The story of Esmeralda's mother is also quite tragic. She absolutely hates the Romani after her daughter's abduction. Therefore she hates Esmeralda too. She is one of the first who accuses Esmeralda of being a witch and is constantly riling up the crowd against her, with success, as she is very respected. Only to find out just before Esmeralda's execution that she was advocating for the death of her own daughter. Edit: She dies trying to save Esmeralda.
@georgespiggott5615 I read it a long time ago, but I think she's respected by a lot of people, despite her madness, as she's kind of a walled in hermit.
I like the fact that Quasimodo did not throw Frollo off the tower. The way it played out in the movie reads like God himself is rejecting Frollo, with the church itself killing him. It is very fitting to me that the man obsessed with God and commiting great evil in his name, is rejected by him. It is the utmost refusal of his entire belief system. Kinda reminds me of the Castlevania adaptation wherein there is a bishop who claims to burn a Witch at the stake in the name of God. When the monsters inevitably come for him, they tell him that God is repulsed by his work, seemingly with some authority on the matter. Again, a beautiful rebuttal to his beliefs, by the one he claims to serve. Good stuff.
@@JohanDanielsson8802 I don’t think it’s important whether the audience believes in God or not because it’s pretty well established that it is an important institution within the film and the characters believe it or at least struggle with it. So yeah it fits that Frollos fake devoutness is seen through by the eyes of God and leads to his death. Basically he pretends to be a holy man and gets called out by God for not being genuine or you could say hell recognizes their own and swallowed him.
A solid essay. Thanks for sharing! Esmeralda remains, to this day, one of my fav Disney characters. I really hope they never make that live-action adaptation 🤞
The musical adaptation was really something else (good), so if they ever make a film and actually want it to be successful idk that they could base it on anything else if they take their audience seriously.
@@DragonGoddess18 and probably to represent true inclusivity towards physical disabilities, the socially purged and stigmatised gypsy culture, abuse and corruption of power would be actually doing the right thing. Ps. I am sure Phoebus would be Asian and would be safe by Esmeralda who actually was a soldier in disguised
Esmeralda was one of, if not my absolute favorite Disney female character growing up and remains one of my favorites today. While I now understand this is based on a classic novel with differing plot points, I can assure you as a little girl who actually liked most of the darker themes in the movie even as a child, I wouldn't have been able to handle Disney killing off Esmeralda.
I love her too because she's so gutsy and has such a big heart and inspires people to defend others in need like how she does in the film. She's also a bit saucy and not technically a princess but definately a leader :)
She fitted right into the 90s Girl power she was strong independent and took no shit off anyone and no doubt could handle herself in a fight I still admire her
I have a feeling that the problem Disney has with the live action adaptation of tHoND, is that Disney doesn't create tragedies. And this story, at its very core, is a tragedy. Disney does know how to create compelling characters and heartbreaking moments, but in the end the story HAS to end on high note. On the grand scale, majority of highly popular movies and franchises have a happy ending, because it feels rewarding to the audience. The tragic endings are almost solely reserved for genres like horror, thriller, some epics or dramas. And even though those movies can be well received, popular and praised, the most important thing for a company is the number under the line.
Disney were originally planning for Quasi to get murdered by Frollo and Esmeralda would be the one to kill Frollo. Of course Disney decided to cut that ending, but the 1997 adaptation (which just so happens to be my second favourite of all the versions made) took inspiration from it. As well as that, Mandy Patinkin (actor for Quasi in 1997 version) was going to voice Quasi in the Disney animation but he turned down the role because of creative differences.
Pocahontas at least had a bittersweet ending, and that had came just before this. I think main issue of live action movie that this video doesn’t discuss is the casting. In todays climate you can’t cast anyone but Romani for Esmeralda. And disabled for Quasimodo. Quasimodo should also be Romani based on his mother (unless he was a foundling?) although they could add what was in the book that Frollo is uncle and focus on that. And where can those actors be found?
