The Phantom of the Opera: Book vs. Musical vs. Movie


So….*here we all pause awkwardly* I completely forgot that it was Wednesday and that I needed to write a blog post. And then it was Thursday and I still hadn’t written a post…hey, I have no idea what you’re talking about, I’m not procrastinating or anything.

If you weren’t around last week, I’m currently doing a series every Wednesday (*cough* or Thursday) centred around popular books and their musical and movie adaptions, comparing them and then throwing in my opinion on which is best, and asking you for your opinions at the end! Last week, we looked at Les Miserables  and this week we’ll be looking at (you guessed it)…

The Phantom of the Opera!

Like Les Mis, Phantom has three major incarnations–Gaston Leroux’s book Le Fantome de l’opera, Andrew Lloyd Webber’s astoundingly popular musical, and Joel Schumacher’s movie version of the aforementioned musical.

Across all three, the plot remains essentially the same. A wealthy, deformed genius lurks in the labyrinth beneath the Paris Opera House and falls in love with a beautiful young (somewhat naïve) ballet girl. Throw in some murder, a bunch of noblemen (or just one, depending on the adaption), a spoilt diva and a chandelier and you have a love triangle which accumulates in chaos and torture.

So, same as we did last week, I’ll highlight three differences between the book, the musical and the movie adaption of the musical. Ready? Okay, let’s go.

1.         Raoul, the Vicomte de Chagny (and the Comte de Chagny too)

Le Book:

Raoul, otherwise known as the Vicomte de Chagny, was Christine’s childhood friend. They used to sit together and listen to Monsieur Daae, Christine’s father, play the fiddle, or tell them stories of the Angel of Music. Raoul is the youngest child, and was raised mostly by his elder sisters and his brother, Phillipe, the Comte de Chagny, since both of his parents were dead. Upon noticing Christine, years later, in an opera he and his brother were visiting, he falls head over heels in love with her. He does a bunch of other things, like following Christine to her father’s grave and having skulls avalanched at him by Christine’s mysterious tutor, and then later “playing at” engagement with her (what even?). He eventually is saved from burning to death, and then drowning, by Christine’s love. All this he manages to do with an impressive amount of ignoring his brother’s good sense, and by whining and just generally acting like a lovestruck fool.

Le Musical: 

People may criticise Webber’s Raoul and he may be the victim of much hate, but he is infinitely cooler than his bookish ancestor and I like him a lot. Musical Raoul is given more of a backbone, spends less time whining, and possesses a good deal more courage and common sense. He still has his faults, but he is, on the whole, a good person, who truly loves and cares about Christine and does his absolute best to protect her. In this version, he ends up almost being hanged by the Phantom, rather than burned in the maze of mirrors, or drowned. Comte de Chagny is left completely out of this adaption, though I didn’t even know he existed until reading the book, so I’ve never missed him much. Raoul has no solo in the musical (a huge letdown, Mr Webber), but he and Christine share my favourite romantic duet of all time–All I Ask of You. (He’s also less creepy and manages to avoid having skulls thrown at him).

Le Movie: 




What happened here? By the time the 2004 movie came along, Raoul seemed to have devolved into…a long haired, rather limpid, pathetic, whining…well, you get the picture. I have no fond feelings for Patrick Wilson’s Raoul. I mean…he just fails at being a hero, I’m sorry. Also, in this version, he speaks a lot of his lines, which are meant to be sung, and it just sounds really stilted and wooden.

However, the movie does include a scene (right after the “Masquerade” sequence), where Raoul falls into one of the Phantom’s mirror mazes, which was a nice little nod to the book.

Which Do I Like the Most?

This isn’t really a question of which I like the most, but which I like at all. The winner here is definitely musical Raoul. He’s sweet, compassionate, fiery (perhaps too much so sometimes), strong and he loves Christine dearly. He’s literally willing to lay down his life for her. Book Raoul was annoying, extremely annoying, and movie Raoul was wooden, weak and lacking in character. So musical Raoul wins by a mile.

2.         The Phantom/Opera Ghost

Le Book:

The Opera Ghost (despite the book being called The Phantom of the Opera, the Opera Ghost is never referred to by the title of The Phantom) is a wealthy gentleman living beneath the Paris Opera house. He has had a long and distinguished career in all sorts of pursuits and he is a master of ventriloquism, architecture and music. He wears a black mask that covers a skull-like face (described frequently as a “death’s-head”) and Christine notes that he smells of death.

Despite all this (and despite his frequent murders), he is very polite, especially when threatening the Opera House’s new managers. He tells Christine that his name is Erik, but that he came upon that name by accident. He has no last name. He “once built for the Shah of Persia, a maze of mirrors”, and then the Shah attempted to kill him. Erik’s life was saved by a Persian policeman. He later came to Paris, got a contract to help with the building of the Opera House, and made himself a secret lair in the basements.

