I speak of two movies: This film, and Dario Argento's "Opera". "Opera" has a 7.0 rating, But I have yet to see someone give it a good review. This film has a 4.5 rating, and everyone seems to be giving it rave reviews. Does the IMDb God favor certain movies over others?
sharei write to be clarified on the phantom of the opera, a movie i enjoyed seeing on screen late last year.unfortunately when this wave of the phantom came up again, i decided to purchase same only to discover that it has different plot and setting and castings too.i rate the phantom i saw last year which i have discovered was acted in 1989,far above the recent by joel schumacher.i want to be briefed more on it and if a preview could be sent to my email box i would most appreciate it.
shareOk...whatever. Now, can anyone answer my question?
shareI think "Opera" may have gotten a higher rating because of Dario Argento himself. He has a very loyal cult following (I'm one of 'em), and "Opera" is considered something of a flawed masterpiece (personally I think it's crap but it does have some lovely visuals).
On the other hand, I think people went to see this version of "Phantom," expecting something close to either the book or the stage production -- and were probably sorely disappointed (or puking into their popcorn). I have no idea how the IMDB gods do their tallying, but personally I prefer this film. It's flawed, yes, but Robert Englund does deliver a good peformance as the Phantom, the music is both beautiful and haunting, and it's an overall original interpretation of the old gothic love story ... even if Jill Schoelen as Christine sucked ass. Didn't buy her as the reluctant ingenue at all.
Yes, It would appear that Mr. Argento does have a cult following. And it would also appear that the IMDb gods aren't one of them.
Hehe...puking into their popcorn.
"To insult a man, we call him a bestial. For deliberate cruelty, human may be a greater insult."
[deleted]