|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Mon Jul 18, 2005 4:57 pm
OH! I found another one.
Phantoms Don't Drive Sports Cars from those Bailey School Kids series...thinga. o__o;; It looks weird...
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 18, 2005 5:16 pm
Polan OH! I found another one. Phantoms Don't Drive Sports Cars from those Bailey School Kids series...thinga. o__o;; It looks weird... The book isn't Phantom of the Opera related. *shrug* That's kinda what this topic is here for. Not every book that has the word "Phantom" in it. If we did that, we'd have a longer list.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 18, 2005 5:59 pm
Utakan Polan OH! I found another one. Phantoms Don't Drive Sports Cars from those Bailey School Kids series...thinga. o__o;; It looks weird... The book isn't Phantom of the Opera related. *shrug* That's kinda what this topic is here for. Not every book that has the word "Phantom" in it. If we did that, we'd have a longer list. XD Oh...well...it seemed kind of Phantom-related. It involves opera and everything, but ah well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 18, 2005 6:03 pm
I love Kay and the originals best because...i havent read the others. Even though i did read "Manhatten"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jul 19, 2005 9:20 pm
I've only read the orginal and Kay's book (took me forever to get a hold of...50$ on e-bay. I love my friends. BEST B-DAY PREASENT EVER!!!)
ok...back to my post. I really enjoyed Kay's book, even though she changed the ending slightly it was still good.
The orginal was kinda boring, dont get me wrong it was a great book...it needed more....I dont know, but I still liked it.
I look forward to reading the others. IT'S NOT AN OBESSION!! I HAVE A STRONG PASSIONS FOR POTO!! (Err, my mom and friends say I'm obsessed.)
Always looking for new friends to talk about POTO, so PM me. ^^
One more thing, I'm looking for an RPG based on Kay's book. If anyone is intersted PM me, I need a Christine, or other????
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 20, 2005 1:10 pm
Gaston Leroux all the way!!! I loved that book.
After I read it spent a very lengthy ammount of time critisizing the play.
How could he leave out the Persian? How?!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 20, 2005 1:47 pm
Jarlaxle Baenre Gaston Leroux all the way!!! I loved that book. After I read it spent a very lengthy ammount of time critisizing the play. How could he leave out the Persian? How?! My opinion would be that he wanted to variate his versions from the other two musicals. I know Ken Hill's Phantom of the Opera has the Persian in it. Not too sure if the Yeston/Kopit version does too. That and ALW was making it a dark romance. He might've thought switching the Persian's role with Mme. Giry would change the Phantom's character around for whatever purpose he was doing it for.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 21, 2005 8:33 am
I still believe that the Persian should've been there. He is a main character of sorts. Also it seems that ALW gave the Persian's part to MMe. Giry who seems to know everything about the Phantom. In the book she was just Erik's box keeper, nothing more.
Also not to spoil anything for anyone, the phantom doesn't really dissapear.
I noticed that ALW left out a few key parts. The torture chamber, the shadow and the rat hunter for example.
Also, has anyone figured out what the shadow really is?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 21, 2005 11:05 am
Jarlaxle Baenre I still believe that the Persian should've been there. He is a main character of sorts. Also it seems that ALW gave the Persian's part to MMe. Giry who seems to know everything about the Phantom. In the book she was just Erik's box keeper, nothing more. Also not to spoil anything for anyone, the phantom doesn't really dissapear. I noticed that ALW left out a few key parts. The torture chamber, the shadow and the rat hunter for example. Also, has anyone figured out what the shadow really is? Well, Mme. Giry knew quite a few things about Erik in the book. She just wasn't telling anything. And I think it's not a spoiler to just blurt out, "OMG ERIK DIES IN THE END" because whether or not someone has read the book, it's bound to be said somewhere else. ALW's an idiot sometimes. I like some of his work, but he left out a lot of things and screwed around with the characters so he could have his little Gothic Romance Rock Opera for his now ex-wife Sarah Brightman. I think if you want a better musical story-wise for Phantom, try Ken Hill's version or the Yeston/Kopit version. My opinion on the shadow was it was some sort of illusion. Don't ask me to thoroughly go into explination because I don't shoot cards out of my nasal cavity on a regular basis. Or at all. I can't even pop a quarter out of my ear.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 21, 2005 11:15 am
Right. I'll be sure to try and get myself to see those versions. Mme. Giry knew much less in the book than she does in the play. In the movie she met Erik as a kid which doesn't happen at all. Simply his box keeper.
I don't think that the shadow is an illusion though. The Persian says that it is far worse than Erik and that it reported and taken him to the directors and police. An illusion can't do any of those things and is most certainly not as dangerous as the phantom.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 21, 2005 11:58 am
Well ALW changed the character of Mme. Giry around to make the Persian obsolete so of course he had to fiddle with the history of the two a bit.
And while it may not be an illusion, the Persian himself did not know everything about Erik. Despite he knew him back in Persia when Erik was working for the sultana, that doesn't give him grounds to know everything.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jul 24, 2005 7:51 pm
The Original. Just because it was the one that started it all. And, it was really well written. And...it's the only one I've read. sweatdrop
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jul 24, 2005 8:02 pm
I liked the original novel the best. And while we're on the topic of the shadow, what's up with the rat-catcher? That was weird, and never explained either. And I don't know if anybody else caught this, but it never says that Erik brought down the chandelier. Just that everyone thought he did it.
I got pissed off at ALW for making Erik all self-centered and a bit too whiny. He's not...Erik-y enough I guess. I do like the movie for what it is though: a decent musical that is to be enjoyed mostly for the music and the imagery and what shreds of the original novel were put in. But it will never be the Phantom of the Opera for me, just always ALW's version.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jul 24, 2005 8:19 pm
There are a lot of things Leroux added in the story that don't add up. I think it just adds to the mystery of the tale.
And of course it's a bit obvious Erik did it even though he didn't admit to it. The chains holding it up had been sawed through and it had killed the woman who was to replace Mme. Giry as Box 5's keeper. Erik was the only one who had reason enough to do it and the evidence leans toward him.
I agree that ALW made Erik a bit "woe is me! no woman wants me!" but Erik is a bit that way in the book. The man begs Christine for her love, for heaven sake. He sobs. So while ALW made it more frequent and evident, the characters are about the same. What I'm peeved at the most is he left Erik simply "The Phantom" which turns his character two-dimensional. Then again, a lot of details ALW switched around or changed bother me. It happens, though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 25, 2005 8:05 pm
Well, Erik is desperate in the book. He's, as he says, like a dog wanting to please his master. But in the movie, it's emphasized more, made more dramatic, so he doesn't come off as a man who's life was in ruins, through no fault of his own, but some needy, overgrown child. And that is not aided at all by the fact that his deformity is so minor that I barely saw it through most of the lair scenes, save for the missing patch of hair. In the movie he seems more like a toddler who didn't get his favorite toy, and now is having a tantrum to get it rather than a man who was shunned by people for all his life and now is absolutely desperate for some human companionship.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
