Even today, Hollywood maintains a dubious love/hate relationship with superheroes.
Now, don’t get me wrong. Yes, the suits behind these production companies are only too happy to wring every dime of profit possible out of ticket sales when it comes to DC, Marvel, and other graphic-based intellectual properties; but rest assured that if you do any amount of serious reading into behind-the-scenes shenanigans – i.e. suggestions made by studio executives to changes they feel would better serve a story – you might think otherwise. Batman without his signature cape and cowl? Yep. That was suggested. When is Superman going back to visit Krypton in a future movie? Yep. That was intended as well. Can we have Spider-Man swinging about less? Believe it or not, that input was supplied as advice, too. If anything, this and other examples just go to show that not every effort gets spearheaded by the right creatives, and perhaps these forays into the worlds of spandex are really best left in the hands of those who capably demonstrate they understand the respective mythologies. Isn’t that what fans would ultimately want?
Going back even further into our cultural past can be even riskier. While champions like Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, and The Flash have been around for decades and continued to grow their fan bases, others like Hugo Hercules, Chandu The Magician, Dick Tracy, or The Shadow have languished in obscurity or been given limited expression in the marketplace with sub-par representations that felt more like fan fiction than authentic interpretations. While a theatrical outing here and there might’ve been met with modest clamor, these pictures never truly demonstrated the potential behind these heroes of old; and these masked (or not) do-gooders found themselves shelved yet again even though fandoms rarely balk at the chance to watch good triumph over evil again.
Such was the case with 1996’s The Phantom. While I’ll admit that I’m not as up on The Ghost Who Walks’ mythology as I am those of Batman, Superman, or The Shadow (my three personal favorites, if you’re wondering), I had enough passing familiarity with the property to know that, theatrically, it had fabulous potential. Directed by Simon Wincer (1980’s Harlequin and 1985’s D.A.R.Y.L.), Phantom’s script was penned by Jeffrey Boam (1983’s The Dead Zone and 1989’s Indiana Jones And The Last Crusade); and the film cast Billy Zane in the lead role alongside such supporting players as Kristy Swanson, Treat Williams, Catharine Zeta-Jones, and James Remar. Tonally, the feature works largely as a nostalgic throwback to the days when screen adventures were really for audiences of all ages; but, sadly, this one-off affair wasn’t enough to guarantee the costumed crimefighter a return visit to the multiplexes.
Now, don’t get me wrong. Yes, the suits behind these production companies are only too happy to wring every dime of profit possible out of ticket sales when it comes to DC, Marvel, and other graphic-based intellectual properties; but rest assured that if you do any amount of serious reading into behind-the-scenes shenanigans – i.e. suggestions made by studio executives to changes they feel would better serve a story – you might think otherwise. Batman without his signature cape and cowl? Yep. That was suggested. When is Superman going back to visit Krypton in a future movie? Yep. That was intended as well. Can we have Spider-Man swinging about less? Believe it or not, that input was supplied as advice, too. If anything, this and other examples just go to show that not every effort gets spearheaded by the right creatives, and perhaps these forays into the worlds of spandex are really best left in the hands of those who capably demonstrate they understand the respective mythologies. Isn’t that what fans would ultimately want?
Going back even further into our cultural past can be even riskier. While champions like Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, and The Flash have been around for decades and continued to grow their fan bases, others like Hugo Hercules, Chandu The Magician, Dick Tracy, or The Shadow have languished in obscurity or been given limited expression in the marketplace with sub-par representations that felt more like fan fiction than authentic interpretations. While a theatrical outing here and there might’ve been met with modest clamor, these pictures never truly demonstrated the potential behind these heroes of old; and these masked (or not) do-gooders found themselves shelved yet again even though fandoms rarely balk at the chance to watch good triumph over evil again.
Such was the case with 1996’s The Phantom. While I’ll admit that I’m not as up on The Ghost Who Walks’ mythology as I am those of Batman, Superman, or The Shadow (my three personal favorites, if you’re wondering), I had enough passing familiarity with the property to know that, theatrically, it had fabulous potential. Directed by Simon Wincer (1980’s Harlequin and 1985’s D.A.R.Y.L.), Phantom’s script was penned by Jeffrey Boam (1983’s The Dead Zone and 1989’s Indiana Jones And The Last Crusade); and the film cast Billy Zane in the lead role alongside such supporting players as Kristy Swanson, Treat Williams, Catharine Zeta-Jones, and James Remar. Tonally, the feature works largely as a nostalgic throwback to the days when screen adventures were really for audiences of all ages; but, sadly, this one-off affair wasn’t enough to guarantee the costumed crimefighter a return visit to the multiplexes.