I read the book in high school. I honestly was shocked at how different it was from the beloved movie. But it was so good. Victor Hugo is still one of my favorite authors.
When I tell you I was shook when I read Les Miserables for the first time. The reading experience elevated what I thought of the stage musical cause holy frick if youre reading the shiz Fantine and Jon Valjean had to go through with the musical lyrics stuck in your head *perfect combo* I still need to read Hunchback of Notre Dame so I can have the same experience listening to the stage musical
There’s a rabbit whole of a discussion to be had about Hugo’s voice as a writer and the zeitgeist he existed in. Speaking power to hypocrisy, irony… he is a master and we see the same level of mastery in Les Mis 🤌
Another big issue of Esmeralda not being Romani: it's not that she was adopted (which could've been a way to portray Romani people as compassionate and caring for a helpless baby), she was ABDUCTED. Which is an extremely harmful prejudice against Romani people. What makes it even more horrible is that historically it were often Romani children taken away forcefully from their families to be "integrated", which often meant that they weren't even treated like adopted kids but servants by their new "families". What Romani people did when "kidnapping children", was only trying to get their own back
Yes great point. I also didn't mention that they left Quasimodo in her place because of his disability. The whole framing just makes them cartoonishly evil. Like even Frollo wasn't that cruel, he took Quasi out of pity. Disneys version where Quasis parents loved him and his mother was killed by Frollo, which causes religious guilt and fear of damnation was much better.
Yep stealing children is a harmful stereotype, didnt know about the sad background thou. And even oif she were adopted in a romani family, she i think would be romani because its a cultural thing too, it has a lot in common with judaism there i think?! Through romani are more close knit pretty sure. So she still very much would be romany because its a cultural member of that community raised? Just dont have hernot kidnapped, that would be a terrible trope if she were abducted.
@@TropeAnatomy Both white and non white charaters viewd Quasi as an adomination tho. And ,historially, it was 100% accurate how people in the past thought that those children were from demons to simply condemed from birth that they could not survive in this tuff society and live a normal life. Ancient Sparta for exaple. They are devided by racism,but united by the hatred towards deformed and disabled children lol!
I had no idea Romani were accused of kidnapping babies. Their culture has really suffered from prejudice and hate from the world but the world is stupid.
Not true, because for the rest of the book, we see the Roman people as loving family members and a wonderful community that has raised Emelda as one of their own and they’re seen as sympathetic in the light of the audience. So that one act that they had happened, didn’t taint the audience, his view or create anything bad in the mind of the people watching the play or reading the book of the Roman people
It seems to me the problem is Disney doesn’t actually understand what these ‘issues’ even are. They just know that if they do _something_ , they’ll receive backlash.
yeah because the Disney company is a bunch of CEOs wanting to make a prfoit by writting the most horrednous adaptions and stealing art by better artists. I agree, no further proof then disney (animation studio) not realizing the Golden Age need a renaissance
I think that they know a lot of the issues are political ones: Quasimodo is a hunchback but does this mean they take a risk and cast an actor who is one, or play it safe and go with a handsome actor with prosthetics because they think that'll be a more crowd-pleasing choice? Then, who do they cast as Esmeralda given her race/Romani/French description? Everyone THINKS of Esmeralda as Romani, because they're picturing the animated character, but anything they pick might be called racially inaccurate/insensitive, or there'll be screams of 'woke' from the childish crowd. Then, there are the religious issues with Frollo. Given how crazy the Christian audience reacted to A Life of Brian back in the day, I don't know how they'd take his character in a live action Disney movie.
@@SevenEllen I don't know about the last part. Frollo is very clearly catholic, so the protestants at least could just say "Catholics!" and leave it at that - and Catholics themselves do not usually teach that all their high-ranking members in history were saints.
@@SevenEllenthe characterization of Esme in the live action more serious when you factor that she was kicked out of the Disney Princess lineup back in ‘03 because parents felt that her dancing on the arrow made her a bad role model for girls. I have a strong feeling that those people will speak again if they put that scene.
