Author Archives: surgeons of horror

No Finish Line: The Long Walk Turns Minimalism into Masterpiece

22 Monday Sep 2025

Posted by in Movie review

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , ,

Sometimes when we get caught up reviewing all these films, it’s easy – all too easy – to forget that
as with a painter staring at a blank canvas; a director, when given their brief, is staring at a multitude
of choices in which to tell the story they have written (or in the case of The Long Walk; been given) .
And this particular story is the brainchild of writing grand master Stephen King. So, no presh.
Also throw in the fact that it involves walking, a ton of it, and you might think this is a film for a
novice (too inexperienced to know that this is an extremely tough assignment) or a black belt
filmmaker. Someone who knows enough to know that a movie that’s about walking in the open air
gives you nowhere to go. No immediate cutaways, no car chases, no love scenes to dictate changes
in pace etc.
Heck even your coverage choices are limited by how stylised (or not) you want to go about filming
men walking. And walking. And walking.
So what do you do? Well, there are a few things this pic leans on, and we’ll talk about those in a bit.
But first – some much-needed context for the 0.08% of you who have clicked on this article not
knowing what this movie is about.
Set in a dystopian alternative reality (around 1970’s ish – although the exact time period is never
stated, so I’m going off the novel, which was written in 1979) you soon realise that The Hunger
Games (and King’s own The Running Man) owe a lot to this idea.
Which is, you get people to WILLINGLY go through a trial of fire to get some nebulous sense of
financial freedom, and freedom from bondage.
In this particular case, you walk. As in you collate at a starting line, get assigned a number and you
walk. There is no finish line. Last man standing (and it is all men in this story. Young men, one from
each State of the U.S. – so 50 in total) wins. And wins big. Both in terms of $ and a wish…
The rule is you DO NOT stop. Evah. If you do for more than a few seconds you are given a warning.
If you fall below 3 miles an hour you are given a warning. More than 3 warnings in an hour and you
are executed there and then by one of the volley of military personnel keeping pace with you.
Water and rudimentary rations are given to the walkers, which prolongs their agony if anything.
Because stopping to relieve yourself or sleeping is counted as a warning/shootable offence. Taking a
pebble out of your shoe, bad weather, incredibly steep inclines…. you’d be surprised just how many
things can impede a good walk when halting is not an option.
And that’s what this review will do right now to get the always insightful Chris Dawes to give his take
on the movie. Over to you Chris!

Ok. So. In my view there are two types of Stephen King adaptations – The genre defining classic (The
Shining, Green Mile, Shawshank) and Dreamcatcher.

The Long Walk is the former.
It’s incredible – they have managed to make a minimalist, mid budget film about a bunch of people
walking through middle America deeply engaging.
Even the moments that you can see coming hit you, and hit you hard.
Everyone in this film is acting the shit out of it in the best possible way – I reckon this will be the
breakout movie for a bunch of the next generations’ Oscar winners.
It’s the kind of film that sits with you when it is over.
And boy howdy, do I love a Mark Hamill heel turn – I genuinely hated his character in a way I have
not often hated a film bad guy. Fucker managed to out-Darth Darth.
Glorious. No notes.
See this movie.