He forces Christine to choose between marrying him and blowing up the Opera House with a whole lot of gunpowder. He tries to murder Raoul in the torture chamber, and drowns Raoul’s brother in the lake. Last but not least, he sleeps in a coffin and has eyes that glow like the eyes of a cat(and if that’s not creepy, I don’t know what is).

Oh, and he dies of a broken heart at the end.


Le Musical:

Webber’s Phantom is simpler than Leroux’s. While Leroux styles his Opera Ghost as an all round genius, The Phantom is merely a musical genius (though reference is made to his maze of mirrors and other accomplishments). Like Leroux’s Ghost, he convinces Christine that he is her father’s “Angel of Music” and helps Christine in her rise to stardom.

He’s rather less violent and creepy than his book counterpart (no mention being made of cat’s eyes or coffins), and he straddles the line between villain and anti-hero, making him more sympathetic and likable.

He writes an opera, “Don Juan Triumphant”, which he orders the opera house to perform, casting Christine in the lead. On the opening night, he murders the male lead, takes his place, sings a duet with Christine, who–upon realising who she is singing with–unmasks him. He kidnaps her, takes her to his lair and then traps Raoul, when Raoul follows them. Eventually, Christine shows him compassion, kissing him for the first time in his life, and he releases both her and Raoul, allowing them to leave and live a happy life together.

What happens to The Phantom at the end is not necessarily known. He simply vanishes. However, Andrew Lloyd Webber actually wrote a sequel to his musical, called “Love Never Dies”, which is generally hated, and which the fandom (for the most part) refuses to acknowledge.

Le Movie:

Again, something was lost in translation with this movie. Somehow, The Phantom ended up super handsome and suave, and his deformity is more like a little burn to the side of the face. This makes him come across as much more petty. He also behaves in a generally more…well, seductive sort of way, which doesn’t seem to reflect either Leroux’s Ghost or Webber’s Phantom.

Which Do I Like the Most?

I like the book and the musical Phantoms for different reasons. More of a backstory is provided for Erik, as well as a name, and he’s presented more as a illogical madman than merely vengeful. The musical Phantom is more sympathetic, and forces the audience to care about him and feel sorry for him. He has no name (which I think adds to his mystery) and very little backstory is provided.

So I like them both, but differently. I’m not a fan of the movie Phantom whatsoever.

Such drama source

3.         The Persian (or lack thereof) and the Ending

Le Book:

Leroux includes an interesting character in his novel, who is integral to the ending of the book. He is a character who is just as mysterious as the Phantom, he has no name and is known to everyone simply as The Persian. He is the Persian police captain who spared Erik’s life, and he knows more of Erik’s tricks and talents than anyone else in Paris. In the book, he also aids Raoul in finding Christine after she is kidnapped and keeps Raoul alive in the maze of mirrors, focussing on finding the way out while Raoul rambles on like a madman.

He manages to become my favourite book character, and appears as the only character with some semblance of sense.

The end of the book involves a scene that has become fairly famous, in which Erik forces Christine to choose between turning two keys–one called the “Scorpion” and the other the “Grasshopper”. One will blow up the opera house, and the other will release a flood of water which will drown the barrels of gunpowder. During this scene, Raoul and the Persian watch helplessly from the torture chamber while Christine correctly chooses the Scorpion key, which, as promised, drowns the gunpowder, but continues to rise, threatening to drown Raoul and his guide as well.

Christine’s pleas eventually cause Erik to let all three of them go. Some time afterwards, Erik visits the Persian and admits to him that he is dying of love, and requesting that, after his death, the Persian will place an advertisement in the newspaper, announcing his death. The Persian promises to do this. The last few chapters are all told from the first person point of view of the Persian.




Le Musical/movie:

The character of the Persian is omitted completely from the musical and movie, which I think is a shame, since the Persian could have had some interesting songs and scenes, and his role is instead given to Madame Giry (who played only a small role in the book). He serves as a sort of…opposite, I guess, to Erik, and as Erik’s only moral compass.

The ending, whilst having the same outcome as the book, is different and involves no gunpowder, no scorpions and no grasshoppers, or torture chambers. Madame Giry guides Raoul to the Phantom’s lair, after he kidnaps Christine, but does not enter with him. Upon being found by the Phantom, Raoul is caught and half strangled (the movie also includes a scene where Raoul falls into a water trap, a nod to the tortures Erik devised for him in the book), before finally being released after Christine kisses the Phantom, thereby showing him the first compassion he’s ever experienced.

