Ideas to improve "Hunchback"

[Marce82]

Uh, thanks. I forgot about that: delete Djali!! So out of place! No point in having that character (even if it was part of the novel).

Maybe Quasi's pet could have been the bird he has at the beginning who is afraid to fly. And the bird could have an arc where it eventually learns to fly...and that inspires Quasi to rebel against Frollo

[REINIER]

Uh, thanks. I forgot about that: delete Djali!! So out of place! No point in having that character (even if it was part of the novel).

Maybe Quasi's pet could have been the bird he has at the beginning who is afraid to fly. And the bird could have an arc where it eventually learns to fly...and that inspires Quasi to rebel against Frollo

You won't believe it.. But I was pondering the same thingNot as well thought out as you thoughBut that bird being a character has real merit right!

[Marce82]

Thanks Reinier, I believe you.

I think the bird is a good metaphor for Quasi: he has the wings, he could fly, but what is holding him back is his fear.

As far as Topsy Turvey... I never really liked the song. And its not the humiliation that gets too long for me, its the whole thing...the song, Esmeralda's antics to escape, her sanctimonious "justice" speech...ugh. And by the way... isnt she supposed to be afraid of Frollo's power? She just tells him off in public view???

[Super Aurora]

Thanks Reinier, I believe you.

I think the bird is a good metaphor for Quasi: he has the wings, he could fly, but what is holding him back is his fear.

As far as Topsy Turvey... I never really liked the song. And its not the humiliation that gets too long for me, its the whole thing...the song, Esmeralda's antics to escape, her sanctimonious "justice" speech...ugh. And by the way...isnt she supposed to be afraid of Frollo's power? She just tells him off in public view???

Since when?

[ProfessorRatigan]

Since when?

Yeah? Esmeralda was NOT afraid of Frollo. She was afraid of being persecuted for being a gypsy and getting killed AFTER she stood up to him in front of the mob. Not before. She is, like all the gypsies, afraid of the soldiers who bully and scapegoat them. (As can be seen when Phoebus first comes into town and she is accosted by two soldiers. "Where'd ya get the money?" "For your information, I EARNED it!" "Gypsies don't earn money..." "They STEAL it." "-You'd know a lot about stealing, wouldn't you?") This part shows she stands up for herself quite a bit. And stands up for others. Her justice speech is very appropriate for the scene. Frollo is being a particularly cruel son of a bitch in that moment, TURNING his head when Quasi calls for him to stop the crowd in order to teach him a lesson.

As for scrapping Djai. Why? That goat IS ACTUALLY IN THE BOOK! If Disney hadn't included it, people would be complaining that they didn't. There is literally no way they can win with this film, is there?

[Marce82]

You make some good points, ProfRatigan...

Esmeralda did stand up for herself, but also disguised herself all the time. She wasn't really doing anything to rebel. I don't know...i felt it was a bit weird to do that speech in front of everyone. Also, I hate the animation on her in that scene.

As far as Djali... she seemed like a pointless character in the film. Esmeralda is the only one who addresses "it", and she has to go out of her way to do it.

I know what you mean about "damned if they do, damned if they dont". but this film was going to be criticized by purists no matter what. So they may as well change what they have to change to make it a good movie.

And Djali had no point. It was a sidekick, based on the IDIOTIC formulaic notion that every disney character needs a sidekick (even though the best ones dont).

[REINIER]

Marce82 you have great insight into this movieI agree on all the above! Prof Ratigan has some interesting views as well! I didn't read the vict.hugo novel and was not familiar to the fact Djali was indeed a character

[BelleGirl]

I don't think Djali is that annoying - she is just Esmeralda's pet, not a sidekick. Or should every pet of a main character in a Disney movie be regarded as a sidekick? if any annoying characters should be scrapped from "Hunchback' it would be Victor, what an obnoxious pest!
(And let him take Hugo with him)

[ProfessorRatigan]

^Victor? He's the tall, slender, stuffy, proper gargoyle. Hugo is the fat, loud one played by Jason Alexander (in the English dub, anyway). Are you sure you didn't get them mixed? I've never minded Victor. I always found him to be my favorite of the gargoyles, given how neurotic and anxious he was. I could relate.

[Mooky]

The film is fine as it is, it doesn't need any fixing. It tells a coherent, tight story, it has strong, developed characters, great score and songs, and doesn't have any failings in internal logic. Even gargoyles are being overly criticized, when they actually serve their purpose (unlike many of Disney's other sidekicks) and I just wish to know how naysayers would imagine the film without them (for one thing, character of Quasimodo would have to be DRASTICALLY different).

If you're bent on fixing flawed movies, here's a few instead of HoND:
- The Jungle Book
- Pocahontas
- Meet the Robinsons
- Tangled

[Marce82]

Hey Mooky,

I somewhat agree with you (in spite of the fact that I was the one who started this post).
I disagree about a couple of things: the story IS coherent, but I don't think it's tight. That's where this "blog" comes in. And I also don't think it has well developed characters, except for Quasi and Frollo. I feel all the other's are pretty flat and underdeveloped.

And don't even get me started on the gargoyles.

As far as the other films you mentioned... Yes, Tangled and Pocahontas could have used a bit more story work (for a different post I suppose). I never saw Bolt, so I have no idea about that one.
Jungle book I have no issues with, simply cause I don' consider it to be a plot-driven film. Just a light collection of amusing characters.

