He sits there unaware in the darkness of his catacombs. Cloaked and masked. Who is he? “Those who have seen your face, draw back in fear. I am the mask you wear. It’s me they hear…” Blissfully involved in his music, he composes a strange aria at his cobwebbed cathedral organ. Music of the night that calls your name. “Sing once again for me, our strange duet. My power over you grows stronger yet.” His song has seduced you since you heard the first note. Calling you as a child from a TV screen. “In all your fantasies you always knew, that man and mystery were both in you…” His name was Lon Chaney then. But later, he was a Technicolor Claude Rains. A Hammer horror Herbert Lom. In the 80’s, you saw him on the splatter screen as Robert Englund. Then he took to the stage in the rock and roll form of Paul Stanley. And now he sings once again as Gerard Butler, romantically brooding in a lavish Oscar worthy modern musical spectacle. “My spirit and my voice in one combined. The Phantom of the Opera is there… Inside your mind!”

DRACULA may have been my first horror movie, but PHANTOM OF THE OPERA was my first obsession. I never even saw the entire film till I was in my teens, thanks to a showing on the same Public Broadcast Station that ran SESEME STREET (Go figure…). But all I needed was to see a leering photograph of Chaney Sr., the first horror star, in that 96th issue of FAMOUS MONSTERS, and damn… I was hooked. The caption, taken directly from the unmasking scene of the 1925 silent classic, invited young readers to “Feast you eyes! Gloat your soul on my accursed ugliness!” Well, I feasted. I gloated. I devoured everything and anything Phantom. I bought the Aurora monster model. Made my artist of a grandmother draw me her version of that very same model’s box cover (no cutesy poo Disney characters for her grandson. Nope! It was ghouls and goblins from day one!) In second grade at the tender age of 7, I donned my first Phantom mask and homemade cape and add my “interpretation” of that misunderstood denizen of the dark. What a thrill when Andrew Lloyd Weber brought the Paris Opera to the New York stage in 1987. Two years later, my favorite modern horror icon (and future star of my first feature film!) Robert Englund would essay the role in a bloody version very loyal to the “splatter” cellouloids of its time. Even more thrilling, in 1999, my all time favorite rock star, Paul Stanley, he of the shock rock group KISS, would take to the Toronto stage at the tail end of a film we worked on together, DETROIT ROCK CITY, merging my mutual love of monsters and metal to sing the role of the Phantom in a once-in-a-lifetime experience that still resonates with those lucky to have caught it.

And now, the doors to the Opera ghost’s domain have flung wide open again. Gerard Butler of DRACULA 2000 fame has traded his fangs for the infamous mask in the much anticipated screen version of Andrew Lloyd Weber’s stage phenomenon. I was blessed with the opportunity to attend the LA premiere, where, incredibly enough, I found myself sitting between Paul Stanley on my right, and, on my left, none other than the great grandson of the original Phantom himself, Mr. Ron Chaney. This lead to much conversation about the eternal appeal of the Phantom (not to mention my obsession) conversations which form this double feature edition of Shock and Roll… as well as the next, in which Robert Englund tosses in his two cents on the Phantom’s mythology. “And do I dream again, for now I find.. The Phantom of the Opera is there, inside my mind.”

Do you remember the first time you ever saw your great grandfather’s performance as the Phantom?

I don’t really remember the first time I saw it. I remember photos we had, different things on television, short clips on TV, the unmasking scene… I had been aware of it forever, but the first time I really got myself involved was when a friend of mine had a presentation back in Connecticut where he played the film with an orchestra accompanying the film. And then I also went to an event celebrating the 100 th birthday of Lon Sr. in 1983. Forry Ackerman had just released his book, LON OF A THOUSAND FACES. Then I went on to produce my own show at the Palm Springs International Film Festival. We showed the original 1925 version, not the 1929 re-edited version, and I had reconstructed the original musical score that had accompanied the film’s release, and had an orchestra play it live. And then, of course, when the US Postage Stamp came out in 1997… You know, they actually weren’t going to do a PHANTOM stamp because Lon Sr. had been honored in ’94 with the silent screen stars. Very rarely do they ever put somebody on a postage stamp twice. But we campaigned and the advisory committee went back and voted to add him to it. After all, he was the original of the monsters, and I think PHANTOM really portrayed that. Maybe not as a monster, but probably the make-up was perceived to be a monster.

Well, so many of his characters were these misunderstood people who society called monsters, but really weren’t. I think the pathos was a staple of all his performances, particularly with the Phantom.

