DVDizzy Forum

So I was watching Hunchback of Notre Dame yesterday for the first time in a looong time, and I got a few ideas on how the film might have been improved. Don't get me wrong, its a good film, but not a great one.

So here are some thoughts...:

1) Ok, so we get rid of the stupid gargoyles. (It also dawned on me that during the climax, the gargoyles are attacking the people... if the gargoyles only come alive in Quasi's imagination, how can they harm people???)
But I think the concept of Quasi seeing a gargoyle come alive cause of his isolation is a smart idea. I was thinking: what if there was only ONE gargoyle that came alive, and it WASN't an encouraging one? Sort of an extension of Frollo... whenever Quasi is thinking of leaving the tower, the gargoyle would taunt him and make him feel guilty. True, it wouldn't lighten the mood like the current gargoyles (tried to) do, but I think it would have been an interesting idea.

2) So let's say we got rid of the gargoyles, so that means that the song "guy like you" is also gone. I agree that the film needs an energetic number at that point to pick things up a bit. What if we axed "court of miracles" and the gypsies actually had a show-stopping song, that welcomed Phoebus and Quasi to the group, while at the same time developing a bit of what the gypsy culture was like back then? (this, of course, after Esmeralda told them Phoebus and Quasi were allies of theirs).

3) I;d like to axe the whole "phoebus getting shot and Esmeralda saving him" thing and taking him back to the cathedral. I feel all these quick changes of location by the same characters diffuse the impact of scenes, and make the pacing of the film choppy.
Phoebus could defy Frollo and then run to the cathedral for sanctuary and bond w Quasi there. The whole "quasi getting his heart broken" thing could happen at the court of miracles, making his heartbreak part of the reason he feels so defeated when Esmeralda is about to be burned at the stake. (actually, Esmeralda and Phoebus could have a small bridge-duet during the show-stopper gypsy song I mentioned in point 2), where they fall in love in front of Quasi)

4) THis is a directorial note: the ending of "Out there". The final shot SHOULD have been Quasi on the cross (when he sings "and theeen I swear I'll be content"). THe song is about Quasi and his freedom. And that shot it pretty spectacular. The song ending the way it does now, it pretty much a "beauty shot" of the cathedral. Also during "Out there"... the first time Quasi sings "and out there..."... its a strong moment in the song, and the current shot is a VERY static view of the square, with Quasi's face almost out of the frame...they should have done something more dynamic and emotional, in my opinion.

5) This is a clean-up note: why is it that the line weight is sometimes too light? Specially on Esmeralda... the lines inside of her are so thin and close to her skin tone that we never see her nose! Even in close ups we rarely do! THis issue happens in other areas, but I think it bothers me the most on Esmeralda.

Anyway...these are just some thoughts... looking forward to your responses!

You brought up a lot of points, but you're changing a lot. I think the film is well written and directed, my only issue is with the gargoyals. I don't hate the characters or anything, but I believe they break up the tone. I know they are there to lighten everything up, but they take away from the experience. As they enter they break up the drama and when they exit, it takes a little getting used to. Yeah, the ending is weird with them attacking considering they're supposed to be imaginative. I think they should have been toned down a bit to fit in the film much better. But other than that the film is great, just how it is, but with this minor change it can be on par with Beauty and the Beast and The Lion King.

Frankly, it doesn't need any of those changes to make it 'on par' with Lion King or Beauty and the Beast. There are plenty of folks who think it superior to both just the way it is, thank you very much.

Really, it only needs minor improvements, nothing that drastic. The gargoyles are pretty much "fixed" in the stage show, where they more or less function as ego, id, and superego, so really, it doesn't require much work there. The idea of making one depressing gargoyle is... not that good. It would create a pretty redundant character, not add much that Frollo didn't already do, and create one more obstacle that need not be there.

Additionally, there was a number that took place after the "Court of Miracles" song called "As Long as There's a Moon" which discusses a gypsy custom of saving the prisoners by agreeing to marry one, in this case Esmeralda agrees to marry Phoebus to spare their lives. It is both a romantic number and one that deals with some gypsy customs. There was also ANOTHER song written to more or less accomplish the same thing called "In a Place of Miracles." Both were cut, and there's good reason why we don't have that plot point there.

