is 'Phantom.." a true story?

Wish u a merry CHRISTMAS.!!!!!!!!!!!

I watched the movie 'The Phantom of the Opera' directed by Andrew Lloyd Weber and it has Emily Rosum acting as Christine. I watched this on the Christams Eve. This movie is the most beautifull english musical I have ever seen in my life and after watching it , I started crying and crying because I felt sorry for the Phantom because he couldn't marry Christine.
I just wished Christine could have married the Phantom, because the phantom loved her more than anything in this world.
I HAVE AN IMPORTANT QUESTION- "Is this story a true story or is it just made up????????"

I hope any one of you can give me a reply to this question.

If it is a true story , I should say that being an Indian I believe in Karma (the rebirth of the soul after death), I just pray for the phantom that in his next karma(rebirth) he will meet Christine in her next karma and marry her.

once again "Is this story a true story or is it just made up????????"

Adieu!
from,
Preethi

Just read your question about if it is a true story. Like you I watched it christmas eve but at the theatre stage in London and I thought that the film was good until I saw the stage one. You must go and see it.

Yes phantom of the opera is based on a true story. The phantom's name was Eric and he lived in the 1800s but not sure when exactly. His face was so distorted that his mother could not look at it and so she made him wear a mask on his head. Although there was no pictures of him people think that his head was like the Elephant man. He lived in a small village in France, however when he was about 6 he ran away with a traveling circus and made friends with the travellers.
When he became an adult he travelled all over the world and helped to design and build palaces for different kings. Twice he was nearly killed. He ended up living in France and helped to design the opera house, hence why all the caverns that are there and that is also why he demanded rent out of the managers each month.
Christine and all the other characters were real also, however christine had a slightly different surname. [not sure what though]. the love story is also true however from what I can make of things there are two different endings that I have found out about one is that the count and his brother found out where Eric lived in the caverns and killed him the other is that his brother died and that Eric let Christine go and that he eventually died of a broken heart.
If you search long and hard on the internet you will find all of the above information but it took me a good hour of typing in various things to try to find the information.
hope this answers your question and hope it is not too long winded!

from floss

to KTS yes the story of the phantom of the opera is based on a true story

My understanding is that although Leroux based the setting on the real Opera house at the time, the story is not true. If it is based on fact, it is not documentable fact, just rumor.

I agree with BleuUnicorn.... Phantom IS based on a real opera house - l'opera Garnier (I was there!) - but the story iteslef is just nineteenth century masterful writing by Gaston Lereux. The only factual part of the story is that the opera house was rumoured to be haunted, but that is it.

For the record, Weber did not direct the film - Shumaker did.

hey floss, sorry to let you know but wherever you found your information was misleading you. Leroux made up the story and based the opera house in the story on the paris opera house. in fact, the numberous passages beneath the opera house gave him the inspiration to write 'the phantom.' but beyond that, 'the phantom of the opera' is a completely fictional work.

The Phantom of the Opera: is it really a true story? According to Monsieur Leroux, (Gaston Leroux, the author of the book), it is. Mr. Leroux is very convinced that the Phantom of the Opera really did exist. If you purchase or borrow the book from a library or a friend, the very first "chapter", or as it's called, a Foreward, is entitled: "In Which the Author of This Singular Work Tells the Reader How He Was Led to Become Certain that the Opera Ghost Really Existed". Quite a mouthful. During his research, he met many people, found loads of evidence to support his theory, and wrote his story. One could question if he [the phantom] truly did exist, or if perhaps Mr. Leroux, in an attempt to write a book, found a story and expanded on it. So, watch the movie, see the Broadway, read the book. Does the Phantom really exist?

That's up to you.

Like Night Tigress said, Leroux messes with the reader's mind by stating that the story is true in the beginning of his book. Leroux was a newspaper reporter who decided to try his hand at creative writing after he toured the Paris Opera House (Opera Garnier). During a tour to the cellars he came across a lake (yes, it's actually down there) that was created during construction of the opera house. I have yet to come across any actual information (like a diary or a newspaper article) that points to a true story.

