by Drew Deitch
| Published
Phantom There was so much to do. It was a great production, had a strong marketing push, and was billed as the perfect summer superhero movie. Unfortunately, none of those helped it reach the No. 6 spot during its opening weekend.
Why did you do it? Phantom Failed to catch on with the masses? Nearly twenty-five years later, is it time to reevaluate this reckless adventure?
Let's criticize some evil when we look back Phantoma more enjoyable film than its reputation might lead you to believe.
Why the Phantom deserves better
Before we delve deeper Phantomwe need to contextualize this unique piece of comic book history. Originally appearing in a 1936 newspaper strip by Lee Falk, the Phantom was a superhero from the Golden Age of Superheroes. Three years before Batman, the Ghost had a trusted servant, a secret cave as a hideout, and used the cowardly and superstitious feelings of criminals against them by claiming to be a real Ghost. Yes, the Ghost was an obvious inspiration for Batman.
So, it seems clear that Tim Burton has had huge success Batman in 1989 would also spark interest in this predecessor. Finally a conclusion was reached in 1996, Phantom He was one of many action heroes who got feature films in the aftermath Batman.
What makes Phantom This exhilarating experience is how serious the adaptation is. The film is set in 1938, and director Simon Wincer and screenwriter Jeffrey Boam treat the material as if it would have been made in 1938. Much like Raiders of the Lost ArkThere is not a hint of sarcasm or self-mockery at the core of this film. From the Phantom's meticulous costume design to the period-appropriate performances, he wants to be a true adaptation of the character and his world.
This means that the cast plays things in a warm but old-fashioned way. It's easy to read this as trite but it's important to the action of the film. Each artist is on the film's classic comic book wavelength. This keeps the tone light, fun and breezy. Yes, this is not a film with heavy thematic resonance or overly complex characters. And that's good. Her goals are simple and she meets them at every turn.
Don't take this to mean that there is no good performance in… Phantom. The cast is full of superstars and outstanding actors. Billy Zane plays the Phantom aka Kit Walker like Clark Gable or Errol Flynn. There are perfect supporting roles from Catherine Zeta-Jones and James Remar Like two little villains. Christy Swanson plays the earnest romantic lead, Diana Palmer, with old-school assurance. The always great Cary-Hiroyuki Tagawa shows up late in the film as a villainous pirate, which is fun. It's also nice to see veteran actor Patrick McGoohan appear as the spirit of Kate's father, the former Ghost.
If there's one cast member who threatens to steal the show, it's Williams as the antagonist, Xander Drax. Williams relishes every moment he gets to be a scenery-chewing villain. You can practically see his teeth marks in the set. He's the kind of troubled, delicious villain that we don't see enough of in this type of movie anymore.
Related to:
The 90s Buddy Cop Action series was hijacked by failure and tragedy
Perhaps the most impressive feature Phantom It is the production design and tactile nature. Like I said, this feels like a 1938 movie made in 1996. The shooting style, stunts, costumes, and filmmaking all reinforce that this is a movie that knows it's a movie. Realism is not what this is going for. By being aware of this, the film is allowed to feel theatrical and not try to overdo modern influences. Alternatively, he can be as cruel and cartoonish as he desires about everything.
This may be one of the reasons for its failure.
Why did this pulp adventure fail?
One of the most important takeaways from This is a continuous column is that a film's failure is rarely due to the film's perceived quality. There are always many factors that contribute to the initial failure of a film.
with PhantomThis was likely due to a shift in what audiences were enjoying in terms of action cinema. Michael Bay The rock It opened the same weekend and took first place. Mission: impossible and Hurricane They were at number two and three and were in their third and fifth week of release respectively. Audiences were seeing action movies as a bigger spectacle thanks to advances in special effects. Phantom It looked very old compared to everything else in the theatre.
There's also the matter of these pulp adventures never attracting modern audiences. rocket shadow, and Dick Tracy (Everything has its merits) performed poorly. Moviegoers don't seem to be drawn to these period (or period-inspired) characters.
One aspect of this same issue is recognition. The Phantom has not had the same level of widespread cultural saturation or nostalgia as the Batman character. The truth is that the feature film was the first knowledge I had of the character. It's likely that a lot of these superhero characters needed some deep knowledge of the fandom in order to be able to appear.
That's the problem Phantom It was not a huge success at the box office. The brilliant film critic Roger Ebert gave it three and a half stars Review it He called it “one of the best-looking films in a long time.” If you're looking for a movie that captures the basic spirit of comic book adventure, Phantom It is yours. Expertly crafted and understated, it is not a film to be overlooked or belittled.