^Yeah, "As Long As There's a Moon" was a deleted song sung by Clopin, the Gypsies and Phoebus in the Court of Miracles. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wuhPdyrT ... re=related -Quite frankly, I love the song and wish it had at least been recorded in studio with the orchestra and the actors singing the parts. The link above, from the Laserdisc special features, is the demo version with accompanying storyboards. I think the voice actor of Clopin is actually singing his part in the demo, which is cool. (It at least SOUNDS like Paul Kandel...)

What I like about this song is that it takes a scene from the book (Esmeralda agreeing to marry the poet Pierre Gringoire to save him from hanging after he stumbles upon the Court of Miracles) and adapts it to suit the film. (Esmeralda here instead agrees to marry Phoebus to save he and Quasimodo from hanging) And the Gypsy-wedding rituals depicted are all present in the novel as well. I think it's neat how it references all that in such a short span. I think the film works fine without it, but it's still a lovely song, in my opinion. Maybe it could make it into the Broadway show?

As for the suggestion of an additional, nightmarish Gargoyle...I think that would actually be an interesting idea, though obviously the film is fine without it. Perhaps in a Broadway stage setting where additions are needed, it could work. It would represent the negative, self-conscious side of Quasimodo's fractured mind. I picture he would associate it with Frollo, and that whenever Frollo appeared, that Gargoyle would supplant the other three as the 'voice' he was hearing from them. And in the end, when Frollo falls from the Gargoyle statue during the climax, the Gargoyle is the same 'evil' 'negative' Gargoyle Quasi always associated with his ward and it dies with Frollo, forever leaving Quasi free of its pernicious influence. I think, if done right, that it could be poignant. But, again, this has little bearing on the FILM.

Marce82 wrote:So I was watching Hunchback of Notre Dame yesterday for the first time in a looong time, and I got a few ideas on how the film might have been improved. Don't get me wrong, its a good film, but not a great one.

So here are some thoughts...:

1) Ok, so we get rid of the stupid gargoyles. (It also dawned on me that during the climax, the gargoyles are attacking the people... if the gargoyles only come alive in Quasi's imagination, how can they harm people???)
But I think the concept of Quasi seeing a gargoyle come alive cause of his isolation is a smart idea. I was thinking: what if there was only ONE gargoyle that came alive, and it WASN't an encouraging one? Sort of an extension of Frollo... whenever Quasi is thinking of leaving the tower, the gargoyle would taunt him and make him feel guilty. True, it wouldn't lighten the mood like the current gargoyles (tried to) do, but I think it would have been an interesting idea.

2) So let's say we got rid of the gargoyles, so that means that the song "guy like you" is also gone. I agree that the film needs an energetic number at that point to pick things up a bit. What if we axed "court of miracles" and the gypsies actually had a show-stopping song, that welcomed Phoebus and Quasi to the group, while at the same time developing a bit of what the gypsy culture was like back then? (this, of course, after Esmeralda told them Phoebus and Quasi were allies of theirs).

3) I;d like to axe the whole "phoebus getting shot and Esmeralda saving him" thing and taking him back to the cathedral. I feel all these quick changes of location by the same characters diffuse the impact of scenes, and make the pacing of the film choppy.
Phoebus could defy Frollo and then run to the cathedral for sanctuary and bond w Quasi there. The whole "quasi getting his heart broken" thing could happen at the court of miracles, making his heartbreak part of the reason he feels so defeated when Esmeralda is about to be burned at the stake. (actually, Esmeralda and Phoebus could have a small bridge-duet during the show-stopper gypsy song I mentioned in point 2), where they fall in love in front of Quasi)

4) THis is a directorial note: the ending of "Out there". The final shot SHOULD have been Quasi on the cross (when he sings "and theeen I swear I'll be content"). THe song is about Quasi and his freedom. And that shot it pretty spectacular. The song ending the way it does now, it pretty much a "beauty shot" of the cathedral. Also during "Out there"... the first time Quasi sings "and out there..."... its a strong moment in the song, and the current shot is a VERY static view of the square, with Quasi's face almost out of the frame...they should have done something more dynamic and emotional, in my opinion.

5) This is a clean-up note: why is it that the line weight is sometimes too light? Specially on Esmeralda... the lines inside of her are so thin and close to her skin tone that we never see her nose! Even in close ups we rarely do! THis issue happens in other areas, but I think it bothers me the most on Esmeralda.

