Phantom of the Opera discussion
All Things Phantom!!
>
The Phantom or Raoul?
message 1:
by
Paula
(new)
Jan 20, 2009 06:14PM

reply
|
flag
*


Even though in the musical, ALW writes good music for Raoul (and he comes off as better and more interesting than in most films) he still pales in comparison to Phantom. I feel like even in the musical he's in love with this distant fantasy ideal he has of Christine that he remembers from childhood and does not really see her as she is. (i.e. in the musical "Little Lotte" and "Notes (Version 2)"

Erik shows a quality of good things. He is mysterious, sexuality, and some charm. He steals my heart any day. Unforantely, Raoul is way too simple, predictable. Phantom all the way

PHANTOM !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! NOTHING DIFFERENT



EDIT:
I've been thinking about this, and I think I've changed my mind. I really like Raoul too. He's very caring, and sometimes I really wonder if the Phantom truly loves her. He is such a maniac, so I don't know. I guess that if I were Christine I'd choose Raoul without a doubt.

For me, travesty #1 was the movie which I admit I haven't seen, and HUGE travesty #2 is the sequel set in Coney Island which ALW hopes to open in about 4 locations worldwide. POTO does not need a sequel.

Also, have any of you read Susan Kaye's novedl Phantom> If you're and Erik fan, I recommend it 110%.

And yes, Susan Kay's novel is amazing!


Erik was also seriously mentally unbalanced -- likely bipolar, maybe schizophrenia or a host of other issues.


And I don't see how having a mental affliction can ruin the romance.







Either way...just ick.

i loooooooooooooooove the phantom even tho i was 8 when i saw it :p

http://www.broadwayworld.com/article/...
Maybe these links will answer some of your questions

Yes, i agree. It's too bad really, that he seems unable to break out of this rut he's been in since the 1990s. He writes some wonderful music, but he just seems unable to choose a really good project since then. Frankly, this seems to be true of Boublil and Schoenberg also.
OMG! i drew anime versions of some of the POTO charries(christine, erik, sorelli, carlotta, raoul), and my mom saw that i labled raoul as the ultimate idiot of shame(cuz i cant stand him)... i told her why i did that, and it turns out that shes on raouls side... grrrr...
cloris wrote: "i loooooooooooooooove the phantom even tho i was 8 when i saw it :p"
omg! i was 8 or 9!(i cant remember which) when i saw it the 1st time!!!
omg! i was 8 or 9!(i cant remember which) when i saw it the 1st time!!!

I agree about Erik, at least ALW's version. I would go with him in a minute. I think the first two he killed in the movie were justified, the carnival man was keeping him prisoner and whipping him too, and Buquet was a creep, voyeur and a possible rapist. In my book, I had Piangi only have a heart attack and live because that was the only one I could not justify, and wish ALW had not had Erik kill him in the end. We never will be sure anyway. All we have is Carlotta crying and saying "Piangi, my love." he could have been unconcious. Anyway, I like to think that Erik was a better man and could become a great man when he found someone to love him.

Now, the other factor is that Leroux is making a commentary about Parisian society with this book. Erik is *not* a nice man. He is a murderous sociopath. He does not understand human emotion, for a wide variety of reasons that are exposed to all of us in the story. Raoul, OTOH, is the Prince charming of the whole damned thing. He's handsome, IMO not too bright -- but he's The Right Answer according to the mores of the time.
I think that the reason so many people say "I would take Erik" is that we are dealing with a Jungian archetype: the Wounded Healer. We look at Erik's situation and relate to things that have been done to us. We think to ourselves, "I would do better by you than was done by me," and by that process we heal our wounds and Erik's simultaneously as we relate to his story and his anger.
I also think that Christine (who has an Electra complex as big as the great outdoors -- the girl just ain't right) plays both of them for saps.

Jeannie, as an avid lover of Erik, the Phantom, I cannot see why those who like Raoul need to be apologetic. Raoul had a lot of good points, and I still feel he was a better match for Christine, who I feel was too immature to really cope with Erik's problems. That is why I created a new love, a more mature woman for Erik in my book, "The Phantom's redemption." I have come to the conclusion that those who are Erik/Christine shippers, seem to have more disdain for Raoul. Not me, however.

Raoul did indeed have his merits. He truly cared about Christine and did all he could to protect her from Erik. As Leroux wrote both of them, though, it's hard to choose between them. The cons outweigh the pros of both personalities. For my part, I have no disdain for either one of them, I just prefer Erik's good points to Raoul's.

Oh, it's so lovely to come into a discussion like this only to find people already defending Raoul before I get here!
I am a staunch Raoul defender because in this day and age, good guys are so underrated. Raoul is a fine young man with so many excellent qualities that so few people seem to notice. I personally think Christine made the right choice going with Raoul and, most importantly, Erik knows that, too.
Now, is Erik more interesting? Certainly. I find him exceptionally fascinating in the same way I'm fascinated with Hannibal Lecter and Ted Bundy (just not nearly as dangerous, of course). But had I been Christine's guardian in the novel, I would have raised Hell to keep her safe from Erik. Inside, Erik's a sweet guy, but he needs years of therapy and cognitive restructuring before I'd give him a serious shot. Doesn't mean we can't be friends, though!

Phantom was fascinating and wonderful. Mysterious. And he did care for Christine, maybe even as much as Raoul. His love for her was just a more intense, frightening love. I like Erik best. Always have. Raoul annoys me, but I can understand Christine's decision.