Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Eliza Hodgkins 1812
But I'll only take issue with this particular comment because I think, even in the film, her character is far more sympathetic, and less shallow, than you think she is...
|
In the film, though, there isn't much age difference. There isn't the idea that this man is a father figure. There is the idea that her father sent her an angel. Wouldn't this be more of a reason to be with him if, in fact, she thought her father wanted it that way? So, why not settle for the phantom after all? She doesn't, she goes for Raoul. (Who is also loaded.)
In the play, did she stay with him for 2 weeks? I thought it lasted a song and a half and that's it... Meaning, one day or so.
I think in the end she realizes that he's mad (ie. 'It's in your mind where the true distortion grows...' or something like that...) but her acting like all the rest did/do paved roads his madness too, no?
Also, I always got the feeling that ultimately if the situation was different, she should have been with the phantom. I mean, 'modern day' Raoul didn't seem to be letting go of what happened, focusing more on what she was so torn about than anything else. It always seemed to me that there was regret in Christine's choice (she goes back for one final moment with the phantom - something that in the play and the movie I loved, loved, loved) and a longing in Raoul's sad 'old man character' that seemed Christine's life afterwards was unfulfilled (him clutching onto artifacts of the past to remind him of her etc).