After this, the Phantom escapes the angry mob coming after him, leaves behind his cape and mask and vanishes. As I said earlier, the sequel informs us that he did not, in fact, die, but ran away to America.

Which Do I Like the Most?

Both are interesting. I don’t like “Love Never Dies”, so the ending to the musical is kind of annoying, but it leaves a lot more mystery in the character of the Phantom. I also prefer the more personal ending of the musical, since it involves only the three of them, and is based more on Christine’s actions and compassion, than on her ability to guess correctly. Her compassion is also emphasised more in the musical, whereas it is only mentioned in the book (since that portion of the book is told through the eyes of the Persian, who is unconscious at the time). However, I also liked the character of the Persian a lot, and if anyone wants to write a retelling of The Phantom of the Opera in his eyes, than I’d absolutely love to read it.


Okay, so what’s my conclusion? Overall, the book had a more horror slant to it than the musical does (though it would hardly be considered horror compared to today’s standards), and it’s weird and creepy at times (there are a lot more instances than I mentioned previously). But it’s interesting, and it held my attention very well. It also had cool characters like the Persian in it, an actual name for the mysterious Phantom, and a lot of backstory for him too.


Phantom of the Opera
I know that I use this pic a lot, but I really like the way it turned out, and it’s the Phantom of the Opera (rooftop scene, if you’re wondering), so….


I grew up on the musical though, and so it also holds a lot of nostalgia for me. I feel that Webber did a really good job of taking the elements of the original book and then improving on them. I much prefer the characterisations of Christine (I didn’t touch on her here, but there were a few differences there too), Raoul and the Phantom, as well as a few secondary characters. I also like the music and the songs add another level of depth to the story.

The movie is, in my humble opinion, bad (with the exception of Emmy Rossum’s singing, which I really liked). And it’s easily my least favourite of the three.

So, I come to a conclusion! My favourite will probably always be Andrew Lloyd Webber’s musical, and then Gaston Leroux’s original book. Last of all (way last of all) comes the 2004 movie.

What do you think? Do you agree or disagree? Have you read the novel? What do you think of the movie version? What about Love Never Dies?

20 thoughts on “The Phantom of the Opera: Book vs. Musical vs. Movie

  1. I saw the musical in New York last spring and it was absolutely incredible. I haven’t seen the movie- friends told me enough about it, and I have no desire to watch it. Andrew Lloyd Webber is absolutely amazing with the music.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. I’ve only actually watched the musical version, but it was pretty good. Although sometimes I got…bored. XD Because they sung. all. the. time. 😛

    Liked by 1 person

  3. The original musical is definitely my favorite version by far. The book definitely has things that I appreciate–like the Persian, for example–but it just didn’t have the same fantastical feel that the musical does. The 2004 movie version of the show has got to be one of my least favorite movie adaptions of any musical ever but that’s kind of beside the point… I agree with what you said about Raoul and the Phantom in the movie. While I like Patrick Wilson’s voice–he’s probably the only singer I really liked from the movie–I just didn’t really feel emotionally connected to him. Gerard Butler’s Phantom is just… not for me. To put it shortly. I will forever think it’s a pity that the Persian doesn’t appear in the musical… I think that it would be interesting to see him make an appearance! Also, I’m glad that I’m not the only one who thinks Raoul needs a solo! Maybe in a revival they’ll give him one? It’d be interesting but I’m not sure that it would wind up being great. Great analysis! I really enjoyed it!!

    Liked by 1 person

  4. I completely agree with you about the movie! What happened to Raoul? And the Phantom??? Everything you said about the terrible way the movie depicted them was SPOT ON. I don’t like the movie at all, if you can’t already tell.
    I have not read the book, but my sister read it and told me about Raoul’s whiny personality. It didn’t sound inspiring. I am interested in the character of the Persian though! Maybe someday I will read the book.
    Unfortunately I have seen Love Never Dies. I hated it. Some of the music is really good, but the story does not fit with the original AT ALL. The characters aren’t consistent. They are completely different people. I decided it is some fantasy/dream that the Phantom made up. That is the only way for it to make sense. And then he gets scared of how happy it’s turning out and randomly kills Christine. Yep.
    Great post!

    Liked by 1 person

  5. I’m so envious! I’ve never had a chance to see it live, but I’d really love to one day!
    Yeah, I wouldn’t recommend the movie at all! Some parts of it were good, I really liked the settings, the costumes and a lot of the scenes, but I think all the characters were misrepresented and…yeah…I didn’t like it much. I KNOW the music is one of the best bits!

    Liked by 1 person

  6. Yes, it’s pretty cool! I think the musical will always be my favourite, since I listened to it first and it’s made a big impact on my storytelling and writing! Thanks for commenting!