So, as you can see – mixed emotions from Chris there.
I kid.
As he touched upon, the best weapon this movie had at its disposal was casting. One way to get
around a story that has limitations in terms of setting is to make sure your actors are world class for
the roles they have been chosen to play. And for this trek, the filmmakers have nailed it.
When all you have is dialogue interspersed with ratcheting tension with each death, it helps that the
baseline words come from Stephen King. But when those words are delivered by young actors who
themselves are clearly gifted craftsmen, then you have the luxury of letting this movie do all the
heavy lifting for you.
And the tone from the outset is thrown down by the only real female member of the cast – Judy
Greer.
Now well and truly in the mother character phase of her career, her heartbreak as she bids farewell
to her son at the starting line hits a perfect balance. Not over-wrought to put you off the film before
it’s even started, but 100% grounded in a reality you can buy into. Because at this point of the
movie you don’t know the rules of The Walk, but in a great example of show don’t tell, you know it
can’t be good. So from the get-go you are intrigued and a little bit tense – the exact sort of tone you
want at the start of a flick like this.
So. Writing and acting. That’s how you make a dangerously simple premise work. [Allow time for
the world’s biggest d’uh].
But another thing that played in favour of this film was its unapologetic refusal to look away. The
way these men die is graphic, and that’s the point. A bullet does horrendous damage to a human
body. Powered metal explodes through bone and tissue and it doesn’t care how you look
when it does, and this film makes sure you SEE that, in all its factually visceral detail.

And it’s not gratuitous either. But rather, the point. Because why would these men sign up for
something that has a 49 in 50 chance of killing you in a physically painful and undignified way?
Well – why would 12 districts send 2 young people each year to fight to the death for the
amusement of the rich masses?
And by extension… why would SO MANY people in a real-life election vote AGAINST their own best
interest?
Because the illusion those in power sell to those without is tantalising and intoxicating. It’s framed
in rules that THEY set, but if you play the game, you can be ONE OF THEM. One of US!
In this case, chances are 49 to 50 against, but the result is binary. It’s either yes, or it’s no. And most
of us think and feel – deep down – we are the lead character of our own story. And rules don’t apply
to lead characters! Lead characters stand out by going against the mainstream and beating the
odds. Lead characters are special and so are YOU! Despite something immutable as math saying
you’re not.
Plus changing an unfair status quo through revolution seems like a lot of hard work. Work that
mostly benefits those who come after you, as revolts usually kill a lot of instigators. Even successful
ones.
So why not choose a path that could immediately benefit YOU instead? Countless money AND a
wish?
So what if the odds are not in favour? If you want anything in life, anything that’s worth it, you gotta
work for it. Bleed for it.
Walk for it. Die for it.

The Prognosis:

Power is an illusion, but it doesn’t make it not real. And this film makes you feel that every step of
the way.
5 stars.

  • Antony Yee & Chris Dawes

Blood, Backpackers, and Blunt Force: Revisiting Eli Roth’s Hostel 20 Years On

16 Tuesday Sep 2025

Posted by in retrospective

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , ,

When Hostel arrived in 2005, Eli Roth had already made a name for himself as a provocateur with Cabin Fever (2002) — a filmmaker whose gleeful embrace of gore and shock was as divisive as it was deliberate. With Hostel, Roth doubled down on his reputation, delivering a film that would help coin the term “torture porn” and spark heated debates over horror’s direction in the 2000s. The premise is simple: three backpackers, chasing hedonistic highs through Europe, are lured to a Slovakian city with the promise of pleasure but instead find themselves trapped in a brutal underground network catering to the darkest desires of the wealthy.

Roth’s work has always been a love-him-or-hate-him affair. His admirers cite his unapologetic excess, grindhouse energy, and enthusiasm for horror history. His detractors point to a tendency toward juvenile humour, one-dimensional characters, and shock value over substance. Hostel embodies both sides of that argument. On one hand, it’s hard not to acknowledge the film’s impact — it pushed the boundaries of on-screen brutality for a mainstream release, and in doing so, influenced an entire wave of ultra-violent horror. On the other, its character work is paper-thin, its cultural caricatures crude, and its fixation on suffering feels more like an endurance test than a narrative.

In the years since, Roth’s career has veered between horror provocations (The Green Inferno, Knock Knock), pulpy homages (Thanksgiving), and the occasional detour (Death Wish remake). Hostel remains one of his most recognisable works, though not necessarily his most accomplished. Two decades on, it’s less shocking than it was in 2005 — time and countless imitators have dulled its edge — but it still stands as a defining example of Roth’s polarising style: fearless, messy, and never subtle.

