it be incomprehensible to me why some writer feel the compulsion to totally mess up a classic story by change everything about the original that make it worthwhile in the first place . i long ago notice an interesting parallel between 2 classic tragic romance and both set in paris the hunchback of notre dame and the phantom of the opera . each have be redone multiple time . in the case of hunchback and each time it seem to have be do with minor revision and and generally and the result have be excellent . in the case of phantom and each time it get mutate far and far from the original and and while the result may be intrigue to behold and each version be like an entirely different story . so it be that the 1943 remake use the original merely a a springboard for what be really a nelson eddy jeannete mcdonald musical comedy and push the real star almost out of his own picture and and completely change the back story ( while ironically restore the original end from the book but almost nothing else ) . and so it be that the 1963 hammer version totally ignore the original and and use the famous and popular 43 version ( my dad saw it while in the army and love it ) a it springboard and to do the typical hammer thing of different for the sake of different and craft a film where every single frame screams hammer ( be there ever a studio where the finished product be so uniquely recognizable . ) . and and so it be that this 1983 tv version appear to haphazardly take element from all 3 previous film and and mix them together in a jumble that and while some bit seem nicely do and others be just horrible and and the overall product be just a jumbled and at time nearly incoherent mess . let take the origin represent from 43 we have a composer who be a sad and pathetic man to begin with and who mistakenly believe his composition be be steal from him . this lead to the accident of his disfigurement . the 63 version change this to an actual theft and call for revenge that go terribly wrong . the 83 version change the hero from composer to conductor and it his wife who steal from him rather than his music and and a critic office rather than a print shop destroy by fire . while there be some mysterious figure lurking in the underworld in the 25 version ( and we never find out if he have any connection with the phantom or not a wonderfully minor detail ) and the 63 version have both a rat catcher and a sewer living derelict . the derelict wind up cause the phantom death in the 63 film but and absurdly and in this one and he not only rescue the composer from the fire and he take him down to the underworld in the first place and give him the mask and show him the map of the catacomb in effect and this guy who never utter a single word of dialog create the phantom . i find this so annoying and and it remind me of the similar absurdity of sean connery teach kevin costner the way of chicago in brian depalma deliriously misguide untouchable remake . i be not sure what to make of michael york character in here he start out likable and then turn into a heel and then wind up be the one who investigate and learn the truth about the phantom and while the police inspector be merely a dolt . the scene with the inspector family merely make all of them annoy and in a lame attempt at a comic interlude . ( the inspector in the 25 film be that story hero if you discount erik himself and who despite his murderous antic be admirable right to the end and when justice and a murderous mob catch up with him . ) the whole thing completely fall apart in the last half hour and after the phantom kidnap maria . after go to such length to make her the success his wife wasn not able to be and he suddenly change his mind for no apparent reason and want to keep her safe while the vicious prima donna he early drive away come back . then and after maria be rescue ( with relatively little fanfare ) and and the conductor and inspector plot to trap the phantom ( how . ) and he decide to cut the chandelier loose ( a bit predicted much and much earlier in the film in one of the bad and most awkward bit of foreshadow i have ever see ) . cut the chandelier at this point make no sense and he do it so badly ( in a horrible exercise of slow motion to boot ) and that nobody get kill except himself . this phantom be not only insane and he incompetent as well . my recommendation to anyone interested in these film be and start here then work your way backward to 1963 and then 1943 and then 1925. if you do and each version you watch get well . my admiration for the 25 version the only one that even attempt to do the book have steadily increase over the year with every viewing . even more so since i get my hand on the video with the rick wakeman score . ( some might find that border on blasphemy but i have come to love the music so much and and it manage to make what be already my # 1 favorite silent film even more enjoyable . ) .