@@UltraVioletKnightI don't think he had much of an attachment. Frollo abused him, gaslit him and hurt him. Quasi was terrified of him. He whimpers into a corner like a dog when Frollo came to visit in the beginning.
@@vetarlittorf1807 It does not stop him from trying to save Frollo though. He may have been the worst parental figure around, but he was Quasi's father-figure. He had to try. And he did, to his shame.
@@vetarlittorf1807You can still love an abusive parent. Even if they hurt you, even if they make your every waking moment a living hell, some part of you will always love them, even after you realize they don't deserve it, because whether they did a good job or not, they raised you.
Personally, I think Quasimodo trying to save frollo makes more sense for his character. Regardless of how frollo treated him, he was still Quasi's father for the majority of his life, and part of him will always see him as one, no matter what.
Once again, everything is in context of history, culture region, as well as the individuals experience. Year-old during that time. We’re not children. Nor were they raised as children so you can’t look at them in a 2024 lens and still think that your highschooler who is a freshman, no emotional maturity, is the same 15 year-old who would probably be married off by this time and a mother and also performing her own chores in her own home. 😂 Not to mention, she’s in a totally different culture of the Romani culture. This constant victimization of teenagers has got to stop , because I understand an American culture we infantilize our own teenagers and we don’t expect much maturity from them, hence why there’s a lot of handholding in high school and there’s a lot of rules parameters and a lot of responsibility taken out of the kids, hands and put into everybody else’s. But even if you are emotionally stuck at an age life still goes on around you and your experiences. Do change as you get older so even if you’re not emotionally, an adult people will treat you like one, if so for dating underage people because they’re “emotionally not there” 🙄 But this had nothing to do with her and more so the people around her and the men who all wanted her , two of them wanted her for very selfish reasons and wanted her for more pure reasons, but wasn’t able to verbalize those feelings or feel he would be accepted because of how he looked. At the end of the day, it’s a tragedy. Has nothing to do with Esmeralda an individual she’s more so , The catalyst of these events. So you’re definitely stating her importance in the book 😅 or even how her relationship with these men were.
Agree. If anything, it shows how cold and alienating that society was, to the point that any act of decency could make a marginalized person fall sooo in love. The bar was rock bottom.
i have severe ADHD and often struggle to sit down and only focus on a singular thing, so the greatest compliment i can give here is that you really had my full attention for the entirety of this video.
I will never understand why people criticize these Disney movies as being in a sense unrealistic. I think the way they did the animated version of the Hunchback was a nice balance of diving into the darkness but also giving us a form of wish fulfillment with a nice ending. I suppose I wouldn't mind an animated version based on the stage play. But the Hunchback is one of my favorite Disney movies, and I don't mind the happy ending at all. You don't go to Disney movies for historically accurate depictions of things. You go to Disney movies for a good time. Even better if like the hunchback, they are able to take you for an emotional ride along the way.
