DVDizzy Forum

Wow. I wonder what that version of Hellfire was like. Might have had the Esmerelda Spirit seem a bit more nude.

Well, as long as they got away with it in Fantasia, it really shouldn't have been that much of a problem.

^Actually, yes

From what I've read, that is exactly what was cut, along with a couple of other things. Really, this was going to be a mature film.

jpanimation wrote:^Actually, yes

From what I've read, that is exactly what was cut, along with a couple of other things. Really, this was going to be a mature film.

can you list up everything that was suppose to be in the film originally?

or is there link I can read up on it?

I can't remember everything. I actually read all this from multiple interviews with animators and a couple of articles on it (one might've been on Jim Hill). I'll try searching for them and post links if I find them.

When Disney has gone the darker route in the past, (Black Cauldron, Hunchback, Atlantis) the movies haven't really been embraced by the public at large. Each movie may have fervent fans, but generally they're not accepted as classics in most people's minds. For that reason, it will probably be a while before they enter that territory in animation again.

You have a valid point. However, I won't consider "Atlantis" as dark. It was a film which broke with the Disney formula in some ways (no talking animals or sidekicks, no songs, a more adventurous movie), but otherwise the movie was quite lighthearted. It wasn't dark at all.

Hunchback was originally going to be a very mature film. Many of the animators hate the final version of The Hunchback of Notre Dame because they know what it was originally going to be (Nik Ranieri is the most outspoken on this). The mature take was green lit and in production, then at the last minute, the execs got cold feet and demanded they lighten it up and shove in some Happy Meal characters. Many animators describe the original version as Hell Fire, but the whole movie. Gaëtan Brizzi (who along with his brother directed the fantastic opening sequence, Hell Fire sequence, The Court of Miracles sequence, and part of the ending execution sequence) said that the Hell Fire sequence is actually a toned down version of what they originally story boarded. I wish the executives would've allowed the creative team to make the movie they originally wanted to make.

How can they actually hate the final version? With the exception of the gargoyles, the guards and the lame goofy yells, there's nothing really to hate. Hunchback is an amazing film.

However, here's a link with some infor that pretty much sums up what you were saying; http://web.archive.org/web/200212231912 ... eDame.html

A darker Hunchback? **mouth waters** That would have been amazing. Not that the final version isn't fantastic... But a whole movie that is like the Hellfire scene? With no gargoyles?

I pretty much like the Disney Classics the way they are, but without some of the tasteless humour and unnecessary/annoying characters.

Well... in a way, aren't the gargoyles really figments of Quasi's imagination? Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I think they are, since they weren't "alive" whenever other characters such as Frollo were in the scene with him in the bell tower. But... how do they keep moving from one spot or another when they aren't "alive" if they're figments of Quasi's imagination?

DisneyJedi wrote:Well... in a way, aren't the gargoyles really figments of Quasi's imagination? Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I think they are, since they weren't "alive" whenever other characters such as Frollo were in the scene with him in the bell tower. But... how do they keep moving from one spot or another when they aren't "alive" if they're figments of Quasi's imagination?

That was only the play's version. They're "real" in the movie.

DisneyJedi wrote:Well... in a way, aren't the gargoyles really figments of Quasi's imagination? Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I think they are, since they weren't "alive" whenever other characters such as Frollo were in the scene with him in the bell tower. But... how do they keep moving from one spot or another when they aren't "alive" if they're figments of Quasi's imagination?

There's a scene in which Hugo attempts to kiss Esmeralda's goat and he reacts, so in the film's universe, the gargoyles are definitely alive. They also participate in the final battle, like Victor dropping a brick on a guard's head and Hugo throwing a catapolt on the Paris Streets.

estefan wrote:There's a scene in which Hugo attempts to kiss Esmeralda's goat and he reacts, so in the film's universe, the gargoyles are definitely alive. They also participate in the final battle, like Victor dropping a brick on a guard's head and Hugo throwing a catapolt on the Paris Streets.

Exactly. They interact with people, get reactions, and cause things to happen. In the film, they are definitely real.

I'd definitely like to see Disney branch out more like they did with Atlantis and Hunchback.

Personally, I would prefer if Disney made full-lenght cartoons with deep, psycological themes. Something a la Hunchback.

More mature/darker...

I've said it before, why not try...

Dracula (yes, yes somewhat toned down off course..)

Addams family (which I recall is an upcoming Burton project)

Phantom of the Opera

Ramayana



Less squeeky toy like

Ramayana

I've heard some rumors that Disney are developing a Ramayana tale.

