Look no further than images and plot points turning up in the famed Webber musical. Sure, the make-up, unmasking and Red Death sequence solidify its place in film history but Rains velvety voice, acid burned deformity, half-mask, fedora and silhouette have been just as ingrained into the Phantom's legacy. People say the Chaney film is also more iconic. Yes the Chaney version features that brilliant make-up and is still the definitive adaptation of the tale, but which version is the better film? The 1925 version feels slowly paced, and the 1929 version has as many strengths and weaknesses as the Rains version. In fact, I'd argue that the origin aside, it's closer to the premise of the novel than the Whale Frankenstein, but I digress. But neither is Frankenstein Shelley, or Dracula Stoker. Now as a Phantom adaptation, it isn't Leroux. Even as a 1940's Technicolor epic, I would rank it favorably above the dismal Climax, and the Maria Montez adventures. But let's face it, it's probably just behind The Wolf Man and Meet Frankenstein when ranked with the studio's 1940's output. As fun as most of those B-movies are, they aren't exactly quality filmmaking, and you can certainly tell Universal put the time and care in crafting a decent film with Phantom. Is it a true masterpiece of horror that stands on equal footing with the best 1930's classics? Perhaps not. The lines he rattles off to Christine during the abduction make it one of the creepiest moments for me in any Universal film. Claude Rains presents Erique as a sympathetic and well-rounded figure, even though his mental health is clearly deteriorated by the final act. If this is true, what about The Mummy's Hand which is more of an adventure comedy, and all of the 40's monster sequels which were clearly aimed at younger audiences? I doubt they were considered hard edged horrors, even in their day. Sure, I used to have a problem with the overly long opera sequences, but they never diminished the dramatic or horrific aspects for me. One of the biggest criticisms is the lack of actual horror. I never would have read the book, or even seen the Chaney film had it not been for discovering this version on VHS as a young lad. Why does this film not receive as much love as the other films in the Universal canon? It was my first exposure to the story and made me a lifelong fan. With reviews of the Universal Monsters BD set hitting the web, once again I find the 1943 version of Phantom of the Opera the most bullied of the lot.

The phantom of the opera 1943