Same for Pocahontas imo. I understand the controversy surrounding the actual story of Pocahontas nowadays, but back then the problem wasn’t nearly as enflamed as it is now. I understand representation of different ethnicities is important, but I think a lot of people forget or straight up ignore Disney’s Pocahontas was NEVER marketed as a historically accurate portrayal of the real story of Pocahontas. This is coming from an era when Aladdin became popular simply because it had Robin Williams, despite the movie had problematic depictions of Middle Eastern culture, specifically with how Jasmine is portrayed as an exotic beauty with no actual character or dreams/desires. When I first watched Pocahontas, I already knew the real story of Pocahontas and she wasn’t in love with John Smith, let alone the same age, and I remember she was married to a different Englishman in reality before her untimely death. But that didn’t prevent me from enjoying the movie as an entirely fictional story, especially when Balto came out the same year and was based on a real sleddog called Togo, a movie that still is pretty beloved and isn’t nearly as criticized for historical accuracy (especially when you learn the actual story of Balto and Togo) Same with Anastasia, considered to be one of Don Bluth’s best movies, and doesn’t really portray the actual account of Anastasia, a REAL Russian princess who had a tragic life as well. I understand Pocahontas had a lot of problems in so many ways, specifically from the themes of racism and prejudice, but I wish more people would remember it was NEVER meant to be an accurate portrayal or a history lesson of early Virginia. I don’t go to movies, especially Disney, to be educated or expect to analyze a movie from a specific perspective. I go to movies to ESCAPE reality and have a good time. People really need to read some of the stories several Disney movies are based on before constantly ridiculing Pocahontas, but all the other movies get a pass because “they’re not real” especially if you know anything about Greek mythology in comparison to Disney’s take on Hercules. I’ve seen some people say Hunchback handled the racism and prejudicial themes a lot better than Pocahontas, but I have to disagree. As this video mentioned, even in the Disney adaptation the Romani are still presented in a pretty terrible manner. Specifically all the Romani characters except Esmerelda are portrayed as ugly and wearing filthy rags and aren’t afraid to scam or cheat others to make money. The song Court of Miracles is a pretty racist song when you really listen to the lyrics, all while they’re about to k*ll two men trying to help them. Fast forward to the end of the movie after the fight scene, there are absolutely no Romani characters in sight except Esmerelda, Clopin and Quasimodo. Everyone in the crowd are Parisians/Caucasians as Quasimodo is celebrated as a hero. Its like the movie actively avoided showing the Romani except Es and Clopin, and never actually addressed the issue of other people aside Frollo treating them terribly and as cheating thieves and criminals.
@kristinahuchison2511 Out of curiosity, how does Disney's "Aladdin" measure up against DreamWorks' "Sinbad" in terms of cultural representation? They are technically both based in the same culture.
I came here to say the same. While I agree with most of this video analysis, I don't wish to change the story's happy ending to a tragedy. I think we shouldn't forget that these movies - first and foremost - were created for children. And even though now, as adults, we enjoy looking back at these films with an analytic eye, we shouldn't forget that children cannot cope with deep tragedies in general. It's much harder for them. They feel deeply, get very invested in fantasy worlds, and don't have the words or the maturity yet to handle some disturbing feelings. (I'm talking in general, of course. Every child is different, with various maturity levels.) So when someone is suggesting to make these stories even darker, without the relief of a happy ending, I suggest they ask themselves: would they show that cartoon to their own 6-7 year-old? Or would it have hurt them watching it at that age? Of course, parents shall wisely monitor what their kids can watch or not, within the scope that they believe that they (the kids) could handle. And discuss every emerging question meanwhile or after that. But I would call it a pity (and honestly, kind of selfish) to make children media too mature and grounding so that it would please adult needs. Children need great movies too - that's why many of us are here, looking back with nostalgia, how much we loved this piece, for example. Let future generations have that fun and blessing, too. No need to make everything grim in order to mimic reality more. They would need to face with it eventually anyhow - just as we did.
I would not say that in the animated film they took out Esmeralda’s husband but combined him with Pheobus instead. You notice that Esmeralda does save Pheobus twice in the novel from drowning and from the the court of miracles (with Quasi) the saving plot is similar to the one where Esmeralda saves her husband in the novel from being executed (which is very similar to Pocahontas saving John Smith that was just done so could not be repeated). Also 1939 adaptation I saw the character also was advocating for justice like Pheobus ultimately ends up doing in the Disney film. I think this combination makes Pheobus more compelling character, although more conventional one perhaps (although less so since he is fourth most important character in the story). He has a character arc (also sense of humor), plot purpose of leading the resistance in the end and saving Quasi in the end, and his and Esmeralda’s relationship can show more healthy version of love than Quasi and Frollo’s obsessions, one too idealized and one too sexual and controlling. It’s for younger audiences so it’s good there is more a role model regarding this.