After reading the replies to this question, i could not help but add myself as a memeber to this forum. In order to conduct the writing of this book, Gston Lereuox did historical research. He conducted interviews with people of the time, and he also read several manuscripts, which are available to public reading. If anyone else out there is a historian, they will be quick to notice that Lereoux's work is not one of fantasy, (well perhaps the love story between the phantom and christine, the count, etc. ) but of fact. The nmanuscripts are written by poeple who worked in the opera house during the time of the Paris Commune, when the tunnels below the opera were ocnstructed. The tunnels are 17 stories below the floor elvel, and there is a lake at the bottom. The people living in the opera house did believe in the occurence of a ghost, or "phantom" in french. In fact, they planted a horseshoe above the entrance to the right stage wing for good luck, to protect all the actors from the ghost's mishaps. Guided tours are available to teh public, and if one is daring enough, you can visit the underground tunnels.

All I know is that the chandileir (Im a bad speller) really fell and killed an opera hose parton and Erik did live under the opera on the lake and I also can confirm floss's answer!

personnally, I am not sure but the author, Gaston Leroux says so in the beginning of his book and explains his reasons. he says that he has talked to witness etc.

http://www.phantomoftheopera.com/mod...id=131&forum=2
You can go here for more information. It's a very interesting debate.
The person Christine Daae is based off of is Christine Nellison.
I don't have anything else to say besides the girl who played Christine is Emmy Rossum, not Emily. Sorry, like my screenname says, I'm a phanatic.
Couldn't help it.
:D

i've done some exstensive research on this. Erik the Phantom WAS real. did all of the silliness happen the way it did in Gaston Leroux's novel and the film? of COURSE not. There was a Chorus singer that caused a scandal by disappearing with the younger brother of a count after the count was killed in a duel by an unspecified person. (they later turned up in denmark) Charles Garnier's opera house WAS plagued by multiple setbacks during both design and construction and a man that helped with the designs disappeared after several disputes and there was a mysterious fire around the time the disputes began. Theatre people are notoriously supersticious (being 1 myself i speak from experience :) ! ) so they decided the ghost of the designer had come to haunt the theatre. llike so many writers do Leroux wove the elements of the 2 scandals together for best results

wait, i'm confused. it was fiction, but inspired by an opera house, right? did something happen at the opera house or something?
pardon my bad grammar in that last sentence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paledancer

personnally, I am not sure but the author, Gaston Leroux says so in the beginning of his book and explains his reasons. he says that he has talked to witness etc.

---

Just because an author says it's fact- that doesn't make it so. If, in a ghost story, someone says that it happened up the lane from you and 5 kids were found dangling by their intestines- are you inclined to assume it's truth or do you just enjoy the fact but after it's morning and everything's all calm you know it was just a story?
Now, you could argue that this is different- but it's not. There's a quote along the lines of "Don't trust writing, a person who would lie to you in person would lie to you by paper". So, yeah, textbooks and journalism you can generally trust- but Leroux you have no idea.
Same with most references that you'll find to say one way or another. It's the internet- I could write up a ten page essay on the use of male nipples and post it; then someone might use it as help on the Biology term paper. Doesn't mean I'd be right- I could've made the whole thing up rather convincingly.

The author presents it as though it were based on truth - it may be that it was based on a real person, but the full story was a creative work. The book, the musical, the movies, all had different variations but similar basics.

In the movie he is portrayed as someone who suffered severe trauma and abuse in his childhood. If we consider the times (1870 to start) and the culture, it would make sense that someone with a distortion would be shunned by society. Often people were superstitious then and believed that disorders now known to be Medical and/or Mental health problems were demonic. It may be that there was a man living in the basement of the Opera house, maybe homeless and aimless, simply seeking shelter. Someone like that could have inspired the writer.

If we think in terms of the presentation in the most recent movie (2004), with a past like that one would expect him to also be mentally disturbed (In lyrics at one point, Christine sings "this haunted face holds no horror for me now, it's in your soul that the true distortion lies)." The Soul was thought about differently in those days and characteristics such as these were often attributed to it.

I don't suppose we'll ever really know.

phantom means fantasy or not real.It is just an imaginary world or dreamy world as supposed by Don Quixote. In other words we call it a romantic world. This term is mostly used in novels ,in which sth is presented with artificial make up or polish. Its best example is Don Quixote,the novel written by Servantes.

Here's the thing though: Phantom does NOT mean fantasy. It is another word for ghost. And whether or not a ghost is real usually depends on the person you are. Some do not believe ghosts exist, where as I, and people like me, believe they are just as real as we are.

