Watch Phantom of the Paradise For Free

Thanks for the memories!

It's hard to see any effort in the film. There's no comedy to speak of, no real drama and, worst of all.

The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.

It's simply great fun, a winsome film and an occasionally over-the-top luxury fantasy that never flags.

Dear Brian De Palma,you really hate the American music industry, don't you? You didn't even spare The Beach Boys. The songs in the film were truly awful, lol. I guess that was deliberate. Phantom of Paradise is an over the top depiction of American excess, debauchery and bad taste. That and the characters with grotesque faces and garish sets makes Phantom of the Paradise America's Satyricon (the Fellini film) - a study of how uninhabited devotion to pleasure eventually leads to the decline of a civilization. The exaggerated social satire set to music reminded me of A Clockwork Orange. The film might have had an influence on the makers of This is Spinal Tap. William Finley is such a great actor to have in your movie. His odd long face with the big nose, peppered with the cat eyes makes him almost like a special effect. Jessica Harper was disappointing, it was hard to imagine that the talented song writer (Finley) would be so enamored by her. I wonder what you and Dario Argento saw in her. She did act reasonably well though. Paul Williams nailed the creepy and cruel music producer. I noticed some of your trademarks like split screens, long point of view tracking shots and morally repugnant Italians. I was not enamored by the film beyond a certain level. I mean, I like the fact that you are being tongue in cheek with all the over the topness. But there are times when you lost your way with this style (Get to Know Your Rabbit was also an example of this).Best Regards, Pimpin.(5/10)

This is one of those rare films that unfortunately flew under the radar. I hope that is no longer the case. I had a copy of this and watched it over and over over the years, but I lost my DVD. Just watched it again and DVR'd it from cable. God how I still love this movie!! Very operatic and melodramatic. If you are a lover of musicals, Faust, The Phantom of the Opera, The Picture of Dorian Gray, and Beauty and the Beast must get the tongue in cheek humor, the glam rock "Kiss" references, and the ultimate tragedy of a talented geek who had the unfortunate luck of meeting the Devil. Paul Williams' understated and perfect pitch portrayal of Swan is wonderfully perverse with a good dose of wink, wink, nudge, nudge... His cherubic outer image juxtaposing his inner evil was simply delicious! (I'm licking my lips. Can you tell?) And his score is still strong enough to pull me back through the years to a magically specific point in time. I'm really pushing for a musical on Broadway. This is just a natural for that venue! And Mr. Williams could expand on his score. It would be perfection. It's nice to know I can still dream.....

DePalma at (almost) his best, which is not too good but intermittently entertaining, mostly for the visual aspects.The problem is that everything else is obviously a subordinate concern to the effects and scenes that DePalma (who wrote as well as directed). This holes in the narrative and lack of internal logic are made all the more painful by awkward scenes of exposition that are either unnecessary ("But I'm innocent! Swan framed me and stole my music" is not something that needs to be stated to the audience immediately after showing it) or shoehorned in, putting the brakes on the movie.The lack of internal logic undermines dramatic effect, but that's no surprise, as DePalma's inability in that regard is amply illustrated in his attempts at "serious" movies such as Bonfire of the Vanities and the Untouchables.In his best films (the underrated Greetings and the effectively unpretentious Carrie), DePalma doesn't overreach himself. In most of his movies, however, his "homages" to classic scenes of other movies only serve to underscore that he is not in a league with the filmmakers that he idolizes.Phantom of the Paradise could have been more than an amusing curiosity if the music wasn't so prevalent, interminable, and awful. The music that's supposed to be "good" is the worst sort of sensitive balladeering. The music that's supposed to be trashy rock bastardizations of the "artist's vision" are way more Broadway than rock and not trashy enough: the character Beef deserved better.

Talented underground creators. How great it is to be in their worlds! that's when we get them at the height of their more uncontrolled and pure creativity. unmanipulated, wild. The outcome of what they do when they work within the underground is hardly the best work they produce, but it's often their more passionate creations, and practically always indicates what they will master when they "grow up".Here we have a film that exists in 3 levels (at least 3 that matter to me): this is a film within a social and cultural context. The kind of music we hear here (not the multiple parodies, but the music that is intended to be "good") was a reaction to the 60', or the next step of the evolution. Within the same underground spirit that created this film, there was a growing tendency to extend and invent forms that would accommodate the fantasies of new musicians. That's what today we know as progressive rock. This film would pave the way for Tommy, for Live at Pompei, and for The Wall.Paul Williams, great mind, great talent. Much of what works here is his vision, from the mood even to some roots of the story. His parodies are great, but his real stuff is good enough. I enjoyed getting to know him better, and it Is funny that he comes to perform the guy who steals his own music.de Palma, who was my first interest when coming to this. The fact is i didn't know so well what to expect, and i ended up appreciating more the other levels than this one of the director. Apparently by this time he had clarified what he wanted to explore, but he was far from mastering any of his enormous visual skills, or this film was such a collective work that he just couldn't make his personal statement so well. Anyway we have here eventually the first split screen of his career (i'm not absolutely sure of this), something he would take all his careers with incredible results. Other than that, we don'te have his magical camera eye yet.The story matters only for the fact that we have a battle between creative and money grower, something that all the people involved here might know pretty well back in those days.Jennifer Harper has a pretty face, and illuminates the set when she sings.My opinion: 4/5 http://www.7eyes.wordpress.com