The Prognosis:

Whether you see it as a gleeful slice of splatter cinema or an exercise in excess without payoff, Hostel is pure Eli Roth. And with him, that’s always been either the best thing or the worst thing about the movie.

  • Saul Muerte

Christensen Sharpens His Blade with Night of the Reaper

15 Monday Sep 2025

Posted by in Movie review

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

Brandon Christensen’s Night of the Reaper wears its genre lineage proudly, a film whose scaffolding is unmistakably indebted to the slasher cycle of the late 1970s and early ’80s. Yet what distinguishes it from mere pastiche is Christensen’s attempt to infuse the familiar architecture of suburban dread with a contemporary reflexivity. The result is a work that gestures toward both homage and reinvention, though it occasionally falters under the weight of its own ambition.

At its core, the narrative is bifurcated: Deena, a college student reluctantly drawn into the liminal domestic space of babysitting, embodies the archetypal “final girl,” while the sheriff’s scavenger-hunt pursuit of a killer injects a procedural dimension that broadens the scope beyond the living-room crucible. This duality lends the film a structural intrigue, complicating the linear inevitability characteristic of earlier slashers. Christensen’s gambit is to stretch the genre’s grammar toward a more fragmented, almost puzzle-box form, and while not always seamless, it sustains an atmosphere of unease.

Thematically, Night of the Reaper interrogates surveillance, communication, and the transmission of violence—whether through mailed evidence or the uncanny ritual of watching over another’s child. The “babysitter” trope here functions less as a mere setup than as a cultural cipher: the guardian of innocence, rendered vulnerable not only by external threat but by the epistemic instability of what she sees, hears, and knows.

Performances, particularly from Clement, anchor the film in an emotional realism that offsets its occasional excesses of plotting. If the twists sometimes feel calibrated for shock rather than inevitability, they nonetheless affirm Christensen’s willingness to deny the audience easy comfort. The film’s refusal to collapse into nostalgia, even while nodding to Carpenter and Craven, positions it as both homage and critique.

The Prognosis:

Night of the Reaper is less about transcending the slasher than about testing its elasticity—stretching a well-worn form to see what new resonances might emerge. Christensen may reach a little too high, but in doing so he ensures that the film, like its protagonists, never entirely succumbs to the shadow of its predecessors.

  • Saul Muerte

Night of the Reaper is streaming on Shudder from Friday 19th Sept

The Case That Ended It All… and the Love That Carried It.

11 Thursday Sep 2025

Posted by in Movie review

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

There’s a line I keep coming back to when watching The Conjuring: Last Rites: “The case that ended it all.” Not just for Ed and Lorraine Warren, whose final chapter this is meant to be, but for the sprawling universe their names have conjured into existence. Like every haunting, it’s less about the cold spots and whispers in the dark than it is about the people who believed enough to chase them. And at the heart of all this chasing, for over a decade now, have been Patrick Wilson and Vera Farmiga.

If the devil lives in the details, then the soul of this franchise lives in their eyes. Wilson’s steady but haunted Ed, Farmiga’s luminous and fierce Lorraine—they’ve carried us through nun sightings, cursed dolls, crooked men, and endless houses rattling at 3 a.m. What’s remarkable is not that they convinced us to be afraid, but that they convinced us to believe in love. Their bond has been the true connective tissue of the Conjuring Universe, more powerful than holy water or a crucifix.

Michael Chaves, who has already carved his name into the annals of this cinematic scripture (The Curse of La Llorona, The Conjuring: The Devil Made Me Do It, The Nun II), is tasked with the ultimate rite: closing the circle. He doesn’t swing for jump-scares or gore this time. Instead, he stages something quieter, almost tender. Yes, there are entities in shadowy corners, and the Warrens must confront forces that seem beyond human comprehension. But the real confrontation is with time, mortality, and the question of what we leave behind.

