The Phantom Project Forum

Despite the fact that it's never really bothered me before, why the hell does Christine freak out after Buquet 'drops down' dead?

I've been listening to the score a lot at work, but I cannot figure out why Christine from Webber's musical freaks out and thinks the Phantom is going to kill anyone and everyone in sight.

Yeah, she got a fright when the Phantom got pissy for her taking off his mask, but he never implied that he'd kill her or anyone she knew. All he does is say that she'll never be able to get his deformed face out of her mind. Yet she's convinced that he'll kill her and everyone else she knows.

As far as I can tell, there isn't even much reason for her to assume that the death of Buquet has anything to do with her. He gets knocked off in the musical because he's teasing the Phantom. So, really, that's nothing to do with her.

Now, I could take the musical at face value and go with her thoughts of "he kills without a thought, he murders all that's good", but frankly, that makes no damn sense to me. Up to that point, the only person in the whole musical to get knocked off is Buquet - and as I said, that didn't really have much to do with her. And there's nothing to imply he didn't think about it - actually he did think about cause he warned that a 'disaster beyond your imagination will occur' - so that's really quite a bit of forward thinking on his behalf. He likes think out his killings, Piangi included.

Additionally there's no evidence that Buquet was even good. He didn't stay at his post - and blamed it on the Phantom (correctly, but not the point) and he was scaring the chorus girls. So, he had an itty bitty cross against his name, but he was still an okay guy I guess. If the Phantom had sliced and diced someone else, say for example, Meg - then I might be more inclined to believe that Webber's Phantom is a bit more deranged.

Ignoring the film where Christine is meant to be a teenager, I've never considered the musical Christine to be a whippersnapper. I always thought she was in her early twenties. So if she's terrified of him because he's a bit ugly, then holy hell, she's ridiculously immature and superficial. She liked him well enough until she saw his face. Then he becomes evil in her eyes.

So by time they're in his lair again, he's killed Buquet, has demanded his opera be performed, has killed Piangi and kidnapped her.

She chooses now to get all pissy and taunt him. He pretty much explains that he gets that his faces scares her, but he still wants her (though he goes about it all wrong). Strangely, she then declares that his face doesn't scare her anymore, despite the fact that she's been terrified of it and him up until now. All it took was a kidnapping and hey presto, the Phantom's face isn't scary anymore. And she then proceeds to tell him that he's crazy. Which is a great idea, isn't it? Telling the guy you've been terrified of for most of the musical and who just kidnapped you that he's crazy? Bonus points for smarts there, Christine.

Now in that pause after she's just called him 'distorted' aka crazy, I think that Christine has the oppurtunity to show some backbone, reason with him and be a bit more mature. She's not hypnotised here like she usually is when she's been with him - she could tartly point out that he isn't being gentlemanly about earning her affection, or at the very least, try to reason with him. Alas, this doesn't happen.

Instead, Raoul shows up and she briefly becomes a damsel in distress again. Then Raoul becomes the 'damsel' in distress, so she 'sacrifices' herself. Because she's so nice and pashes the Phantom, she redeems the Phantom cause he lets Raoul go. I'm not convinced this makes musical Christine more mature, just a bit more logical. If Raoul kicks the bucket, he can't come back and rescue her, can he? So she picks the Phantom and Raoul gets to live - and I'm sure he would have come back to get her.

Or I'm just cynical.

Original book Christine made her sacrifice knowing full well what the Phantom was like, so her decision was more informed. She didn't run around like a nutjob telling everyone that he was going to kill her and everyone she knows.

Alternatively, if I were to view Webber's musical on a more symbolic scale (which I sincerely doubt it's meant to be), I could hypothesize that Christine stayed with the Phantom longer than fifteen minutes and he told her some of his history.

So going with this theory, the Phantom might have told her 'Yeah, I kill people for shits and giggles" or "If you annoy me, I'll off you." This would be more logical to me in explaining why she's so afraid everyone is going to die.

If she'd stayed longer, returned, and then gone back again as original Christine does, then it might also explain why Raoul has a hissy fit when he gets his note telling him to stay away, despite her saying 'No' to him in her change room the night before.

Basically, in this whimsical idea I'm pondering, I think Webber has tried to follow the book.... but got bored with it and just done his own, somewhat illogical, thing. The original book makes sense. The musical has a few too many plotholes - and the whole 'he's going to kill me and everyone else' concept crosses over into the film version too.

So, in conclusion to this odd rant, I still love the musical to bits.... but I still feel the need to justify Christine's strange thought processes.