[QUOTE=RDraconis;255956]Just because an author says it's fact- that doesn't make it so. If, in a ghost story, someone says that it happened up the lane from you and 5 kids were found dangling by their intestines- are you inclined to assume it's truth or do you just enjoy the fact but after it's morning and everything's all calm you know it was just a story?



LOLLLL!! "dangling by their intestines"... such description. I LOVE IT! Anyways, I just think The Phantom of the Opera was a more realistic version of the story Beauty and the Beast. The author obviously wanted to add more mystery to his tale so that it would be an ongoing masterpiece in later years to come. Nevertheless, it worked. The play is coming to Los Angeles soon and I'll be buying tickets.

hello, i don't know what it is about this book, movie, ect. but i feel the same way, the phantom and the music got into my mind!!!!. it is a beautiful story, i'm doing some research on the truth about the phantom, so far i've hit a brick wall, i know the paris opera house has all those passage ways below the stage, and that huge chandilear did fall. i believe he did exist, my own opinion, i'm a phantom phan romantic. ha.ha.:) from jstone

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jstone

hello, i don't know what it is about this book, movie, ect. but i feel the same way, the phantom and the music got into my mind!!!!. it is a beautiful story, i'm doing some research on the truth about the phantom, so far i've hit a brick wall, i know the paris opera house has all those passage ways below the stage, and that huge chandilear did fall. i believe he did exist, my own opinion, i'm a phantom phan romantic. ha.ha.:) from jstone

---

I recently listened to a book online of the original Phantom story. I believe they said it did have some truth to it, or that the idea was acquired from some true events. I have the book on a external device and will review it to see what the opening remarks are concerning truth/fantasy. It is a great play, film and book! Saw the play in New York City years back - it was the best musical I had ever seen and still is a favorite. Les Mis is up there too. Saw that in Philadelphia....wonderful!

It's like a realistic fiction. It's based on true story. Christine and Erik both were real, and Raoul also. Erik was being called, "the walking skeleton", because he was ugly. But no one could prove that he was(or should I say is?) the Phantom of the Opera. But I believe he once was.

I believe there is some truth in everything. Things are always inspired or course but I believe the story to have truth in it. When someone is maybe "different" we shall say what they lack in is gifted in other ways. Who can say fully knowing their was not a genius living under the Parisan Opera House. I believe Gaston Leroux researched a great deal into it. Maybe the tale has been given more flavour from the author to make fact into fiction but things don't start themselves. Nothing is created out of blankness. Every story has a truth behind it. A little fact in everything.
I also believe that when the chandlier fell Erik was behind it. Carlotta was Caron Rose who sang at the night of the falling of the chandlier. One woman was killed. It is also said a corpse was found under the opera house in an enclosed room. The corpse was wearing a ring with "C.D" inscribed on it giving us the possiblity that there was a Christine Daae of sorts. Some believe Christine Nillson to be "Christine Daae" but she never stepped a foot in the Opera House so its not possible. All the records have been burnt by the French Government and all the photos of Erik with Charles Garnier also destroyed. Afred Clark, a man who took many pictures of "Erik" whilst working as a contractor in the building of the Opera House, those photos were clearly stolen by the French Government after the opening of Erik's tomb. Their is alot of truth in it, the Count De Changy and the Viscount were possibly there, under different names. As for Daroga, there would have to be alot of research done into his orgin and its probably all burnt. It is obvious that Gaston changed the dates to mislead his readers into believeing it fiction. He didn't want to get into further troubles with the French Government.

Gaston Leroux was credited after his death as being "able to conjure a story out of nothing." So while I think that the story was based on some events that may have indeed happened at a real-life opera house, I think Leroux just knew how to turn it into a good story.

The opera house is real, Christine is based on an opera singer named Christina Neilson(only her life, the actual person didn't have anything to do with it.), the name de Chagny is based off another family's name de Changey, the chandlier incident DID happen, there was a skeleton found underneath the opera house by a lake shore with a gold ring and a face that could've been deformed. Did the actual story happen, I don't know, i wasn't there.

Ok. Im very confused. I read this book and I'm lost about the setup of the opera house. Ok, theres cellers, but they say tunnels lead to them. By tunnels, do they mean hollowed out ground on a downward slant? Is that what it is? Plus, this lake. How big and deep is this "lake?" Is there like a diagram or something?

