Right from the start you can tell that Argento hasn't lost his touch, with a distinctively unique approach to the colouring of his film which gives it a real period look and feel. And, right from the start, you realise that this isn't going to be one of Argento's best movies. Far from it in fact: it is a film many, many people consider to be his worst film, at least to date. I'm afraid I have to join that camp because there is almost nothing of any worth in this disjointed mess, full of poor judgements and a lack of intelligence all-round. Argento introduces unwanted moronic humour when he should be going for scares, gives us a tragic ending even though its completely unwarranted - why should we suddenly start caring about the Phantom after all his crimes and gore murders? - unbelievable character actions - what is it with Christine? Talk about a love/hate relationship... - extremely poor acting (Argento has never got the best performances from his cast, but this is something else) and dodgy digital effects all over the place which detract from the visual appeal.Sick comedy is something you don't usually find in Argento's movies, but you'll see it in abundance here. Whether the Phantom is ripping the breast of an opera diva or a young girl is being chased through the catacombs by a would-be paedophile, Argento badly misjudges his scenes making for an often distasteful and tasteless movie. The silly comic interludes ruin any attempt at dramatics and one has to wonder whom exactly Argento was aiming at with the introduction of a comic sidekick dwarf (yes, even in a film this recent), intelligent rats, and, in the nadir of his whole career, a rat-shredding machine which drives along and sucks up rats through a huge vacuum cleaner hose at the front. Any fan of Argento's classic gialli movies will simply shake their head at the sorry state of Argento's current directorial career.Acting-wise, the film is dreadful, especially Asia Argento (yes, the girl who was pretty effective in THE STENDHAL SYNDROME) who is just embarrassing as Christine - Dario really doesn't know when to reign in his daughter's overacting and you can't help but feel sorry for somebody when you know they're capable of far more than this. Julian Sands seems to have lost the ability to be naturally creepy like he was in the early '90s and his Phantom is more of an impish wimp than a scary screen horror icon. Bad miscasting alert there! As for the supporting Italian cast, well once again there are fresh-faced youngsters whom you don't give two hoots about and forget instantly once the film is over (what happened to all the up-and-coming actors and actresses that used to star in films and stay in your mind?) and annoyingly whiny female characters the likes of which haven't been seen since the Universal horror cycle of the '30s and '40s, like the stupid maid.Mind you, the script has such bad characterisation and dialogue that you can't pin the blame entirely on the cast. Then there's Ennio Morricone, usually somebody you can rely on for some good music, putting in a score so bland and unnoticeable it's a mystery why Argento hired him in the first place. The famous Argento set-pieces are in short supply here, with the exception of the notorious "chandelier" sequence which should be horrific and instead, incredibly, is played for laughs. Has Argento really lost touch with his audience this much? The computer effects work is lamentable, particularly a really lame "fantasy world" sequence which is so unconvincing as to be downright laughable.Thankfully Argento has stuck with Sergio Stivaletti who supplies some nicely juicy gore effects once again which don't disappoint, including bodies torn in two, a small but excellent effect of a bone protruding from a guy's thumb, tongues being torn out, decapitations, and a stand-out impaling on a stalagmite. Unfortunately these are usually shown in brief only with quick jump-cuts away but you have to make do with what you get in a film this poor. All serious film fans and Argento fans should give this a wide berth, and curiosity-seekers are better off looking elsewhere for entertainment. The only people who should watch this are those looking to write about it such as this unfortunate reviewer...

Having already seen 'Phantom' in several of its incarnations ... the 1925 silent film with Lon Chaney, the 2004 musical film with Gerard Butler, and the 2011 25th Anniversary stage version at the Royal Albert Hall ... I was in the mood to see this quite different version, on Netflix streaming movies. This version has a number of giant differences, while still following the basic story, of a musical genius who lives in the bowels of the opera house in Paris, and who inspires young Christine to become a fine opera singer. First, this Phantom is not disfigured, instead is mentally distressed from having been rescued by rats as a baby floating in the river underground, then raised by rats. Thus his response when he was called a Phantom, "I am not a Phantom, I am a rat."Julian Sands, with very long hair is The Rat (Phantom). Pretty Asia Argento is Christine Daaé, Andrea Di Stefano is Raoul, and Nadia Rinaldi is Carlotta Altieri . But this is not a musical, in that singing is infrequent, and only to further the plot, i.e. a rehearsal or a performance. The Phantom and Raoul never sing. It is really mostly a horror movie. Did I enjoy it? Yes, I did. Does it deserve a high rating? No, it doesn't. But it accomplishes what it sets out to do and, knowing the basic 'Phantom' story,it is fun to see how they changed it with a quite different Phantom role.It was not filmed in English but it is presented in English on Netflix. The dubbing is really done well, I had to look really hard at lip movements to see any irregularities, it looks for the most part that the actors were speaking English.Much of the filming was done in the Pertosa Caves outside Naples, Italy. It makes the underground scenes very attractive.

This is by far one of the worst movies I've ever seen. Beginning with a very fast approaching 'fantasma' (no real introduction of the characters)and a following love-story (both in 1 minute) the movie is quite fun sometimes. Only the blood-splattering scenes from time to time and the slight feeling that there is no sense behind all the actions is a bit disturbing. Unfortunately there is no really suspenseful scene, despite that my girlfriend left the room twice. Don't watch this if you are not stoned or intoxicated by other chemicals. The whole story is nuts, including an out of place reference to Edgar Degas... The only element worth in this movie is the music, so I gave it a fair 2.

If you think that you will see the master of giallo's delivering another gem than you are wrong. dario tried to make a twist on a classic story but it failed. Even the score from Ennio Morricone couldn't save this flick. Here and there Dario was able to put some nasty shots in it and a few nudity scene's but it isn't done to change the most important thing in the story, the phantom is not a disfigured individual, and he was raised by rats. By doing so the mystery and the cruel shot from the Lon Chaney version is missing. The gratuitous nudity didn't add anything towards the flick. It's just like you are suddenly in another flick. Of course Dario's daughter Asia is in it as Christine Daaé and you can guess it, she has to go nude. The phantom was played by Julian Sands and he was believable but the effects used to for example the rat-catcher was laughable and looked like Blackadder (British comedy). When he for example is moving with a rat destroyer it really looked stupid and teared this flick further down.If you want to see how a classic is destroyed or how gore can be added than this is one for you but I rather would classify it under another failure from Dario.Gore 1,5/5 Nudity 2/5 Effects 2/5 Story 3/5 Comedy 0/5