(NOTE: The following review will contain minor spoilers necessary solely for the discussion of plot and/or characters. If you’re the type of reader who prefers a review entirely spoiler-free, then I’d encourage you to skip down to the last few paragraphs for the final assessment. If, however, you’re accepting of a few modest hints at ‘things to come,’ then read on …)
From the film’s IMDB.com page citation:
“The Phantom, descendent of a line of African superheroes, travels to New York City to thwart a wealthy criminal genius from obtaining three magic skulls which would give him the secret to ultimate power.”
Folks, I can specifically recall being somewhat totally geeked out with anticipation back in the days when I learned that The Phantom was coming to the silver screen.
You see, I grew up a huge fan of pulp properties; and having just been so horrifically disappointed with how badly director Russell Mulcahy and actor Alec Baldwin (of all people) had theatrically butchered The Shadow in 1994, I hoped that The Phantom might serve as a return to form for heroes that had largely vanished from the zeitgeist. Having also amicably sat through such marginal attempts to reinvigorate cinemas to the dynamism of the 1930’s with Dick Tracy (1990) and The Rocketeer (1991), I really, really, really wanted this attempt to produce something special. The theatrical trailer for the forthcoming release had the right look; all that was needed now was a story big enough to catapult this purple-clad adventurer with his blazing .45’s and his skull-bearing belt into our collective consciousness, and I would be one happy camper.
Sigh.
As I often counsel readers, it ain’t always easy being a fan of our respective pursuits because so many folks who work in or around the entertainment industry just don’t see things the way we do. When there are volumes upon volumes of source material that can effectively be drawn upon to craft a winning adventure, these movers and shakers would instead pick-and-choose the elements they desire to spin their own interpretation even if it bears little resemblance to the original tales. In other words, putting any Tom, Dick, or Harry under the cowl and giving him a souped-up street racer is good enough to convince most moviegoers that he’s Batman … but actor Billy Zane’s turn as The Phantom was little more than a celebrity lookalike for writer Lee Falk’s original Kit Walker – aka ‘The Man Who Cannot Die.’
Having done a bit of research into the making of the film, I’m well aware that screenwriter Boam had originally intended his draft to be a superhero spoof and not one more notch in cultural utility belt. 1989’s Batman had pierced the veil (as they say), and truly lit a fire amongst studio executives to the gold mine that was action/adventure material; so the resulting trend brought about a respectable number of knock-offs and/or subsidiaries. Why not jump into that bedlam right away and go in a vastly more comic direction? Whether or not Boam drew inspiration from that Tim Burton project or not I’ve never established, but it’s clear to see some baseline similarities between the two efforts. However, somewhere between the script’s finish and a change in the director’s seat (Joe Dante left and Simon Wincer came in) it’s very clear that this version of The Phantom wasn’t so much comical as it was intellectually vapid.
In fact, The Phantom opens with little more than a typeset shot that reads “For those who came in late …”
From the film’s IMDB.com page citation:
“The Phantom, descendent of a line of African superheroes, travels to New York City to thwart a wealthy criminal genius from obtaining three magic skulls which would give him the secret to ultimate power.”
Folks, I can specifically recall being somewhat totally geeked out with anticipation back in the days when I learned that The Phantom was coming to the silver screen.
You see, I grew up a huge fan of pulp properties; and having just been so horrifically disappointed with how badly director Russell Mulcahy and actor Alec Baldwin (of all people) had theatrically butchered The Shadow in 1994, I hoped that The Phantom might serve as a return to form for heroes that had largely vanished from the zeitgeist. Having also amicably sat through such marginal attempts to reinvigorate cinemas to the dynamism of the 1930’s with Dick Tracy (1990) and The Rocketeer (1991), I really, really, really wanted this attempt to produce something special. The theatrical trailer for the forthcoming release had the right look; all that was needed now was a story big enough to catapult this purple-clad adventurer with his blazing .45’s and his skull-bearing belt into our collective consciousness, and I would be one happy camper.
Sigh.
As I often counsel readers, it ain’t always easy being a fan of our respective pursuits because so many folks who work in or around the entertainment industry just don’t see things the way we do. When there are volumes upon volumes of source material that can effectively be drawn upon to craft a winning adventure, these movers and shakers would instead pick-and-choose the elements they desire to spin their own interpretation even if it bears little resemblance to the original tales. In other words, putting any Tom, Dick, or Harry under the cowl and giving him a souped-up street racer is good enough to convince most moviegoers that he’s Batman … but actor Billy Zane’s turn as The Phantom was little more than a celebrity lookalike for writer Lee Falk’s original Kit Walker – aka ‘The Man Who Cannot Die.’
