There is no OBCR. Well, there was an OBC recording (of sorts) that was issued. Actually, it was the London cast recording repackaged using "Original Broadway Cast" on the spine and the addition of a small American flag in the upper right corner of the front cover. It was the only time I had ever seen this sort of marketing ploy used with a cast recording.
Why do people have to shield their eyes when entering the Phantom's lair? That is actually explained in the show. They are not sheilding their eyes. They keep their hands "at the level" of their eyes to avoid being hanged by the "magical lasso".
Why are there floating candles on the underground lake? Who lights them? That's not a loophole in the libretto. It is a visual feature of the design which is rather inconsequential. The story had already been long-established as a romantic horror fantasy, so questioning the use of such visual effects is sort of pointless. It's sort of like asking why Rapunzel couldn't escape a tower only 15 feet tall in Into the Woods.
How did the Phantom become so hideously deformed? Good question, though not really essential to the plot, but it is more of a curiosity. Kopit and Yeston's Phantom answered this question beautifully in a stunning number not included on the cast recording.
What lighting fixture can fall at a 90 degree angle? It's not 90 degrees, but it does change its trajectory mid-fall. Again, special effect not a libretto loophole. Suspension of disbelief is required just as with Hello Dolly when people burst into spontaneous song and dance with matching choreography.
How did the Phantom develop his supernatureal abilities? That's the one question I've always had. Though it's not explicitly explained, it is implied that he has some sort of supernatural magical qualities, which is very odd.
When you can write something as successful then you MIGHT have a little creditability Credibility for what? Forming an informed opinion and posing some rather obvious questions? You don't need to be a librettist to make observations.
My problem is a bit more basic in nature: that the audience is expected to sympathize with a stalker/kidnapper/murderer. I don't
hate Phantom of the Opera, but it's not one of my favorite shows. Probably because I worked on two of the tours for such a long time and the first was one of the worst experiences of my life. But even before then, the first time I saw it, I thought it was visually stunning, but I quickly got bored with the overly repetitive score and the book is quite weak. Christine comes off looking like a gullible idiot. Raoul and Madame Giry are woefully underwritten when they had potential to be incredibly vital complex characters. Meg is pointless other than to demonstrate that Christine had at least one friend at some point in time (that and she introduces us to Angel of Music, which we will be assaulted with ten more times throughout the evening). And as I said earlier, the real protagonist of the musical is an evil manipulator whom we know nothing about and nothing is ever revealed other than he was disfigured at some point in his life, but we feel bad for him because he has pretty music.
"What can you expect from a bunch of seitan worshippers?" - Reginald Tresilian
Anyway, I actually love Phantom of the Opera! I just think it's flawed. And one of the reasons why I've been... dissecting the librettos of musicals lately is because I love writing scripts and song parodies, and I'd like to be a lyricist or book-writer for musicals someday. I'm sorry I offended you, though. 