Watching Last Rites feels less like entering a haunted house and more like attending a vigil. Each scene reminds us that the Conjuring films were never really about demons—it was about the Warrens looking into the abyss together, hand in hand. And while the scares are muted, the harmony between Wilson and Farmiga remains intact, their chemistry now weathered but stronger, a testament to why audiences kept returning long after the first clap in the dark.

For longtime followers, this is less exorcism and more benediction. Chaves doesn’t so much slam the door shut as pass the candlelight forward. Whether the torch will ignite future stories in this universe, or flicker out with a final prayer, remains unknown. But there’s a sense of closure—like the last page of a well-worn case file, annotated not just with facts and evidence, but with love letters written in the margins.

The Prognosis:

If you came looking for terror, you may leave unsatisfied. But if you came looking for a farewell—an elegy for the haunted hearts who dared to investigate the impossible—then The Conjuring: Last Rites offers exactly that. A requiem, not for the dead, but for a love that kept the darkness at bay.

  • Saul Muerte

Embrace the Darkness: Dark Nights Film Fest Vol. 2

10 Wednesday Sep 2025

Posted by in dark nights film fest

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The shadows are calling again. The screen is no longer a safe window to peer through but a chasm, hungry and alive, waiting to swallow you whole. Strap in, Sydney — Dark Nights Film Fest Vol. 2 has crawled out of the grave and into the Ritz, and this time it’s not here to play nice.

This isn’t cinema for the faint, the casual, or the polite. This is cinema that stalks you through the back alleys of your subconscious, cinema that rips the floorboards off your cozy illusions and drags you headfirst into a pit of worms. Just when you thought the blood had dried and the screams had faded, festival director Bryn Tilly has cranked open the gates again, ushering in a delirious parade of maniacs, monsters, and midnight visions.

Nine Australian premieres. One unholy cult resurrection. Twenty-two short, sharp shocks from across the globe. It’s a full-course banquet of nightmares, each dish steaming with dread and dripping with the strange juices of cinema’s dark heart.

Opening night doesn’t just raise a curtain — it tears open the roof with Hell House LLC: Lineage, an unhinged carnival of terror where haunted basements and clown-faced demons set the tone for what’s to come: fear without safety nets. From there the fest descends into Germany’s tangled woods with Bark, drags you through the neon purgatory of America in A Desert, and burns you alive with the Serbian one-two punch of A Serbian Documentary and Karmadonna — films that don’t just push buttons, they rip them out and swallow them whole.

But the crown jewel of delirium? Peter Jackson’s Braindead in screaming 4K glory. Thirty years since its last Australian theatrical run, and the pus-filled carnage hasn’t aged a day. This isn’t a screening — it’s an exorcism of sanity, an orgy of undead slapstick that makes every Marvel movie look like a children’s nap-time.

And just when your skull’s about to split, along comes Necromorphosis, burrowing into your flesh like a cockroach in heat, and Sun, a fever-dream hybrid of movement and madness that dances straight into the abyss. By the time the anthology Adorable Humans rolls around, Hans Christian Andersen will be spinning in his grave fast enough to power a small Danish village.

Closing night locks the doors and swallows the keys with The School Duel, a dystopian grenade lobbed at society’s fragile bones — ferocious, timely, and cruelly relevant.

This isn’t just a festival. It’s a séance. A bacchanal of blood, dread, and midnight delirium. Between the Aussie and international shorts, the Movie Boutique of VHS relics and arcane treasures, and filmmakers dropping truth bombs about low-budget survival, Dark Nights is where the monsters come to play.

Forget safe cinema. Forget the plush multiplex glow. The Ritz is where the shadows come alive, and the screen bites back.

Dark Nights Film Fest Vol. 2 — October 9–12, Ritz Cinemas, Randwick.
Bring your nerves, bring your nightmares, and leave your soul at the door.