I wouldn't mind Disney wanting to produce maturer animated films, but I think realistically they would think that they would have to be released under another banner, as Disney still has a lot of expectations, at least as far as animation is concerned. The fact that The Hunchback of Notre Dame had to be watered down and the lack of success for Atlantis, Treasure Planet etc say a lot; the former would have been a more consistent film under the Touchstone banner, and the latter two didn't do well in part because they weren't what people expected from Disney. Whether that means releasing stuff under Touchstone or another brand is another matter entirely. I find it a shame that Disney abandoned Miramax like they did, as it eventually had much more brand recognition than Touchstone does today and probably ever did have.

DisneyFan09 wrote:

Ramayana

I've heard some rumors that Disney are developing a Ramayana tale.

According to the latest reports if I recall correctly, Dreamworks is doing an animated adaptation of "Ramayana" as a Bollywood musical with songs by Stephen Schwartz tentatively called "Monkeys of Bollywood."

SpringHeelJack wrote:

DisneyFan09 wrote: I've heard some rumors that Disney are developing a Ramayana tale.

According to the latest reports if I recall correctly, Dreamworks is doing an animated adaptation of "Ramayana" as a Bollywood musical with songs by Stephen Schwartz tentatively called "Monkeys of Bollywood."

Holy crap!

I just googled it and you weren't kidding!

Personally, I think Disney’s films are already mature. They don’t need to add superficial ideas of “mature” (violence, sexuality, *special* topics like global warming or abortion, etc.) to satisfy me.

And Hunchback is really overrated on this forum. It’s okay and obviously I like movies that have mixed criticism myself (TP, TP&TF, Hercules, Sword in the Stone, etc.), but most everyone I’ve talked to in real life (or on other forums) thinks Hunchback’s middle-of-the-road or "low tier." Only lately has it been getting treated like the holy grail of Disney. If it's not that popular, I'm sure Disney would want to avoid making that their go-to standard.

Umbrellafish wrote:

SpringHeelJack wrote:According to the latest reports if I recall correctly, Dreamworks is doing an animated adaptation of "Ramayana" as a Bollywood musical with songs by Stephen Schwartz tentatively called "Monkeys of Bollywood."

Holy crap!

I just googled it and you weren't kidding!

Wow, Disney drops the ball on everything.

I guess with the recent financial success of Tangled, Dreamworks is going to do everything it can to crush the company (again) starting with stealing their story ideas. Happened with the Jack and the Beanstalk thing.

Next thing you know, they’ll be doing The Snow Queen.

If you mean like a "PG-13" or higher rated animated film, then no, I don't want to see that and I honestly think if they did, on that day, the Disney brand would die. At the very least, it would officially not be Walt's company anymore. That kind of film making is not Disney.

But I mean, there are still mature themes in Disney films, even ones from Walt's day. The thing about it is, was that it was never in your face or anything, it was made to be a bit more hidden, there for older audiences to find or not to find if they wished.

I'd agree with many here so far as that "Hunchback" was probably the most "mature" in the modern sense of the word that they have ever made. And it is also the one that has been attacked by parents the most. I've yet to meet many parents who are ok with their kids watching that one. Honestly, when I have kids, it will probably be sometime until I let them watch it. There are one or two other DAC I feel that way about, like "The Little Mermaid."

I think Disney and Pixar films are "mature" enough. You push it anymore and you can kiss Disney Animation good-bye, as many current fans, mostly families, would probably start to not watch new Disney films anymore. Bottom line: it would hurt them and I don't think they have any execs that are that ballsy to be the one who destroyed Walt's company.

Disney's Divinity wrote:Personally, I think Disney’s films are already mature. They don’t need to add superficial ideas of “mature” (violence, sexuality, *special* topics like global warming or abortion, etc.) to satisfy me.

And Hunchback is really overrated on this forum. It’s okay and obviously I like movies that have mixed criticism myself (TP, TP&TF, Hercules, Sword in the Stone, etc.), but most everyone I’ve talked to in real life (or on other forums) thinks Hunchback’s middle-of-the-road or "low tier." Only lately has it been getting treated like the holy grail of Disney. If it's not that popular, I'm sure Disney would want to avoid making that their go-to standard.

Bingo! "Hunchback" was not THAT good. But it seems on this forum, for who knows what reasons, it's deemed the best thing they ever made. Just like you, most people in real life I've ever talked too don't really like that one. While I personally liked it, I didn't like it THAT much. It's a bit down on my list of Disney films. Honestly, I liked a few of the package films better.