There is a French musical called "Notre Dame de Paris" that adapts the story, and imo Gringoire played/sung by Bruno Pelletier is one of the best parts of the musical. 😌 It's definitely worth checking out. Tbh, I think the reason why the movie is in limbo isn't because they don't know what to do about Esmeralda, but that sentiment towards migrants asking for asylum isn't really the best these days... if you don't want to create controversy, making such a movie is really difficult right now.
@@TropeAnatomy Really, it is the best adaptation according to me. It really respects the tragedy aspect, the character of Phoebus, Quasimodo's love and friendship for Esmeralda, makes her a stronger character and Gringoire is improved and used as a narrator. And the songs are awesome, especially for the lyrics, but I don't know if it translates well in english
I think it´s important to consider that the Disney version have its own approach: Who is the monster and who is the man. For that narrative a lot of their were necessary. It´s not just the kid friendly version but a version with its own important moral.
Watching this with my friend and about halfway through i stated that the musical did it best because they kept the strong characters of the disney movie, added even more hauntingly beautiful songs AND managed to end it without sunshine and rainbows. So happy that you touched on it in the end, as it often gets forgotten
Agreeded it's my favorite musical because of its music and the fact it is such a good tragedy and in my opinion is the perfect mix of the book and the Disney movie
At the end of the day Disney wanted a movie that children and parents accept so they could do money. Still they risked with this movie and I 24:23 appreciate the effort.
Frollo is killed by himself actually. It's maybe the only time I dont complain about the accidental death of a disney villain,as they wanetd to portray that his actions are what truly killed him,not a "trecherous' act of anyone! He never loved him anyway in the Disney version,to have a tragic nature when he 'd see the child that he raised and cared about killing him!
I think not many people, influenced obviously by the commercial version of the story,truly understand the book! Esmeralda is supposed to be naïve because of her innocence. She is perceived as a siner.A public dancer. And in medieval Europe,women who displayed themselves that way were viewed as extremely inappropriate! In the translation I ve read,they even call her a woman "of the night".😳 But, despite society's views,she is a pure inoccent girl,who even keeps her virginity, despite we assume how many men probably want it! "Agnes" (αγνή) means literally pure! Her attraction to Phoebus is an illusion,not stupidity.It's her hope of escape, it's the disenchantment of "the knight with shiny armour" trope.who's gonna save the damsel without demanding anything in return. I don't think that Frollo is meant to be an unredeemable monster either. He is a self -destructive and sexuality repressed man, frustrated by his failure to make his brother a descent person. Those and his worship of fate (anagi ) are what leading to his downfall! If you ask me , they ll never make the live action happen.And even other versions that were not targeted to family audiences didn't achieved to fully portray what the book was truly about. The book needs to be understood as every other classic book of it's kind.Not something that needs to fit modern standards or be sugarcoated!
With all due respect, there is a difference between being naive and being clueless, a distinction a lot of people struggle with in these kinds of conversations. Just because someone is naive, that doesn't mean that they'll just blindly go along with everything and anything and turn off their senses and reasoning. I've known people that were brought up in sheltered upbringings and none of them displayed this level of obliviousness. Now, I will say it's harsh to call (Book) Esmeralda "stupid" and chalk her up as a solely unintelligent character but she is definately delusional and willfully ignorant so that ultimately falls on her. She ignored the clear warning-signs and reality of the situation in favor of clinging to her fantasy of "Phoebus loves me and we'll be married and live happily ever after". That's the true tragedy of Esmeralda, not naivety but abandonment of reality for the sake of a fantasy.