Oh, absolutely. Undoubtedly. All Phantoms of the Opera will be measured against Chaney, both his make-up and his performance. It will always be that way because he was the original and it was his interpretation of Gaston Leroux’s novel that brought that book to the forefront and left it indelibly in film history. And, as we see today, it’s still going. I mean, the musical is a phenomenon.

Did you enjoy the musical?

Oh, God, I love it. You know, I actually attended the LA premiere of Phantom and when Michael Crawford was doing the lead. I got to meet him after the show, and when I introduced myself to him, he kind of looked up at me, they were tearing his make-up off, and he just kind of stared at me, shook my hand and said, “I studied your great grandfather’s a long time to prepare for this role. I hope I’ve done justice to what he’s done.” That was really special for me.

What are some of the stories that your grandfather, Lon Jr., the Wolfman himself, has told you about his father?

There are so many, but there is one I will never forget. Because Lon Sr. always wore such heavy make-ups, he could walk about in public quite freely for the most part, even though he was the world’s biggest movie star at the time. See, no one really knew what he looked like. Well, to get ideas for his characters, Lon would take long walks by himself, studying people. Now, remember, at this time, a lot of young men were coming back from World War horribly disfigured from combat injuries. These poor guys were often shunned because they were so mutilated. Well, one day, Lon was walking along the docks, doing his thing, when a group of men started following him. It was quite foggy, but through the fog Lon could see that two of the men were both missing a leg, and so they were leaning on each other in order to walk. Basically the two of them formed one complete man. One of the other guys was terribly burned, and the fourth looked like the top of his head was dented in. Now these guys start following Lon in this isolated area, and all he could think was these guys were gonna rob him. So he sped up his step and made it to his home. Next thing you know there’s a knock at the door. Lon cautiously opens it, and there are all four of these men standing in the shadows. Turns out, they somehow recognized Lon, and wanted to thank him for taking on roles that showed the humanity and heart beneath an often ugly exterior. They said that because of Lon, people who had shunned them before were now understanding and accepting. They told Lon he was the “King of the Misshapen.” This became a title my great-grandfather took very seriously.

Wow. What a moving story. Chaney certainly did take on that title. His make-up creations are nothing less than iconic. What was his process?

Well, Lon Sr. always worked on his make-up at home first. He would perfect it, check lighting techniques, things of that nature. Once he believed he had the character developed, then he would go to the studio when the film was on, but this development was all done prior to the film taking place. He was very much a person to make sure production wasn’t held up because of him. And PHANTOM was a painful make-up for him, and a lot of what he did was experimental. It had never been done before. To achieve some of those effects, he had to experiment on himself, and some of them would go wrong (laughs).

He really suffered for his art, huh?

I’ve heard it said that he was a masochist or something, and that is so far from the truth. He certainly didn’t want to endure any more pain than anybody else. But to achieve it, he had to experiment.

I can’t imagine what it must have been like to actually see him on the set in his full costume and make-up. I would love to know what it looked like up close and in color. What it was like to be an actor opposite your great grandfather…

I’ve got several comments from people who worked with him. On the PHANTOM, he apparently didn’t get along with the director very well. And in a lot of cases, he did a lot of the directing himself. But certainly long before the filming took place, he was into reading the author’s version. So he had read PHANTOM OF THE OPERA and tried to achieve the character’s look based on what Gaton Leroux wrote, what that skull like character looked like. He always based his characters on what the author was trying to achieve.

I’ve heard he directed a lot of his own sequences in PHANTOM. If you see the film, the camera angles and editing of the scenes with the Phantom are just so far superior to the rest of the film.

Yes, he didn’t get along with director Rupert Julian very well, and it probably was due to the fact that his father was sick at the time, and they were making heavy demands upon Lon Sr., and he was torn between taking care of his father and doing his job. And I think it created some conflict with Julian that ultimately led to something else, a difference of opinion. Now Lon was a major star at the time, and when he walked on to the set, he was ready to go and do his job, and was pretty much in control of that set. I’ve heard that directly from Loretta Young that once he walked on, it was basically his set. I know that he and Tod Browning, who directed him in so many films including LONDON AFTER MIDNIGHT, got along really well because Browning completely allowed Chaney to create the interpretation of the character and how the character would be captured on film.

So, okay, say I’ve never seen the film before. What version should I track down?