Having done a bit of research into the making of the film, I’m well aware that screenwriter Boam had originally intended his draft to be a superhero spoof and not one more notch in cultural utility belt. 1989’s Batman had pierced the veil (as they say), and truly lit a fire amongst studio executives to the gold mine that was action/adventure material; so the resulting trend brought about a respectable number of knock-offs and/or subsidiaries. Why not jump into that bedlam right away and go in a vastly more comic direction? Whether or not Boam drew inspiration from that Tim Burton project or not I’ve never established, but it’s clear to see some baseline similarities between the two efforts. However, somewhere between the script’s finish and a change in the director’s seat (Joe Dante left and Simon Wincer came in) it’s very clear that this version of The Phantom wasn’t so much comical as it was intellectually vapid.
In fact, The Phantom opens with little more than a typeset shot that reads “For those who came in late …”
Now, I hate to harp on first shots because – let’s face it – they’re little more than narrative hooks, but such a banal set-up kinda/sorta implies that there’s more to that story but we’re choosing to begin it right here. Who came in late? Why were they not on time? Did what happened before this not matter? Are you openly mocking the audience? To what end? The list of questions only grows longer the more one thinks about why any intelligent person would begin a superhero movie with this opening; and I’m not sure the picture ever really recovers. Granted, what follows is a very, very, very quick hint at an origin story, and yet there’s still no escaping the loose parody implied from that first placard.
Rather quickly, the film turns into what starts to look like a copy of 1980’s vastly superior Raiders Of The Lost Ark – not surprisingly, perhaps, given Boam’s involvement with 1989’s Last Crusade – with screen veteran James Remar filling the shoes as a kinda/sorta villainous Indy knock-off known only as Quill. Apparently, he’s been traveling the world raiding tombs all in pursuit of archaeological relics being sought by his employer Xander Drax (Treat Williams) and Sengh Brotherhood, a rather nebulous group of sea pirates tied to the original Phantom’s origin story. (For those who came in late, The Phantom appears to be immortal because successive incarnations are little more than the adult offspring of the man who served under the mask previously.) Eventually, the tombs appear, and they’re looted predictably, all of which sets this Phantom hot on the heels of Quill and his associates.
What gives this opening caper the narrative depth to propel an entire motion picture is that among the stolen treasure Quill finds one of the Skulls of Touganda. History says that – like Raiders’ Ark Of The Covenant – an army that can find and join the three (or is it four) skulls together will be invincible; and this through-line pushes both The Phantom and his Bruce-Wayne-like counterpart – Kit Walker – to pursue Quill and company back to New York City after their business is concluded in the Bengalla Jungle. Naturally, there’s a fair amount of derring-do that takes place in the Big Apple, including the introduction of Drax and the loose realization that he’s little more than your routine capitalist with a thirst for global domination though we’re never quite given any legitimate reason why. (FYI: Hollywood hates capitalists, don’t you know?)
Sadly, the resulting story never really rises above the level of feeling as if it was intended as anything greater than being an excuse to string its separate action sequences into one convoluted whole. Characters have no depth – Williams does what he can to supply the big villain with the charisma to chew scenery with dialogue no more memorable than the words on that opening placard, and Swanson tries to muster the same level of pluckiness that made her at least watchable in Buffy The Vampire Slayer (1992). The sequences – while theatrically pretty – spool out in pretty much the way everyone expects. Even the effects – reasonably quaint by early 1990’s standards – have the look of being throwbacks to what the studios were doing a decade or two earlier, so where’s all the excitement for a new superhero when this has been done before? Why, it’s almost like this was all meant to be parody … only it’s (allegedly) not.
As for The Phantom’s blazing .45’s?
Well, under Wincer’s adequate direction, The Phantom is the kind of motion picture where the hero only uses his weapons to shoot the gun out of his opponents’ hands.
Rather quickly, the film turns into what starts to look like a copy of 1980’s vastly superior Raiders Of The Lost Ark – not surprisingly, perhaps, given Boam’s involvement with 1989’s Last Crusade – with screen veteran James Remar filling the shoes as a kinda/sorta villainous Indy knock-off known only as Quill. Apparently, he’s been traveling the world raiding tombs all in pursuit of archaeological relics being sought by his employer Xander Drax (Treat Williams) and Sengh Brotherhood, a rather nebulous group of sea pirates tied to the original Phantom’s origin story. (For those who came in late, The Phantom appears to be immortal because successive incarnations are little more than the adult offspring of the man who served under the mask previously.) Eventually, the tombs appear, and they’re looted predictably, all of which sets this Phantom hot on the heels of Quill and his associates.
What gives this opening caper the narrative depth to propel an entire motion picture is that among the stolen treasure Quill finds one of the Skulls of Touganda. History says that – like Raiders’ Ark Of The Covenant – an army that can find and join the three (or is it four) skulls together will be invincible; and this through-line pushes both The Phantom and his Bruce-Wayne-like counterpart – Kit Walker – to pursue Quill and company back to New York City after their business is concluded in the Bengalla Jungle. Naturally, there’s a fair amount of derring-do that takes place in the Big Apple, including the introduction of Drax and the loose realization that he’s little more than your routine capitalist with a thirst for global domination though we’re never quite given any legitimate reason why. (FYI: Hollywood hates capitalists, don’t you know?)