You really nailed it! I also didn't feel like Esmeralda was stupid but more so naïve, I didn't dislike her character at all. Because I actually could see my younger self in her, when I was 16 I also had a crush on a boy and would imagine whole scenarios in my head. I felt like she was very naïve, but also kind hearted. Even though she was repulsed by Quasimodo looks, she still helped him. In the song, Frollo says "Celle qu'on prenait pour une fille de joie" refering to Esmeralda, "une fille de joie" means a prostitute so yeah, you're spot on :)
@@prunelicious7437 My thoughts exactly! I know that as teens we might have been annoying to older people,but that's how teens actually are! We fall in love and we think he/she was the most important person in the world [and then we break up and we have the first taste of reality,lool] I read the book in Greek [my native language] and I remember the phrases from the court. When they trailed Quasimodo,they claimed he offenced a "Woman of the night" . And when Esmeralda is charged for killing Phoebus,they accused her for prostitution as well. That's how it has been translated at least. Merci for the response!
My goodness, so this is why I've found video essays about this particular film so fascinating for all these years...mostly due to the fact that it _is_ a particularly fascinating film. Who knew, not me! Thank you for sharing. 🙂😀
@@TheSkinnyLegend1997 I don't agree, I think that the ending is a bit of a downer, and I also think that Hugo spends WAY too much time talking about Parisian architecture in 15th century France, but other than those two things, I rather enjoy it!
One issue they must be having is the difference in how the Romani people were treated in the US vs the rest of the world. Americans practically worshipped the "Gypsy", which made America is safe haven for them. But the rest of the world, it's hard for Americans to even comprehend how they were viewed. While we have a terrible history with genocide and discrimination, nothing we have, in modern history, resembles how Europe treated the Romani- and still does. So the people who would be writing and directing the script probably are having a hard time being respectful to the history. I'm sure they're also struggling with Quasimodo's disability. They might be trying to avoid offending people with similar disabilities. Honestly I wouldn't be surprised if they outright got rid of them, lol.
Yeah the disability seems like a huge thing to navigate. Especially when discussing who would play him, how would you achieve the look of him etc. They CGIs the 7 dwarves recently instead of casting real people so I can imagine they don't want to even tackle this.
yeah I think the vast majority of Americans would be shocked to hear about how Romani people get spoken about TODAY in Europe, let alone in Medieval times. And you're right Quasimodos disability is also definitely holding them back (the video would be too long if I went into it). But yeah even beyond the hunchback-- they will have to contend with how ugly to make him. Its much easier to make him both "ugly" and cute in an animation, but in real life ugly can be scary and off-putting. They have to think about whether he's partially deaf because of the bell ringing like he is in the novel, he's also deaf in the Disney play. Whether he's mentally disabled or not etc. And like you said, whether this would offend people with similar disabilities.
Btw in the book it gets even more tragic as they found out too late that Esmeralda was born to a parisian Woman and was abducted as a child. So the hate is focused on a gypsy person who was not actually gypsy. A person that if things had only gone slightly different might have stood with the likes of Phoebus and condemmned another woman in Esmeraldas position. It is a beautiful point about the uselessness of judging people based on a persons or societys perception, hate, and discrimination
Btw, there's a reason she's referred to as Romani throughout the whole video. The G-word is a slur for the Romani people. We accept that the movie is a product of its time, but you are not.
@@TropeAnatomy hey sometimes we just need a nice long break. i've made one essay this entire year. doesn't matter how long it's been you're still one of the best video essayists on the platform. take care man
Might be the only time, in recent history, they've actually sat down and thought about the potential consequences. They can't afford to be flippant about this.
@@ghostratsarah Yeah, I can only imagine the public outcry if disney applies the same laziness they did with The Little Mermaid and Snow White and the rest of their remakes to The Hunchback of Notre Dame. This movie is radically different from most disney films because 1) its not a wish fulfillment magic fairytale, 2) its based on a actual book written by one of the best writers of all time and 3) it touches upon some pretty sensitive subjects like racism, disability, and religious hypocrisy. If they screw it up, they risk offending some pretty vocal groups--the disabled, brown-skinned women, Catholics, and everyone else who defends them.