Most versions of the PHANTOM that people see is the 1929 re-edited version were they shot new scenes, put some talking in there, added new music. Chaney’s scenes never changed, however. Now the 1925 version is the one that you do see the different camera angles, and most people don’t see that one because the only existing prints are 16mm prints that aren’t as clear and crisp. So people tend to take the 1929 re-edited version because it’s a better print. However with the cuts and edits, it doesn’t make as much sense as the original version, which fleshes out the characters. The ’29 version leaves you guessing. So the definitive version of PHANTOM OF THE OPERA is certainly the 1925 version. I do believe Image just put a new one out that has both versions of it.

As a kid, I always loved MAN OF A THOUSAND FACES, the biopic about Lon Sr. But now, I just feel there’s a better version of your great grandfather’s life that could be done. Have there been any attempts to do that?

You know, years ago, when I took this banner on to preserve and perpetuate the legacy, my grandmother was still alive, and we were moving her from the house she had been living in for years, and we came across boxes full of pictures and all these notes for this book that my grandfather, Lon Jr, was working on. And when I opened those, I knew at that moment that it was time to remake a movie on him and do it more accurately. There were definitely some liberties taken on MAN OF A THOUSAND FACES, and now that I’ve done ten years of research, making a new movie has always been one of my goals. You know, to put the facts down, and make another story of his life. Now MAN OF A THOUSAND FACES was a very good film, but it was very much out of chronological order. And I’ve done my best to go back and really lay a foundation of who he was, what he endured. Because people remember him for being famous, but they forget the forty years of struggle he had before that. He was very guarded with his success, and very untrusting of Hollywood in general. There’s a lot to the man’s life that has never been revealed before.

Who do you think could play your great grandfather? Who could do him justice?

I get asked that quite often. There are several really good actors out there. You know… I think somebody with some stage background certainly would help. I thought of Gary Sinese. I think maybe James Woods. What I always thought of MAN OF A THOUSAND FACES, you know, James Cagney did a wonderful job, he was a wonderful actor, but he didn’t look like Chaney at all, so the creature make-ups didn’t take to him that well. So I would have to say bone structure-wise, facial features, if you really wanted to achieve what he did, you’d have to go in that Sinese/Woods line. Now, I get criticized sometimes for saying this, but you know, I’ve looked at several of his films and I know he had an early comedy career, but he’s done some interesting dramatic work, and it’s Jim Carrey.

Wow. You know… he would be amazing.

Well, I’ve seen pictures of Lon Sr. from his stage days, where he could change his look in an instant. And I see Carrey doing that, being able to change his face and have that motion and range. And some of the films I’ve seen, he’s shown that pathos that needs to be there, because it was such a part of Lon Sr.’s life.

Jim Carrey as the Man of a Thousand Faces. Perfect.

Everybody looks at Carrey as a comedian, but Chaney was a comedian as well. In his stage days, that’s what he did. And then as he developed his career, obviously drama and horror, but he started out in comedy.

Would Universal need to bless this?

I don’t think so. Chaney’s films are all in public domain. And I have my great grandmother’s notes. I have her diary of her early days on the road with him. I’ve got his second wife’s notes. I’ve got my grandfather’s notes. I’ve got thousands of photographs. Set designs. I’ve been doing research for years and my goal has always been to do that film. I truly have always felt in my heart that if done properly, it is an Oscar film.

So what does the Phantom’s great-grandson do for a living, Ron?

Well, I’ve been a contractor for years, but right now, I’m going back to work on the book. We’re going through all of our archives, I’ve been data basing everything, and my goal is to tell his story. I’ve actually written an outline for it. I start it in 1927, and then I revert back a little bit and then come forward again. I’m not much of a writer, I see things visually. But I have written a few screenplays myself, you know, in the Chaney vein. CURSE OF THE WOL FMAN was one, a sequel to THE WOL FMAN. And then I wrote a supernatural western called PHANTOM RIDER for which I did some photos of myself wearing the Phantom make-up of my great grandfather’s. Interestingly enough, I look an awful lot like him in make-up.

It’s an amazing legacy that your great grandfather has left us and I thank you for keeping that alive.

I appreciate that. I’m really doing my best to perpetuate that legacy and have new audiences enjoy that. In fact, when we did our show, we screened it for elementary and high schools, and the comments coming out of them were amazing. These were teenagers and young kids, and they were blown away by the movie. They had never been exposed to it, and that gave me hope that, you know, if they see it, they’ll enjoy it.

Click here to purchase Image’s definitive edition of PHANTOM OF THE OPERA.

CONTINUE TO SECOND HALF WITH PAUL STANLEY >>