  • Saul Muerte

Closing Reflections: A Phantom That Will Never Die

09 Tuesday Sep 2025

Posted by in retrospective

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , ,

Even after a century in the shadows, The Phantom of the Opera (1925) remains an indelible force—its mask both a symbol of horror and heartbreak, its underground lair a stage for primal emotions too vast for daylight. The film’s enduring power lies in its ability to exist between worlds: the sacred and profane, the beautiful and grotesque, the seen and the unseen.

At its heart, this Phantom is more than a monster—he is the ultimate tragic outsider, yearning not just for love, but for recognition, for humanity. Lon Chaney’s transformation, so physical yet so intimate, continues to cast a long shadow over every actor who dares don the mask after him. The Paris Opera House set—designed like a gothic cathedral—stands not only as a marvel of production design but as a symbolic battleground for the soul, where music, love, and horror converge.

Throughout this anthology, we’ve traced the Phantom’s trajectory from literary adaptation to silent screen myth, from visual innovation to emotional devastation. We’ve seen how its themes echo through time—obsession, artistry, and alienation—and how it helped shape the very contours of horror cinema in the silent era and beyond. We explored its architectural symbolism, its Expressionist lineage, and its shifting cultural legacy, from Andrew Lloyd Webber’s romanticised musical to countless reinterpretations in media high and low.

And yet, there remains something unknowable, something ineffable about the Phantom. Perhaps this is why he refuses to fade. He is not just a character but an archetype—a spectre who haunts not only opera houses but also our collective fears and desires. Each generation rediscovers him, reshapes him, yet never fully explains him.

In that way, The Phantom of the Opera is more than a film. It is a mirror held up to the darkest corners of the soul, reflecting back our own longings and shadows. And in that reflection, he lives on—not just in reels of nitrate or on stage under chandelier light—but in the very idea of horror as poetry, as tragedy, as truth.

A Phantom that will never die.

  • Saul Muerte

Afterlife of the Phantom: Cultural Echoes and Modern Resurrection

09 Tuesday Sep 2025

Posted by in retrospective

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , ,

Few cinematic figures have endured quite like the Phantom. Rising from the shadows of a silent-era soundstage, Lon Chaney’s masked outsider has taken on a life well beyond the flicker of nitrate film. More than just a horror character, the Phantom has become a symbol—of unrequited love, artistic obsession, and the monstrous within us all. And from film to stage, parody to prestige, his presence continues to echo through popular culture.

The legacy of The Phantom of the Opera is perhaps most visible in the realm of theatre. Andrew Lloyd Webber’s 1986 musical reimagining catapulted the Phantom to mainstream global fame. Romanticised and operatic in a way that Chaney’s original never intended, the musical softened the grotesque and leaned into the tragic yearning. It was a Phantom tailored for new audiences—less terrifying, more tortured. Still, it retained the core elements of secrecy, seduction, and spectacle, paying homage to the original’s grandeur even as it remixed its emotional palette. Its success—over 13,000 performances on Broadway and counting—cements Phantom not just as a cinematic relic but as a living myth.

But stage success is just one thread in the Phantom’s sprawling afterlife. Hollywood has returned to the Opera House time and again: from the 1943 Technicolor remake starring Claude Rains to Hammer’s Gothic revision in 1962, to the campy rock version Phantom of the Paradise (1974), and even a heavy metal slasher rendition in the form of 1989’s Phantom of the Opera with Robert Englund. These remakes, reinterpretations, and reimaginings speak less to fidelity and more to the character’s adaptability. The Phantom fits horror, romance, satire, and music equally well—his mask reshaped for every era’s anxieties and aesthetics.

In pop culture, references abound. From cartoons like Scooby-Doo to dark satirical nods in The Simpsons, the Phantom’s visage is instantly recognisable: the half-mask, the cape, the subterranean lair. He’s an icon in the truest sense—instantly legible, instantly loaded with meaning. Even outside of horror, the trope of the scarred genius lurking beneath society, creating beauty in isolation, owes a debt to Chaney’s Erik.

