Some people still maintain that the Phantom continues to haunt the Opera. They claim that anyone who dares to reveal the secret of the Phantom may face great peril.

You are used to seeing me perform feats of illusion on television. Tonight I won't be the one performing the magic. The magic, and the mystery is provided by the Phantom!

Tonight, in the locations where the events took place -- the Phantom's own lair -- the great historic Paris Opera house, I want to take you on a journey through the Phantom legend; a journey that invites mystery, fantasy, and even potential danger, as I attempt to reveal the Secret Of The Phantom Of The Opera.

-- David Copperfield

I remember seeing an ad for a new David Copperfield special entitled 'Secret Of The Phantom Of the Opera' and being very excited. David Copperfield's magic shows are always so polished and exciting, one can only assume that his documentary/dramatization examining the "real" story behind the Phantom Of The Opera would be at the very least highly entertaining, right? Sorry. Wrong.

I think if you crossed any community theatre group with junior high book report/movie review you would come up with a result pretty close to what David Copperfield achieves with his 'Secret Of The Phantom Of The Opera'.

To give David Copperfield credit, he does seem to show a sincere fondness for the Phantom (so as not to confuse viewers, who presumably have little to no exposure to the Phantom outside of Andrew Lloyd Webber's musical, Copperfield refrains from mentioning the name 'Erik'). He opens by earnestly informing us that the Phantom was always his favorite movie character. With some nostalgia he recounts afternoons as a child spent alternately terrified and enthralled by the Phantoms of both Lon Chaney and Claude Rains. Copperfield informs us, his viewers, that what sets the Phantom apart from his other horror classic counterparts is that his story is not simply a fictional creation, but rather the legend inspired by a real living man, whose nefarious yet tragic deeds were preserved by journalist Gaston Leroux.

Presumably, David Copperfield's childhood fascination was what brought about this well-meant yet dreadfully misguided television special, which dramatizes his search for the Secret Of The Phantom Of The Opera.

David Copperfield claims to have read Leroux. In fact, "Leroux" himself appears in this production, along with "Christine", "Joseph Buquet" and (very, very briefly) "The Phantom". Unfortunately, with the possible exception of the rather charming fellow playing Leroux, the actors (including Copperfield) are abysmal to the point of becoming unbearable.

As David Copperfield roams the opera searching for "clues", the spirit of Leroux becomes his guide, leading him through a maze of corridors in his search for the elusive ghost of Christine, who Copperfield becomes enamoured with as she flits about the Opera always just beyond his reach. David Copperfield's infatuation with Christine grows -- and when he comes just a bit too close to her, reaching out to touch her on the rooftop, under Apollo's Lyre, the the Phantom's otherworldly vengeance is felt -- with nearly fatal consequences!

In and amongst all the drama and storyline, the program attempts to inform the novice as to what exactly went on in the original novel, as opposed to the plotline of the more familiar musical.

The Leroux character is used to provide some background info on the Phantom's story, but the program relies more heavily on scenes from the Lon Chaney and Claude Rains films to illustrate David Copperfield's retelling. In fact, I would say that nearly half of this hour long program is lifted straight from these films. After watching this special, there is scarcely a critical scene in either the Lon Chaney or Claude Rains interpretations that remains unseen. You can think of this as the Cliff's Notes version of both movies, if you'd like. Surprisingly, this works fairly well, as the majority of the selected scenes are shown in a context reasonably faithful to the original novel.

What causes me the most concern about this program is not the melodramatic overacting, or the somewhat forced and predictable storyline, but that David Copperfield keeps voicing his gloomy suspicion that the Phantom "in all likelihood" killed Christine. Is this what he presumes to be the Secret Of The Phantom Of The Opera? He repeats this nonsense in dire tones several times throughout the program, until I begin to wonder whether he was lying to us when he claimed to be familiar with Leroux, or even any version of the story at all. One wonders where on earth that idea came from, but he neglects to support his hypothesis with even the most trivial of evidence. I suppose we are expected to simply take him at his word on this.

To wrap up this pointless exercise, Copperfield leads us (against the wishes of a protesting Leroux who advises that the Phantom's secrets should remain exactly that) to the "house on the lake" which appears to be no more than a miserable looking table and chairs sitting beside a murky sewer. We find Christine's discarded gown nestled beside the Phantom's coffin and mask. For some reason, this sight prompts David Copperfield to leave the Phantom's spirit at rest and return to the streets of Paris to enthrall us with more ramblings about the profound nature of the Phantom legend.

Although he may harbour childhood nostalgia for the Phantom, his program failed to do the character justice. 'Secret Of The Phantom Of The Opera' is no more in depth than the Phantom "Wishbone" episode, with the only difference being that David Copperfield is a sexy, suave guy as opposed to a dog. I think that instead of his pseudo-documentary he would have been better off levitating the chandelier, or making Apollo's Lyre vanish. At least that would have been more original, and put his talent to better use. I'm a big fan of David Copperfield, for sure, but this program unfortunately fails to satisfy.

--robyn

index   // onward