[Disney's Divinity]

If you're bent on fixing flawed movies, here's a few instead of HoND:
- The Jungle Book
- Pocahontas
- Meet the Robinsons
- Tangled

The only one here that I think is more flawed than Hunchback is Pocahontas.

And the gargoyles can never be criticized too much. It's not even the fact they disrupt the mood of the film, but that the humor is so low and mostly unentertaining. I would like to know which sidekicks are worse (other than Terk from Tarzan or BEN from Treasure Planet)?

[Marce82]

Hahaha... DisneyDivinity, you have made me think!

Well, Treasure Planet I have mostly blocked from my memory. Either that, or it was so unmemorable that I remember nothing of it.

But yeah, Terk was SO annoying! And so out of place. I remember cringing during that "shoo-bap-she-doo" sequence in theaters...and ALWAYS fast-forwarding through it on VHS/DVD... it like "lets stop the story and have an idiotic number. Now that its over, back to the story".

[ProfessorRatigan]

I would like to know which sidekicks are worse (other than Terk from Tarzan or BEN from Treasure Planet)?

Uh, gee. How about: Timon & Pumbaa, Jiminy Cricket, Creeper, pretty much EVERY side character in Oliver & Company, Flit & Meeko (most pointless comic relief EVER), Mushu, Louis...

[Marce82]

Prof Ratigan....

ARE YOU KIDDING?? You consider Jiminy Cricket and Timon & Pumbaa to be bad sidekicks???
In all fairness, I dont consider either of those three to be sidekicks, but supporting characters. Jiminy cricket, to me, is almost competing for the lead role in the movie... he is very much a character all of his own.

As for Timon&Pumbaa... again... not sidekicks. THey are VITAL to the story. They introduce the ideology that keeps simba away for all those years. Plus, they are his surrogate family while he is away. One could argue they become sidekicks after SImba decides to return to Pride Rock....

To me, Abu is a sidekick. But a good one. The story COULD work without him, but it is a bit richer with him in it.

All yr other examples of bad sidekicks, I fully agree with.

[Disney's Divinity]

Uh, gee. How about: Timon & Pumbaa, Jiminy Cricket, Creeper, pretty much EVERY side character in Oliver & Company, Flit & Meeko (most pointless comic relief EVER), Mushu, Louis...

I don’t agree with any of those, except maybe Louis. I don’t like Timon and Pumbaa, but they worked within the film; Flit and Meeko may be pointless, but I wouldn‘t consider them detractors any more than the animals in Sleeping Beauty; I don’t consider any of the side characters in O&C sidekicks, and even if I did I liked most of them moderately well; and Mushu was hilarious (to me). Creeper is arguable, as are Pain and Panic from Hercules (although they would be worse if Hercules was more dramatic), but I still don’t think any of those examples intrude or detract as much as the gargoyles in Hunchback, personally. And even if I found all the above to be awful in their own way, I would still consider the gargoyles the lowest.

[ajmrowland]

Hahaha... DisneyDivinity, you have made me think!

Well, Treasure Planet I have mostly blocked from my memory. Either that, or it was so unmemorable that I remember nothing of it.

But yeah, Terk was SO annoying! And so out of place. I remember cringing during that "shoo-bap-she-doo" sequence in theaters...and ALWAYS fast-forwarding through it on VHS/DVD... it like "lets stop the story and have an idiotic number. Now that its over, back to the story".

I think you've blocked it cuz it's still a very good movie.

[Marce82]

Pfft... Treasure Plant is completely charm-less. A bunch of forgettable characters, a bland story and pretentious visuals.

I did like the art direction. But thats about it.

[Mooky]

The only one here that I think is more flawed than Hunchback is Pocahontas.

Really? Jungle Book's episodic nature doesn't bother you? MTR's entire second act which is at odds with the rest of the movie? Tangled's numerous plotholes, tonal shifts and jumps in logic?

And the gargoyles can never be criticized too much. It's not even the fact they disrupt the mood of the film, but that the humor is so low and mostly unentertaining. I would like to know which sidekicks are worse (other than Terk from Tarzan or BEN from Treasure Planet)?

Annoyance aside, I was talking about sidekicks' purpose. Flit, Meeko, Pascal, Maximus, Pegasus, Djali, Morph, and other such characters serve no other purpose other than being cute, funny (debatable), and hogging screen time away from the protagonists.

Mushu, gargoyles, B.E.N., Louis, Timon and Pumbaa, however irritating they may be, aren't just scene dressing meant to entertain kids, they actually affect the plot and their interaction with main characters has a meaning. They provide protagonists with someone to confide in, shape their beliefs and encourage them (btw, I don't support the theory that gargoyles are figments of Quasimodo's imagination - oh no, they're very much real). Sure, Hugo is disgusting at times, but he's there to lighten the mood. Laverne is a (grand)mother figure. Victor is sort of a serious/neurotic/formal type. So other than Hugo (who is basically this film's Timon+Pumbaa), they're not that bad. And without them, I really can't see how they'd be able to develop Quasimodo at all.

[DisneyFan09]

But yeah, Terk was SO annoying! And so out of place. I remember cringing during that "shoo-bap-she-doo" sequence in theaters...and ALWAYS fast-forwarding through it on VHS/DVD... it like "lets stop the story and have an idiotic number. Now that its over, back to the story".

I could actually live through Terk. I understand why people consider her annoying, since she was too loud and blatant. Its Tantor I can't stand. He's highly annoying.