of respect, or perhaps because the room is so small.

The plaques on the wall list the family members' names and perhaps also some religious dedication or blessing. The servants' names may also appear; I remember reading somewhere that it was decided that since they died together in the service of their sovereigns, it was deemed appropriate that their remains stay with them.

(*So far as I’m aware, when “The Romanovs: The Last Chapter” was written, Alexei Nikolaevich’s and Maria Nikolaevna’s remains had not yet been discovered, and at the end of “Nicholas and Alexandra”, Massie addressed the “Anastasia controversy” as well. Since all the remains have now been identified, we can now say for certain that none of the children ever survived. Anyone claiming to be the Grand Duchess Anastasia, or any of the Imperial children, was either delusional or a liar.)

Filed Under: Play Tagged With: , , , , , , ,

Be prepared!

12th November 2011 By Leave a Comment

The amazing Georganne of Banyan Tree Yarns is going to help me calculate gauge for my Seaspray shawl. (I really tried hard myself a few times yesterday, but my artsy-fartsy brain eventually held a gun to itself - Are you feeling lucky, punk? –  and threatened to pull the trigger unless I handed the job over to a professional.)

So I can’t work on that today until she gets back to me, and I’m still waiting for the skein of black Jiffy yarn I bought from her to arrive so I can finish my Shivanaut scarf.

Bet you thought I’d be sitting around the house, twiddling my thumbs, going into knitting angsty, yarn withdrawal, climbing the walls and pulling out my hair.

As our eighteen-month-old niece, Emily, would say, wagging her little finger, “No, no, no, no!”

I have pulled an older, sadly neglected project out of the closet:

It’s a pink scarf, knitted with a gigantic 400g ball of Sensatione yarn that my DH spotted on sale in an Iceland shop. The yarn is multicoloured, so as you knit, it naturally assumes an interesting variation of different shades of pink that go all over the place. That’s called a jacquard pattern.

(“Darling, look…YARN!!!!”)

Measurements

4mm needles, garter stitch (knit every row)

40 stitches per row

I’ll just keep going until I feel like stopping…

And I have decided, once it’s finished, that a portion of the profits of the sale on Etsy will go to either Macmillan or Cancer Research UK – because it’s a pink scarf and people are suckers for pink, cancer-related things.

Filed Under: Play Tagged With: , , , , , ,

Sex and Tolstoy

28th October 2011 By Leave a Comment

Sexual repression and excitation is a theme in Tolstoy. Bet you never guessed that before, eh?

Kiera Knightley is one of those actresses who has become known more for her looks, her breasts (or lack thereof), and her southern genitalia than her talent. I happen to respect her acting talent first. Having found out that she’ll be starring in a certain film next year, I managed to give my husband (who is not a Russophile) a decent summary of Anna Karenina without having read this book, but I have studied others of Tolstoy.

Anna Karenina

Boy (Vronsky) meets girl, (Anna Karenina), who is stuck in suffocating marriage. Girl falls in love. Boy is a devastatingly handsome count (ah yes, we all go weak in the knees for guys with titles, don’t we?), but utterly unworthy of her love, and totally self-absorbed. Girl refuses to acknowledge this, and instead pines away and eventually throws herself under a train, leaving her only son and stuffy husband alone. Vronsky goes off into sunset, oblivious and unremorseful at the pain he caused Anna, presumably to get more skirt.

Tolstoy’s Novellas

Olenin…I wrote an essay about “The Cossacks”. This protagonist is so self-absorbed it’s enough to make anyone want to just chuck it all, abandon living in society and go live alone. Which, incidentally, is exactly what Tolstoy did!

“Family Happiness” – it’s about a man and a woman, who are discussing their brood of five or six children. It seems a very ordinary story at first…until you realize that the point of the story is that the husband’s children aren’t really his. They are all children by different men, with whom his wife has been having affairs with over the years. She knows, of course. He doesn’t. He doesn’t have a clue.

“The Kreutzer Sonata” – This piece of music caused a man to kill his wife and her lover because he heard them playing it together in the next room. It aroused such a fiery passion, sexual jealousy and hatred in him that this was all he could do.

Here is what the Kreutzer Sonata sounds like. Listen as you read the story, and you might feel what the protagonist felt. Just keep all the sharp knives far away, OK?

“Father Sergius” – a celibate priest is unable to cope with the repressed sexual urges he feels. He goes bonkers, sleeps around with various women, and we go bonkers with him.

“The Death of Ivan Ilyich” – Reading this is like going along a roller coaster of black, depressing, massive illness. You think about everything your body is doing, everything that could possibly kill you. The last page is like the longest, steepest drop, and when you hit the bottom it pulls you faster and faster, and you can’t escape. There’s no way out. The last sentence is almost finished, and when you’ve reached the last word, you’re DEAD! Except you’re really still breathing. Or are you? I had to check a few times to make sure I still had a pulse after I was finished reading this story.

Given how Tolstoy ended up living the life of an ascetic, I have to wonder why sex pervades and impregnates so much of his work.

*feedback whine*

Paging Dr Freud to the communal farm…Dr Freud…

Filed Under: Play Tagged With: , , , , , ,

Video: The Last Knit

17th October 2011 By Leave a Comment

This is one of my favourite videos!

The Last Knit

Filed Under: Play Tagged With: , , , ,