User Score
8.3

Universal acclaim- based on 412 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 43 out of 412

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Zal
    Jan 11, 2012
    3
    It's certainly an improvement for Joel Schumacher since Batman and Robin, but I still did not enjoy this film.
    With the exception of Erik, all of these characters are completely bland. This is not the fault of Schumacher or any of the actors. None of these characters, especially Raoul and Christine, were very interesting to begin with. And even Erik in this film isn't that deep, especially
    It's certainly an improvement for Joel Schumacher since Batman and Robin, but I still did not enjoy this film.
    With the exception of Erik, all of these characters are completely bland. This is not the fault of Schumacher or any of the actors. None of these characters, especially Raoul and Christine, were very interesting to begin with. And even Erik in this film isn't that deep, especially when you see that his "deformity" is really just a big rash. It doesn't look that bad and it makes his song about his face seem, well, somewhat pretentious, which is a word that I feel sad using to describe one of my favorite literary anti-heroes.
    The acting isn't that great either. The only one who I thought did a decent job was Patrick Wilson as Raoul. Then there is poor Miranda Richardson doing an incredibly over the top French accent that was hard not to laugh at. This is sad because I genuinly love Miranda Richardson and think she is a fantastic actress, but her acting in this movie was terrible. I don't even understand why she has that accent since everyone else is phoning it in and just doing a British accent, with the exception of Carlotta (since she is Italian) and Raoul and Christine, who for some reason speak with American accents.
    The costumes and sets are creative and well made and some of the singing isn't bad, but it just wasn't a pleasant experience for me.
    Expand
  2. Jun 26, 2011
    0
    I wanted to just describe this movie in one word (terrible) but unfortunately I have to use 150 characters. Gerard Butler was terrible, the all acting was terrible, the story was terrible, everything was terrible, there was not a single good thing in this movie.
  3. Oct 14, 2010
    2
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. i didn't pay a cent for watching this movie, thanks heaven... for those who said "oh, i luv the phantom, oh i luv the costumes blah blah blah..." let me tell you, this movie sucks in a very very disgusting way... the plot is full of holes... they totally changed it from the original story! there is no sense of consistency between scenes! the actors, oh my **** god, they suck!! i mean, epic suck.
    someone said "Wow!The Movie was great. I love the Phantom. I dont like Raoul.Christine & Phantom 4ever! " ... well, that kind of thought means you are a complete brainless idiot... avoid making a fool out of yourselves with that kind of comments. sayonara.
    Expand
Metascore
40

Mixed or average reviews - based on 39 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 10 out of 39
  2. Negative: 15 out of 39
  1. Reviewed by: Jo Berry
    60
    The end result, although entertaining and well-crafted, certainly isn't on the same breathtaking scale of, say, Alan Parker's epic "Evita."
  2. What the film most damagingly lacks though is a sense of mystery and danger.
  3. 40
    Watching the passionless Phantom, with its geriatric story-framing device, gooey dimestore romanticism and tawdry pop ballads about unrequited yearning, feels akin to dying and waking up in your parents’ easy-listening-radio hell.