Anyway...these are just some thoughts... looking forward to your responses!

You are changing a lot. I would say just have the energetic number be much earlier in the film rather than at that point. Also, I've thought alot about changing Frollo's character in the beginning a little bit so his descent into madness is steeper. Like him genuinely caring a bit for the baby that is quasimodo and have *that* be the motive initially for attempting to kill him and subsequently locking him in a tower. Not because he is "a monster" but because he would be percieved that way by others.

I'm not sure if these changes would necessarily fix the film, but I doubt they would hurt. I agree about the shot during the first "out there" when it focuses on a very bland shot of the city--who would want to be "out there"? And I really don't think just fixing the gargoyles, which many cite as the worst part of the film, would make the film equal to B&tB or TLK at all, but that's just me.

Go back in time and do ZERO publicity on the voice cast. Though, I think this could go for any/every animated feature after Beauty and the Beast.

Remove "A Guy Like You", utilize the musical's take on the Gargoyles as being explicitly in Quasi's imagination and in some way, voices in his head that eventually tell him to kill Frollo.

That or replace them with the other kind of Disney Gargoyle.

How about delete the film.

How about delete the film.

Ha, you're funny.

My only real complaint is the gargoyles. Change them to be either in his imagination, or out of it, and make it clear. Make them less annoying as well. Take out A Guy Like You. It's not even the fact that they have that number in there that bothers me, it's the song. Terrible animation, terrible lyrics.. ugh. The rest of the movie is fine.

To all the '"make the Gargoyles firmly a part of Quasimodo's imagination" people I ask: where does the film ever indicate they aren't, other than the Djali seeing Hugo briefly bit? The battle sequence, everyone says. But, really, how is it any more of a stretch to think Quasi is imagining them participating in the fight against the soldiers than it is to think he's picturing anthropomorphic gargoyles talking and hopping around a belltower with him day in, day out? Honestly, I don't understand how it's any more unbelievable or hard to accept... Even the goat 'seeing' Hugo could be Quasi imagining it, considering he was RIGHT there. It's not like we ever see Quasi AWAY from the Gargoyles and them interacting.

^as somebody else said, the climax when they're actually hurting people. dropping bricks on heads, stoking fires, and throwing catapults.

ajmrowland wrote:^as somebody else said, the climax when they're actually hurting people. dropping bricks on heads, stoking fires, and throwing catapults.

Agreed.

Quasimodo was indeed kind of busy dealing with Esmeralda about to be murdered. Why would he have time to imagine the Gargoyles at that moment?

it doesn't need improvement. They should be so lucky as to have another film this good.

As much as I love Hunchback, I must admit that this film is really flawed. My first problem is the main structure of the film. This film is clumsily zig-zagging between juvenile jokes and adult, controversial events and not fulfilling either. That comes pretty clear on certain sequences (Frollo grabbing Esmeralda in the Cathedral, right after Djali has stabbed Phoebus' butt to get some kids laugh. The final climax, the Court of Miracles sequence).

I don't really mind the gargoyles themselves. In fact, I think they fulfilled their purpose; Entertaining the kids in the audience. I enjoyed them when I saw the film as a kid and while I do find them more juvenile now, they're really not the main problem. I thought the soldiers and the other juvenile cues was more irritating.

Besides, another problem with the structure of the film is the script itself. The film starts out as primarily Quasimodo's story and the second half becomes mostly about Frollo's obsession for Esmeralda. That doesn't mean that Quasi becomes entirely left out of the picture, but he becomes less active.

Otherwise, I still love Hunchback because of its animation, the music and the characterizations.

Heil Donald Duck wrote:How about delete the film.

Really? Do you hate it?

DisneyFan09 wrote:

Heil Donald Duck wrote:How about delete the film.

Really? Do you hate it?

He was joking.

Sorry if I step on someone's toes by saying this.. But I think that after viewing this brilliant movie many times over I still dislike the length of that topsy turvey song..waaaaay too long for my taste.. In fact that whole quasi humiliation thing gets real old every time I watch it.It is off course essential storytelling, no doubt, but too freaking long! Also delete the gargoyles altogether.. Delete Djali.. And let Quasi have a pet of his own