Andrew Lloyd Webber's The Phantom of the Opera by Ryan Holt (agentsands77) - Drama, Musical - Based on Andrew Lloyd Webber's highly successful stage musical, this is the story of a young opera singer in 1881 Paris who is pursued by the Phantom, a deformed genius living beneath the Paris Opera. 111 pages - doc, format

I'm just curious, if the author is here, what made you wish to adapt this particular work, considering we already have a movie version of the stage musical adaptation of the book.

I wondered this yesterday.  I also wonder how much of this script is Ryan's and how much  of it was from ALW and JS's script.


Phil

I read through the prologue and the first scene, and most of it appears lifted from the libretto included with the cast recordings combined with the visual look of the existing movie (i.e. the grainy B&W film bits).

It does smell of plagerism, doesn't it?


Phil

Quoted from George Willson I'm just curious, if the author is here, what made you wish to adapt this particular work, considering we already have a movie version of the stage musical adaptation of the book.

I'd be more than happy to answer. I decided to do a version of ALW's Phantom largely because I was very dissatisfied with Schumacher's interpretation of the film. In fact, I daresay I liked almost nothing about it, from his "young and sexy" reading of the characters to his rather dull approach to other moments.

For fun, I decided to approach the script as if I was revisioning/remaking the film 20 or so years down the road, and this script was the result. I decided to try for something a little closer to the intention of the show (as envisioned by stage director Hal Prince), as well as throwing in some ideas of my own.

Quoted from George Willson I read through the prologue and the first scene, and most of it appears lifted from the libretto included with the cast recordings combined with the visual look of the existing movie (i.e. the grainy B&W film bits).

Well, there's only so many ways one can play out the same scene. My prologue is different from Schumacher, sure, but it also tries to be as different as could be asked for while remaining fairly faithful to the stage material.

Read the rest of the script before you judge. There are plenty of differences from the Schumacher version in practically every scene, the prologue included (to name a few, there's no Madame Giry in the prologue, it utilizes more of the stage libretto, the setting is differently described than what was visualized in Schumacher's film, and there's no montage during the Overture). Admittedly some bits are more "mine" than others, but that's to be expected (I'm particularly proud of the graveyard sequence and "The Point of No Return").

Ultimately, the differences would probably have more significance to someone who is already fairly familiar with the stage show and Schumacher's film - it's a fan project, after all, and a lot of the changes have to do with details. IMO, these details add up to a largely different film.

Quoted from agentsands77 Read the rest of the script before you judge.

I dont think you get the underline meaning of the responses here.

No one will REALLY read or what to read UNORIGINAL work on these forums.

script writing is more then, properly formatting a story which isnt yours.

Cuz then all we can comment on is " format looks correct" since truelly, characters/plot/structure/originality isnt yours. Then why read?

Good luck

What I'd really like to see is someone rewriting parts of the musical to fix ALW's inconsistencies and plot holes. Like, why the hell would anyone go to the roof of the opera house when there's a killer on the inside? That's downright idiotic. I've always thought so. Give them a reason to go up there besides the script telling them to do so. Better yet, send them to the street and allow them to decide to go back. Those are some worthwhile changes, rather than just resetting all of ALW's mistakes.

I'm more concerned with how much of this script is yours and how much belongs to JS and ALW.  We recently has a situation on Simplyscripts with plagurism.


Phil

If you're concerned with how much of what is who's why don't you read the script instead of debating it endlessly? Just a thought. Please don't use this post as fodder to start. I don't wanna start anything. Like you said, we've had troubles on here recently.


Cheers, Chismeister.

I don't have a copy of the original script to compare it.  I was able to find a site with the songs from the movie and (from what I've seen) Ryan has copied them for his script.

The songs from the movie can be found at:  http://groups.msn.com/PhantomoftheOperafansite

This, in itself, is a violation of copyright law.  This script should be taken down.

I don't know why you accused me of being hostile.  All I've done was point out a suspicion that I have now proven.  The question is: why have you been acting hostile to me?


Phil

This script (after reading through quite a bit of it) is based very directly on the film version of the story. It has many of the same alterations that do not exist in the stage version, such as removing the chandelier crash at the mid-point, moving the second act letters sequence to the midst of the masquerade, though you've cut many of the additional scenes the movie had such as the flashback to the Phtantom's roots and the mirror room. Personally, I would have liked to see the return of the trio in the graveyard, a sequence cut from the Broadway stage version but was on the London Cast Recording. When I saw Phantom over here, I thought Raoul had missed his entrance, but I later learned it was deliberate. Oh, well.

You might want to return to either the stage version or even the London version to do an adaptation, since it does appear you used the movie as a source.

I know people forget posts when they want to argue but the guy did say in his second post that he did use it and you can only change it so much without deviating from whatever it was.

So the debate is not whether he did because he admits it and said "Fan project" or something along those lines which takes away any further argument. Keep this about the script or it will be modded.

Quoted from George Willson This script (after reading through quite a bit of it) is based very directly on the film version of the story.

There are similar structural modifications, yes, but there are also hundreds of differences, though many of them are detailed.

I suppose you do hit on something, though, seeing as the script was written directly as a reaction to the film, and not of my own accord. I imagine that if I had written this screenplay prior to 2004, it would have been pretty different.

Quoted from George Willson It has many of the same alterations that do not exist in the stage version, such as removing the chandelier crash at the mid-point, moving the second act letters sequence to the midst of the masquerade, though you've cut many of the additional scenes the movie had such as the flashback to the Phtantom's roots and the mirror room.

I moved the chandelier crash in keeping with the new Las Vegas production of Phantom, not because the film did it that way (I disliked Schumacher's chandelier crash, with it slowly swaying about and all that nonsense). I liked the Las Vegas production's take on things, and took more than a few cues from that.

Some alterations were more or less coincidental - seeing the Phantom write the note during the Notes scene, while similar in concept to what Schumacher did, was actually inspired by a scene from Ridley Scott's HANNIBAL.

Quoted from George Willson Personally, I would have liked to see the return of the trio in the graveyard, a sequence cut from the Broadway stage version but was on the London Cast Recording.

I prefer the moment as a private one between Phantom/Christine, and to save the grand trio between the three of them until the finale. It seems more appropriate to do so. I love the musical construction of the graveyard trio, so cutting it was more or less of a painful decision - at one point, it was featured.

Quoted from George Willson You might want to return to either the stage version or even the London version to do an adaptation, since it does appear you used the movie as a source.

I have used all three as sources, I suppose you could say. It's an algamation of all the above - as I said, I approached it as a remake. I'd say that it takes most of its cues from Hal Prince's stage direction, which I researched thoroughly before writing the script.

But anyway, I'm pulling the script. I think the criticism that it's not enough "mine" is perhaps more or less accurate, and so I'm going to go back to work on this one before I ever seek to put it up again (if I ever seek to put it up again).

I could understand that. I do want to encourage you to keep writing though. Undertaking any script is a big accomplishment and putting your mark on something this big is pretty good. I hope you keep going and turn out something that might be more marketable in the future.