Quasimodo, eh. That name rings a bell. *guffaw*
With that lame gag out of the way, it's worth starting this review by mentioning that THAT gag is funnier than most of the lines in this movie. I could also belt out a tune and tell you that my choice of songs would be better than most of the tunes in this movie. Neither of these things made me enjoy the film any less though. I'm just making this clear at the very start.
My lame gag is also a way of clarifying that I'm going to assume people know enough about this story already. Written by Victor Hugo, The Hunchback Of Notre Dame is all about a deformed bell-ringer (Quasimodo, voiced here by Tom Hulce) who lives in the heights of Notre Dame Cathedral. He ends up out in the midst of the public one day, jeered and mocked, and shown some kindness from a beautiful Gypsy woman (Esmeralda, voiced by Demi Moore). The plot then concerns Quasimodo's love for the woman who was kind to him, a "trespassing" suitor (Captain Phoebus, played by Kevin Kline), and the nasty Judge Claude Frollo (voiced by Tony Jay), who is the acting guardian of Quasimodo.
So, bearing in mind it's not too funny and none of the songs are that memorable, what would make The Hunchback Of Notre Dame worth your time? Well, it's just a really good movie, and one that incorporates a number of themes not usually found in cute and colourful animated outings. And the fact that it's not too funny doesn't mean it's completely unfunny, while the songs not being too memorable doesn't mean that they're bad. I found this entertaining throughout, and I enjoyed a few of the main songs, even if I cannot hum any of the tunes right now. Maybe a rewatch will change that.
Written by a whole heap of people, and directed by Gary Trousdale and Kirk Wise, it's worth celebrating this as a Disneyfied adaptation of quite a dark and twisted classic. All of the voice cast do a great job, it's worth mentioning the presence of Jason Alexander as a gargoyle appropriately named Hugo, and they match their characters perfectly. Kline and Moore are the standouts, but you also have small roles for David Ogden Stiers, playing a kindly head priest, and Paul Kandel as a puppeteer who introduces the main theme of the story.
It's an immersive and rewarding experience, made so by the gorgeous animation and shot choices that bring viewers into the world of late 15th-century Paris, letting them float and fly around the streets and rooftops when free from the confines of Notre Dame itself, and putting viewers alongside some nicely-rounded characters. I'm kicking myself for not getting to this sooner, and I'll look forward to revisiting it. Who knows, maybe one day I'll even check out the sequel, although my expectations will be kept very low down for that.
Highly recommended, unless you're wanting the more standard Disney flick, complete with more hearty chuckles and singalong moments. But you can pick from about fifty of those. So at least give this one your time someday.
8/10
If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do
consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A
subscription/follow costs nothing. All links are HERE.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews
Mandy Patinkin was originally cast as Quasimodo, or at least was very far in the casting process. He was very excited as Quasimodo was a dream role for him; however, he dropped out due to clashes with the producers regarding the character – ‘I wanted to play Quasimodo for real … They had their own Disney needs’. He ended up playing Quasimodo in a TV series the following year while Tom Hulce was cast instead.
ReplyDeleteI don't know if this is true but Quasimodo was allegedly meant to die at the film’s end, stabbed by Frollo, and Esmerelda in turn would kill Frollo. Quasimodo’s dying wish was to ring the bells one last time, and the final shot would have been the crowd cheering, while Esmerelda and Phoebus sobbed over the body of their deceased friend. Interestingly, a simillar thing happened with the Mandy Patinkin film.
How bold would it have been to just polish off the main character, in a heroic moment, and actually depict it with serious depth? It would be held in higher esteem than any other moment from the entirety of the Disney Renaissance Era.
It certainly seems to have been forgotten by most people nowadays, but I was surprised by how much I enjoyed it. Although I like the idea of Patinkin in the role, I do also like how this was balanced out by the softened edges of the Disneyfication (sorry if that seems like blasphemy).
DeleteCould it be possible for you do a review of the sequel "Hunchback of Notre Dame 2" (2002)?
ReplyDeleteSpoilers; it will probably be bad.
It's a possibility, but probably won't be until the new year. The last section of every year is always busy on the blog with horrors for October, noirs for Noirvember, and then a whole Santa sack full of Christmas sugary goodness throughout December.
DeleteI have learned that one interpretation is that while the riddle “who is the man and who is the monster” is obviously referring to Quasi as the man and Frollo as the monster, one interpretation is that it can equally both be referring to Frollo, and the argument is he was a man as well as a monster. Whether Frollo was ever killing gyspies when he took them to the palace of justice is entirely unknowable, because we don’t get enough evidence to tell whether anything in his version of events is true (Quasi’s father fate is unknown). Whether he actually meant to kill the mother when he kicked her down onto the steps is left uncertain; he’s clearly surprised when he realises the “stolen good” was a an actual baby and it’s entirely possible that he meant to kick her away and she just happened to brash her skull on the steps. But he ignores his ephiany when he sees the baby’s deformed look and dismisses the death of the mother as maintaining he pursued her by right. Frollo seems conflicted by his attraction to Esmeralda perhaps acknowledging she is a beautiful woman and perhaps deep down seeing she is intelligent and kindful, a far cry from how he images a gyspy to me. This presents him as a fundamentally weak man incapable of keeping his pants on when presented with the opportunity for hot gyspy sex.
ReplyDeleteWhile Frollo does indicates he has been taking care of the gyspies one by one (again, it is unclear whether his palace of justice is him ordering the deaths or letting someone else do it, but he is still responsible, whether directly or indirectly), and he develops an unhealthy obsessive with Esmeralda, it can be argued it is only at the middle of the film that Frollo gets truly cruel by setting houses on fire and taking gyspies to be locked yp. It’s a evil moment, but sharply left ambiguous moment by the fact that we don’t see him killing anyone directly, besides ordering Phoebus to be killed, (funny enough, when Phoebus takes off with Frollo's horse, Frollo yells “Get him! And DON’T hit my horse!”; this doesn’t necessarily mean he is an animal lover of course, his horse is just as dark and foreboding and and it’s entirely possible that he relates to him based on this)
Furthermore, the closer one comes to Frollo - as man, bigot, villain - the more disgusting he appears to become. Far from humanising a monster, He was a grotesque alright, but also a complex and subtle bundle of contradictions. The devil is in the detail.
It's strange that this one review has garnered to much interest today, but I'm not complaining. And I'm sure that there's always a lot to consider and explore in such a classic work, whether going back to the source material or sticking with this fine Disney interpretation :)
Delete