That this film was made only one year earlier, 1989, suggests how much Golan’s fortunes had turned in that span of time. To give you some idea, this is the same guy/studio behind the painful 1990 version of Captain America. As I mentioned in the lead-in, it’s incredibly lavish, especially when you take into account that it was produced by Menachem Golan, half of the classic Cannon Films, under his 21st Century banner.

It truly defies expectations in some regards, most of those for the positive. But on the contrary, he was very convincing and nailed the role.Based on Gaston Leroux’s 1909 story, again, I’m amazed that this version of The Phantom of the Opera isn’t talked about more. I assumed I would see him as Freddy throughout the entire thing, especially considering his disfigured face was full of scars, not to mention he hung out in a dingy cellar. Robert Englund is beyond perfect for this role. I'm talking decapitations (yes, plural), disembowelments (yes, plural) and even a full body skinning. This Phantom packs more suspense into its first 5 minutes than the classic version did in its full 92. Sure, when I first watched Phantom from '43 I was looking forward to classic horror, but I'll take actual horror over classic non-horror any day of the week. So let's just say that this version from '89 is everything I had hoped Phantom would be. Phantom of the Paradise from '74, by Brian De PalmaĬhoosing to start with Freddy Krueger as the phantom was a no-brainer!

The Phantom of the Opera from '98 by Dario Argento The Phantom of the Opera from '89 with Robert Englund So I called on the horror community to suggest the best version to watch and these were the three recommended finalists: If you read my other Phantom of the Opera review, the first reboot from 1943, you'll know that it wasn't much of a horror.

The phantom of the opera 1989