I don’t have much to add to this conversation, unfortunately (but I look forward to reading it, because this sounds like a fascinating topic!), but I heard Phantom of the Opera and got excited because I recently read the book, after growing up on the movie (is it a weird movie to “grow up on”? Maybe. But I also grew up on the Peter Jackson LOTR movies, so…), and I automatically compared and contrasted them. This:
In the words of a friend of mine, “The Phantom in the movie sounds really pretty after reading the book.” And it’s true… (go look up the Phantom from the movie [Gerrard Butler] and then find a picture of Erik [more of the fan art that’s out there. He probably won’t be wearing a mask in these pics])
is soooooo accurate. And in my opinion, it makes the book a much stronger story. Everything about the Phantom is uglier in the book, from his face to his backstory to his mental health (or lack thereof), and it makes the story meaningful because it does introduce that horror aspect. It makes the story more important and more emotional. (Granted, it’s been a while since I last watched the movie, but from what I recall…) The movie lessened the plot to more of a simple love triangle. Erik was abusive and possessive, which is absolutely a bad thing and shouldn’t be ignored, but he doesn’t have nearly the same level of madness or cruelty as in the book. In the movie we feel pity for Erik because he’s been abused and that’s led to who he is, while in the book we feel much more revulsion than pity because he’s just kind of messed up and he mainly brought this on himself. And I think the details of the book were much more thought-provoking, in general.
I don’t know if anything in there is especially helpful to the conversation at hand… I may have just rambled for a long paragraph about nothing… But anyway, thanks for bringing up the topic! I look forward to hearing everyone’s thoughts. 🙂
Fantasy/dystopian/sci-fi author. Mythology nerd. ENFP. Singer.