  7. I know, it was terrible!! Poor Raoul, between the movie and the book, it’s no wonder no one likes him! And was up with the Phantom??? I don’t even know what they were trying to do with him.
    Raoul seriously had issues in the books. Everything about him was SO melodramatic! I would recommend the book, even though it is really weird, just because I liked the Persian!
    I enjoy a lot of the songs and music, but I agree. It completely went back on everything in Phantom, changed the characters and….yeah…it’s worse than the movie.
    On top of everything, the Phantom is now delusional! 😀

    Liked by 1 person

  8. Yeah I agree, the book felt more like a Sherlock Holmes mystery novel than a sort of semi-supernatural romance. I thought that was one of its weirdest aspects, but Leroux was, ultimately, a detective novelist, so I guess it makes sense.
    I didn’t even like Patrick Wilson’s voice, to be honest, I thought it was quite weak, especially when compared to Steve Barton or Hadley Fraser (my two favourite Raouls!). And yeah, it was almost like the director didn’t WANT you to like Raoul, so they emotionally distance you from him.
    I know! I want a Phantom remake where the Persian appears! I think the solo being great or not would rely mostly on the performer and on the songwriter, either it would make people love him, or it would make even his fans hate him.
    Thanks for commenting!


  9. I saw Phantom of the Opera at the Peace Center, which is in Greenville. The year was 2014 and I was spellbound by the production and was choked up watching it.

    I did fall in love with Phantom of the Opera in 2013 after hearing the songs on Pandora.

    Liked by 1 person

  10. Yeah, if I’m remembering correctly, I think that I read that Gaston Leroux was inspired by Sherlock Holmes in writing Phantom. That really intrigued me and I can definitely see the similarities there!
    I agree, Patrick’s voice is pretty watered down compared to Steve Barton and Hadley Fraser. I don’t remember liking his voice all that much the first time I watched the movie version but it’s kind of grown on me in all of the times that I’ve watched it since my sister prefers the movie to the 25th anniversary (something I will personally never understand)!
    You’re absolutely right about the solo. It could have the potential of making people really love him or hate him. And after the treatment he got in Love Never Dies, I’m not sure that a solo made for Raoul would be all that complementary… but that’s just my own supposition!

    Liked by 1 person

  11. This is a fantastic post! I am acquainted with all three versions of the story and you basically just spoke my thoughts on the matter. The musical is my favorite- and most certainly my favorite version of Raoul. Every other Raoul is just… Oh dear. Raoul in the book just felt like a little kid who was always getting his feelings hurt. I spent most of the book alternately laughing at him and groaning. (Also it was weird at the end how his brother died and no one seemed to notice??) And movie Raoul… just no.

    Liked by 1 person

  12. You should eventually. What made me want to see the musical live is the beautiful score. I first heard the score early 2013 and after listening to some of the songs, I knew I wanted to see it. For that Christmas, Santa put Phantom of the Opera stocking in me and my mom’s stocking.

    Mom said I was automatically spellbound once it began. The first time I even moved was when the chandelier fell. I remember during the overture never taking my eyes off the chandelier.

    Liked by 1 person

  13. Aw thank you! I feel the musical is, overall a better story than the book and movie, though there are a few instances where things are explained better in the book.
    Yeeesss. He was so annoying! Yeah, little kid is exactly right, he didn’t seem capable of coping with anything.
    I know? It was weird? Even Raoul who’d been raised by him and cared for didn’t seem to know or really care. It was definitely one of the books stranger points.
    Thanks for commenting!

    Liked by 1 person

  14. Yeah it said something along those lines in the foreword, I think, but you can definitely see it in the style of the writing and the way he includes “memoirs” and “eyewitness accounts”.
    What??? How could they??? It actually took me quite a while to like the 25th, I had to adjust to the different voices, but I really enjoy it now (though Ramin Karimloo’s voice still doesn’t seem quite right, I don’t hate it like I used to).
    Yeah I unfortunately think you’re right. And I honestly don’t think most people would be interested in a solo for Raoul, sadly. 😦


  15. I would love to! The score is sooo nice. Out of all the musicals I’ve listened to Phantom probably has the prettiest, and most inspiring I think, I love listening to the instrumental versions of it too.
    The chandelier is so cool, I can tell just from the music! (and one of the good things about the movie is the amazing chandelier sequences!)


  16. Great post! Has anyone here read the book “Phantom” by Susan Kay? She’s a well-known novelist, and she, like many of us, felt like she wanted to know more of Erik’s backstory after seeing the musical. When she couldn’t find it in the book, she wrote her own. Great read! Starts when he’s young and comes all the way up through his life.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s