.png)
There are always "those" movies that take forever to release because of endless nitpicking from the people involved. There's usually someone in a position of authority who is never quite satisfied with this, that, or the other thing - and lots of editing and re-shooting is inevitable. Although this might be seen as a newer problem, the truth is that it was well-known in early Hollywood - and the film of the day was one of "those" movies.
In 1922, our all-around good guy Carl Laemmle visited Paris and met an author named Gaston Leroux. Gaston gave Carl a copy of his 1910 book, The Phantom of the Opera. Carl was intrigued. What a great movie this story could make! He immediately bought the film rights and scheduled production for 1924.
The first (of many) scripts included scenes from the book that were never seen in the (finally) finished product, and writer Elliot J. Clawson was so inspired by the book that he added an elaborate flashback sequence of the Phantom's backstory - before he was the Phantom. Unsurprisingly, it was eliminated later on due to budget. Or due to the fact that audiences wanted to be done watching the movie come Monday morning - whatevs.
The ending of the movie was a particular problem. There was a lot of discussion about whether or not the Phantom should remain the villain to the end, or become the object of pity for the audience by reminding them that all he wanted was to be loved and accepted. The script changed several times as Elliot scrambled to make the studio execs happy, even changing the ending DURING FILMING as well as several times before and after filming. Were they happy? No, they were not. The Phantom should die - but how? Should he be killed by the hero, or die from illness? Should the leading lady agree to marry him? Should she escape the Phantom, or try to help him if he's ill?
As if the script issues weren't enough drama, the cast and crew had drama of their own! Director Rupert Julian did not get along with the cast - particularly star Lon Chaney. Eventually it was so contentious that the two stopped speaking to each other altogether, and forced the director of photography (Charles Van Enger) to play the middle-man! Rupert was known to be somewhat of a dictator, and naturally this stirred up the rebellion in Lon who, as Charles said "did what he wanted". Upon relaying Rupert's direction to Lon, Lon replied, "Tell him to go to hell."
Lon Chaney in his makeup masterpieces
Lon, to his credit, had full creative control of his hideous "Phantom" makeup, as well as his makeup for the masquerade scene. There weren't official makeup artists in Hollywood yet - so actors did their own. Lon, however, was a special effects makeup genius, and the studio gave him many opportunities to use his talents! He followed the character's description in the book and created a very accurate, realistic image that caused many people to scream and/or faint when the Phantom's face was revealed. However, because makeup artistry was so primitive, he often used WIRES to change the shape of his nostrils, which often caused him to bleed profusely so FOR THE SAKE OF LIFE, KEEP WIRES AWAY FROM YOUR FACE, PEOPLE!
This massive chandelier had an important part in the story - but look at this set!
Although the film was marketed as being shot at the "actual" Paris Opera House, it was in fact shot at Universal Studios on a mammoth stage (Stage 28). The sets of the opera house were constructed with steel girders set in concrete, to support hundreds of extras. This was a first for Old Hollywood! This set (and Stage 28) remained in place until 2014 - and were used in many films and TV shows.
By the end of 1924, enough had been shot to assemble a rough cut - of almost 4 hours (!). In January of 1925, a preview was held in Los Angeles. The audience. Hated it. The top complaint: "There's too much spook melodrama. Put in some gags to relieve the tension." So the studio canceled the New York preview, and went back to the drawing board. Of course, they did what they did best - CHANGED THE ENDING! The studio also decided to put the whole thing back into production to re-shoot many of the scenes. However! By now, Rupert Julian had had enough, and was either fired or quit. The jury's out on that one.
A new director was assigned to fix the project, and at his request, new writers came up with new scenes and the whole story became something of a romantic comedy. Um...OK...? This uh..."creative endeavor" was previewed in San Francisco in April 1925 - and was hated even more than the first, with the audience flat-out BOOING it off the screen!
Well....now what? What more could they do to salvage this great story idea that had become a mashup of everyone's individual opinions? Two words: LOIS WEBER! Lois, along with an editor named Maurice Pivar, took everything that had been shot - the first version and the second version - and edited it together, combining what they thought were the best and most important parts. The end result? MUCH BETTER. Although some (like Variety magazine) felt that it was too scary, it got many positive reviews and has more than redeemed itself with modern audiences! Check it out below!
References:
Comments