I really enjoyed this video essay - this is my favourite animated movie of all time, my favourite musical and Quasimodo is my favourite Disney character. I’ve read the novel a few times, but the stage musical is my favourite Disney adaptation ever and I honestly think in terms of the storyline it is more compelling in many ways. (The La Jolla version) To respond to some of your points though: I think another reason why the “happy ending” happens isn’t to detract from / sanitize the message of the original novel, or wasn’t just because Disney needed a happy ending - but rather, to reflect the needs of the people at that time. Though it’s not a fairytale, throughout history, fairytales have been changed and retold. In some stories, Little Red Riding Hood saves herself, in some she dies, in some she is saved by the huntsman etc. Different communities told the stories in different ways to pass on different messages. Though Disney works with material that are not always fairytales, they make them into fairytales, and it is only human to reform fairytales to suit the needs of the society because their purpose was to reflect the common folk. I think that to them, society needed to see a character like Quasimodo win, especially when we have so few disabled characters even now in 2024. In making him the centre of the story, they needed him to succeed and that’s what facilitated the creative choice to have Esmeralda live. If the thesis of this movie is “What makes a monster and what makes a man?”, it is Quasimodo, a “monster”triumphing over a “man” like Frollo. A good monster and an evil man. Esmeralda dying would feel like a narrative loss, like Quasimodo failed in some way and lessen the impact of Disney’s formula of the victim/villain dynamic. Every musical has a thesis and the happy ending may be “neat and tidy”, but it ultimately delivers on the thesis from the opening number. The reason why the stage musical works though is because it has a different thesis, and because Esmeralda feels more like an equal protagonist to Quasi. The thesis is not just about “what makes a monster and what makes a man?”, but rather, becomes about the world. It’s whether or not the world is worth saving. Esmeralda dying helps to facilitate that theme because Esmeralda died with power - she sparked a revolution with Phoebus and the others to fight against injustice and cruelty. “The world is cruel, the world is ugly, but there are times and there are PEOPLE when the world is not. And at its cruelest this is the only world we got” etc. TLDR; the movie’s thesis is about Quasimodo as the underdog, hence Quasimodo needs to win against evil, but the musical’s thesis is about EVERYONE as the underdog in an unjust world, and whether or not our society and world is worth fighting for - whether it’s worth it to do the right thing. How Esmeralda is portrayed will influence the thesis of the live action adaptation, but I don’t know if it’s her they are struggling with as much as they don’t know the thesis they want the movie to have. I think the world could use the thesis of the stage musical right now, but I think it’s just a fact that Broadway is more willing to accept that messaging.
I liked the fact that Quasi didn't kill Frollo, as in trying to make the story more kid-friendly they inadverently provided a rather realistic depiction of abused children.
Good essay! But considering people alredy blindly call this movie "sort of racist" becouse they simply used the term "ghipsy" in a historically acrate way, I doubt a tragic ending would be what would "save" a live action adaptation. I WISH it where a nuanced reason like you proposed here! I just honestly lost hope that it is, becouse everyone now a days is affraid of offending someone with something.
What an incredible essay. Thank you!! Immediately subscribed. I adore Disney’s Esmerelda and after learning the books original story, I actually love the changes they made to the story and characters to tell a more easily consumable story, but also agree the ending of the movie always felt a little too perfect and lacking in substance after the darkness the film had us sit through. Esmerelda has always been one of my favorite Disney characters so learning her origin is so fascinating.
I don't have a problem with Quasimode trying to save Frollo at the end because he's the hero of the story, he is selfless and tries to save the villain at the end of the story. I like that troupe because it sends the message that you should be a hero and protect people but also be willing to forgive. That is something the modern world has completely lost now and its a reason why the western world is so bitter, angry and twisted. I had a terrible abusive childhood but I chose to make peace and forgive because being angry all the time leads to an inevitable spiral. It's not just Hunchback that does this, Tarzan does it as well, the hero doesn't need the blood of the villain on their hands. People need to understand that revenge only ever leaves you cold, bitter and hateful, even if it's years in the future. I don't think you need to turn Quasimode into a murderer to make him more heroic.