Sadly, the resulting story never really rises above the level of feeling as if it was intended as anything greater than being an excuse to string its separate action sequences into one convoluted whole. Characters have no depth – Williams does what he can to supply the big villain with the charisma to chew scenery with dialogue no more memorable than the words on that opening placard, and Swanson tries to muster the same level of pluckiness that made her at least watchable in Buffy The Vampire Slayer (1992). The sequences – while theatrically pretty – spool out in pretty much the way everyone expects. Even the effects – reasonably quaint by early 1990’s standards – have the look of being throwbacks to what the studios were doing a decade or two earlier, so where’s all the excitement for a new superhero when this has been done before? Why, it’s almost like this was all meant to be parody … only it’s (allegedly) not.
As for The Phantom’s blazing .45’s?
Well, under Wincer’s adequate direction, The Phantom is the kind of motion picture where the hero only uses his weapons to shoot the gun out of his opponents’ hands.
At best, what emerges from this outing is little more than a bloated kid’s movie, something that feels like the kind of thing studios were attempting before 1989’s Batman brought a measure of Gothic-feel and borderline psychological menace to the party. When setting the escapade in the 1930’s was – so far as I’m concerned – the kind of sheer genius that could’ve propelled the property to the same kind of aesthetics developed and exploited so (damn) well in the Indiana Jones franchise, this Phantom dumbs down its tenor in pursuit of small moments instead of big ones. While its occasional campiness works, Wincer and Boam relied too heavily on delivering cartoonish simplicity to the whole affair. Even the luminous Zeta-Jones is wasted – as is the reliable Cary-Hiroyuki Tagawa as ‘The Great Kabai Sengh’ – is such a cardboard construction.
The Phantom (1996) was produced by Paramount Pictures, The Ladd Company, Boam Productions, Robert Evans Company, and Village Roadshow Pictures. DVD distribution (for this particular release) has been coordinated by the fine folks at Paramount Pictures. As for the technical specifications? While I’m no trained video expert, I thought that the provided sights and sounds were very good from start-to-finish: this would look to be sourced from the original release, and I do not believe that there has been any rescanning or updates to the source material. Lastly, if you’re looking for special features? Well, you have only an obligatory theatrical trailer to look forward to.
Alas … only Mildly Recommended.
Yes, I’ll admit decades later to being so hugely disappointed by The Phantom (1996) that I really haven’t given the property so much as a second thought. While its setting had promise and its cast had talent, the resulting film is one of those opportunities that exists to be studied as how could so many positive attributes wind up being misused in the process? Perhaps a team that truly loved the character could've done better than begin with a script meant to lampoon him, but what do I know? Like The Shadow and The Rocketeer and Dick Tracy, I’m still holding out hope for big screen iterations that show audiences what’s possible when the magic happens … and, yet, at this late date in my life, I’ve come to peace with the fact that this may be the best those properties ever get.
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Warner Archive provided me with a complimentary DVD of The Phantom (1996) by request for the expressed purpose of completing this review. Their contribution to me in no way, shape, or form influenced my opinion of it.
-- EZ
The Phantom (1996) was produced by Paramount Pictures, The Ladd Company, Boam Productions, Robert Evans Company, and Village Roadshow Pictures. DVD distribution (for this particular release) has been coordinated by the fine folks at Paramount Pictures. As for the technical specifications? While I’m no trained video expert, I thought that the provided sights and sounds were very good from start-to-finish: this would look to be sourced from the original release, and I do not believe that there has been any rescanning or updates to the source material. Lastly, if you’re looking for special features? Well, you have only an obligatory theatrical trailer to look forward to.
Alas … only Mildly Recommended.
Yes, I’ll admit decades later to being so hugely disappointed by The Phantom (1996) that I really haven’t given the property so much as a second thought. While its setting had promise and its cast had talent, the resulting film is one of those opportunities that exists to be studied as how could so many positive attributes wind up being misused in the process? Perhaps a team that truly loved the character could've done better than begin with a script meant to lampoon him, but what do I know? Like The Shadow and The Rocketeer and Dick Tracy, I’m still holding out hope for big screen iterations that show audiences what’s possible when the magic happens … and, yet, at this late date in my life, I’ve come to peace with the fact that this may be the best those properties ever get.
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Warner Archive provided me with a complimentary DVD of The Phantom (1996) by request for the expressed purpose of completing this review. Their contribution to me in no way, shape, or form influenced my opinion of it.
-- EZ
RSS Feed