Academia, too, has embraced Phantom. Scholars dissect it as a prototype of the modern antihero, a forerunner of “beauty and the beast” archetypes, and a text rich in psychoanalytic subtext—exploring trauma, desire, and the gaze. The Phantom, after all, is not just a villain but a mirror. Whether viewed through the lens of disability, queerness, or outsider identity, he reflects back cultural fears and fascinations with startling clarity.

And yet, perhaps the greatest legacy of The Phantom of the Opera lies in its mythic status. The original film is no longer just a film—it is legend. Its behind-the-scenes lore (from lost footage to production feuds), its technical innovations, and Chaney’s transformation have merged into a kind of folklore. Like the catacombs beneath the opera house, the Phantom’s story now tunnels through genre history—always present, even when unseen.

In every shadowy figure, every haunted genius, every romantic villain scorned by the world, there is something of the Phantom. He lives on—in sound and silence, in theatre and film, in tragedy and parody. He is deathless because he was never just a man. He is myth. He is mask. He is memory.

  • Saul Muerte

Closing Reflections: A Phantom That Will Never Die

The Heart of the Monster: Romance, Obsession, and the Tragic Outsider

08 Monday Sep 2025

Posted by in retrospective

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , ,

For all its eerie grandeur, The Phantom of the Opera (1925) is not simply a tale of horror—it’s a deeply tragic story of longing, beauty, and unrequited love. At its core lies a desperate ache for connection, veiled by a mask of terror. While Lon Chaney’s Phantom may haunt the opera house, it is his tortured soul—wounded by rejection and driven by a perverse devotion—that makes him unforgettable.

This is where the film transcends its genre roots. Unlike the mindless monsters of other early horror tales, Erik is painfully aware of his deformity and isolation. He composes music, writes letters, and navigates the underground labyrinth of his own making, not as a beast, but as a man shaped by the cruelty of others. His obsession with Christine is not merely a possessive infatuation—it’s a twisted hope for redemption through love. She becomes his muse, his salvation, and ultimately, his undoing.

This romantic fixation draws clear lines back to the Gothic tradition—the brooding figures of Frankenstein or The Hunchback of Notre Dame—but with a sharper emotional intimacy. Where Frankenstein’s creature lashes out against his creator and society, and Quasimodo resigns himself to fate, Erik is actively trying to shape his world, rewriting his tragedy as a love story, even as it inevitably collapses into horror.

The film also plays with the dualities of beauty and monstrosity. Christine, caught between the dashing Raoul and the shadowy Phantom, becomes more than a damsel—she’s the axis of a moral and emotional triangle. Her eventual pity for Erik, especially in the final scenes, brings an unexpected grace to the story. Unlike many horror films of the era, Phantom grants its monster a moment of tenderness before death—a silent farewell, not just to Christine, but to the dream of being loved.

Chaney’s performance imbues this romantic tragedy with raw, physical emotion. His gestures are operatic yet sincere; every tilt of the head or clutch of the heart echoes with yearning. When he reveals his face to Christine, the horror is visceral—but so too is the heartbreak.

In the end, The Phantom of the Opera is less a monster movie and more a requiem for those who live in the shadows, yearning to be seen. It tapped into a universal fear—not of creatures lurking in the dark, but of being unloved and alone. That’s the true horror at the heart of the Phantom—and perhaps why, a century later, we still feel his pain.

  • Saul Muerte

Afterlife of the Phantom: Cultural Echoes and Modern Resurrection

Faith on Trial: The Exorcism of Emily Rose and the Rise of Scott Derrickson

08 Monday Sep 2025

Posted by in retrospective

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , ,

Scott Derrickson’s The Exorcism of Emily Rose took an unusual approach to the possession subgenre, merging courtroom drama with supernatural horror. Loosely based on real events, the story centres on the trial of Father Moore (Tom Wilkinson), accused of negligent homicide following the death of Emily Rose (Jennifer Carpenter) after an exorcism. Defense attorney Erin Bruner, played by the ever-reliable Laura Linney, takes on the controversial case, quickly discovering that the line between legal fact and supernatural possibility is more porous than she imagined.