I'm not entirely sure about some of the details, but when I went on a guided tour of the Opera Garnier, this was how I interpreted the information. I'll try and relay it the best I can ^-^ Contrary to (very) popular belief, there is no lake in the 5th cellar. Not in the regular sense anyways. While the Opera House was built, they discovered an underground spring, and in order to lay the foundations, the workers had to pump water out from underneath it, and store it in a reservoir of sorts that lies underneath the building. This is the "lake". At least, that's what it is now. What it could have been 110-odd years ago, who can say? There could have been a house on this lake. Who knows? However, you cannot get down to the lowest cellar, because it is blocked by this "reservoir". The water has risen to the ceiling of this cellar (i.e. the floor of the next lower-most cellar), and has to be pumped every 2 years, to avoid flooding, and to check for any foundational damage.

In 1907, this was in the process of being done, and apparently, the workers who were to go down there, found a wall, completely blocking a portion of this cellar. They got permission to break it down, and inside, they found a small apartment, furnished with all the necessary items, and... the corpse of a man, who may or may not have had a facial deformity, and was wearing a ring with the inscription C.D. The article is published here: http://www.ladyghost.com/legend.html , if you'd like to see it. I'm not sure how accurate it really is, but I'd like to think it is. But there seems to be no information on where this corpse was interred, and I would think that they would have the decency to bring the body up, and give it a proper burial. A curse on it, perhaps, if you're into that sort of thing. In cases where the Opera Ghost is involved, I most certainly am. This was partially what inspired Leroux to write his novel.

But, I'm getting off topic. The tunnels that lead down to the numerous floors of cellars, are more like corridors, descending downwards. They are lined with stone, and are not simply crude walls dug out of the ground. They were needed to get down to the cellars, since most of the rehearsals, props, green rooms, etc. were housed down there, and it was not helpful if one of these passageways were to collapse! The only photograph I found useful about the set-up of the Opera is here : http://farm1.static.flickr.com/177/4...eb373f.jpg?v=0 The two sets of almost parallel lines at the bottom of the inscription are the top-most of these corridors, which signifies that they were actually constructed, and not just carved out of the earth later on.

Hopefully, that wasn't too confusing, or too long, but, unfortunately, I'm not able to find a whole lot on the history of the Opera House, and I couldn't dig up a decent picture of any blueprints of the Garnier.

Hope I answered your questions,
All the best,
Sara

I personally think it was real. I mean, how could you NOT look at the evidence that Leroux provided in the novel and not think that? Or maybe it's just me. Anyway, that's my belief and I'm sticking to it.
P.G.7.

What Floss said seems to be true, at least I get much the same information in my own web searches, and Gaston Leroux may have encountered a disfigured person who was the inspiration for the character of the Phantom, but the story itself is a work of fiction. In the same vein, Bram Stoker based the character of Count Dracula on Vlad the impaler, who was a real person, but we all know it's not a true story. The same principle applies here.
Leroux wrote the story (possibly based on observatin) to show how society tends to shun those who are of grotesque appearance, and this in turn can lead to negative behaviour; in which a disfigured man terrorises those in the opera house. But there's also the capacity to change, and that it's what's inside that counts, it is clear that Erik is capable of love and showing mercy as revealed at the end when he spares Raoul and lets Christine go with him.
The story has changed over time, in the original version Erik was born ugly, but in later versions he was disfigured because someone threw acid in his face; it's rather inconsistant as to how much of his face is covered by a mask too.

I find this topic really interesting especially as leroux swore to his dying dare he had based his story around fact, and after looking into it i found out the the chandelier really did fall and kill someone as well as a few other interesting facts but i would really love to know more and would be very grateful if anyone could suggest books or websites for me to look in to.

The phantom was indeed real. I stumbled across a magazine article from 1907 that explained a few things. Here is the article.
In 1907, when we were repairing the Palais Garnier, we broke through a wall in the fifth cellar and found a fully furnished apartment. We then later found a male corpse in the third cellar. He had a disfigured(it actually used an asymmetrical) face and on itseft hand was a gold band with the initials C.D. On them. C.D stands for Christine Daaè. We identified this man as Erik.
Upon further research I found out that Raoul Vicomte De Changey was real as well. I rest my case. Thank you for reading this.