Linney’s grounded, intelligent performance gives the film its emotional and dramatic spine, portraying Bruner as a pragmatic lawyer whose certainty erodes in the face of unexplainable events. Opposite her, Jennifer Carpenter delivers a startlingly physical and haunting turn as Emily — her possession scenes rely as much on contortion and raw emotional vulnerability as on special effects, resulting in moments that are difficult to shake.

For Derrickson, Emily Rose marked a turning point. It demonstrated his ability to balance human drama with genre tension, an instinct he would refine in Sinister (2012) and push into blockbuster territory with Doctor Strange (2016). His most recent horror outing, The Black Phone (2021), saw him return to smaller-scale supernatural terror, blending coming-of-age suspense with eerie menace — a film that not only reaffirmed his horror credentials but also earned a loyal following. With a sequel to The Black Phone on the horizon, Derrickson’s ongoing trajectory suggests a director who remains committed to keeping one foot in the realm of genre thrills while continuing to evolve as a storyteller.

The Prognosis:

Not all of Emily Rose lands seamlessly — the tonal shifts between legal procedural and possession horror can be jarring, and the pacing occasionally stalls. Yet its ambition, anchored by two strong performances and an early showcase of Derrickson’s genre-bending skill, makes it a memorable entry in 2000s horror. While it may not deliver unrelenting terror, it offers a gripping glimpse at a filmmaker whose best work was still ahead.

  • Saul Muerte

Shadows and Stylization: German Expressionism’s Influence on The Phantom of the Opera

07 Sunday Sep 2025

Posted by in retrospective

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, , , , , ,

In the dim candlelit corridors and vertiginous staircases of The Phantom of the Opera lies a deep debt to German Expressionism—a cinematic movement that left an indelible mark on horror during the silent era. While the film is proudly American, its visual soul often drifts through the distorted dreamscapes of German classics like The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari (1920) and Nosferatu (1922), whose stylised aesthetics helped shape the visual grammar of horror cinema.

Though Phantom doesn’t lean fully into the extreme angularity and painted shadows that defined Expressionist sets, its moody chiaroscuro lighting, cavernous lairs, and symbolic use of architecture all channel the spirit of the movement. The Paris Opera House becomes a labyrinthine purgatory, with secret doors, subterranean lakes, and impossibly steep staircases that twist and descend like something from a fevered hallucination.

Lon Chaney’s Phantom, too, feels born of this tradition—his grotesque visage and tortured, isolated psyche akin to Caligari’s Cesare or Murnau’s Count Orlok. He is less monster than metaphor: a manifestation of anguish, obsession, and decay lurking beneath society’s grandest stage. Expressionism reveled in such figures—outsiders who moved through broken worlds, their inner torments reflected in warped surroundings. In Phantom, the opulence of the opera is a fragile mask over this subterranean madness.

Universal’s production didn’t imitate German Expressionism so much as absorb it, combining its stylised shadows with Hollywood scale and narrative structure. The result was a transatlantic hybrid: a film both gothic and grotesque, tethered to American melodrama yet haunted by European horror. And this synthesis would prove influential. Just a few years later, Universal would lean more heavily into Expressionist stylings with Dracula (1931) and Frankenstein (1931), cementing a house style that echoed the shadows of Weimar cinema.

The Phantom of the Opera may not always be cited alongside Caligari or Nosferatu in academic treatises on Expressionism, but its DNA is unmistakable. It stands as one of the first major American horror films to weave that spectral influence into the foundations of studio filmmaking—proof that the horror genre, even in its infancy, was already a global dialogue in shadows and silence.

  • Saul Muerte

The Heart of the Monster: Romance, Obsession, and the Tragic Outsider