I'm on the fence about it, but I definitely see this side! And I did find it quite compelling that it was, in the end, his own church that killed him, like God himself rejected him. Which can be even more powerful imo.
"Western world is so bitter, angry and twisted". And do you think that Eastern world is an absolute paradise, when it comes to human behavior?🤦♀ I'm an Eastern European and I'm going to dissapoint you - no, we aren't morally better than the West. The most of people who were mean and rude to me were from my own country. There are shitty people EVERYWHERE! Even in East Asia, people aren't that polite and angelic as you might think. They can be polite on the surface to not "lose face" but then they will talk shit about you behind your back.
I agree with your analysis. Just one thing, the novel is not named after Quasimodo, it’s not called The Hunchback of Notre Dame, it’s name given by Victor Hugo is simply Notre Dame de Paris.
^^^ The title in translations is misleading. Hugo's focus is -and is throughout the story - the Notre Dame de Paris. But I guess "Notre Dame of Paris" didn't make a good title in other languages
@@leroyjenkins1249 That really threw me when I got around to reading it a few months ago. Hugo is CONSTANTLY stopping to make asides about Notre Dame, specifically the architecture. I remember complaining that Hugo couldn't seem to make up his mind on whether he was writing a novel or a philosophical treatise on architecture! Come to find out, "philosophical treatise on architecture" is EXACTLY what Hugo is trying to do. Specifically, after the French Revolution, when the leaders insisted that the French people had no use for religion anymore, people were using Notre Dame as a wine storage facility and a vandalism center. Hugo was making the argument that such an architectural symbol ought to be protected, whether people have a "use" for religion or not. Throughout the book, he references Notre Dame as though it was a main character. When I read that, it made the book make a LOT more sense!
1) Welcome back! 2) I'm so glad you brought up the stage version, because I was thinking of it basically the entire video. The thing I keep wondering about with respect to this work is the G* slur. It's in the lyrics of several songs (not that they can't change it for Romani for characters that are sympathetic to the Romani people, with the scansion suffering slightly). I could see a lot of criticism being hurled at Disney, both with and without nuance, however they handle it. None of that is very specific to Hellfire, so I'm not saying it's what Menken was referring to, but I do see it being really difficult to please everyone.
The "G-word" has existed for centuries in the English-speaking world, both as a neutral term and as a slur. "Romani" started to go mainstream only in the 1970s, and it was a very slow process even then. It's not easy to get people to stop using a "new" word that sounds so vague, since it is easily confused with "Romanian" and "Roman" (and, just to compound the confusion, both Romania and Rome contain populations of these people). Using "Romani" exclusively in the period setting would be nonsensical. No one but the Romani themselves even knew of the word then. Even as a student in junior high school, I recognized that it was ridiculous to use a modern term to describe a historical situation, no matter how respectful the modern term is.
Taking it out would cause massive backlash too, look at what happened with Boba Fett’s ship - Slave 1. Even just avoiding using the name causes problems because there are a lot of people very sensitive about “freedom of speech” (in this case freedom to harass others without consequence).
I don't think it's that hard (musically) - I studied "Part of Your World" and "God Help the Outcasts" back in 2014 as audition songs, and the official sheet music we had for "God Help the Outcasts" had the initial line as "I don't know if you will listen/To a humble prayer". I hadn't seen the movie in a few years, and the scansion is very similar, so not only did I not notice, seeing the original lyrics when I'm singing trips me up now.
You know what I want to see instead of another Hunchback adaptation? Romani Wolfwalkers. (As in, a mythology-inspired fantasy story steeped in history and using animation to echo traditional romani art, but with motion, similar to what Wolfwalkers did with it's Irish roots.) Of course, this would be made by a studio on the level of something like Cartoon Saloon, not a Disney, but that usually leads to better art these days tbh.
Just rewatched a ton of your older videos so seeing an update gave me whiplash, so excited to watch the video! edit: Great video!! I personally think there's no need to make a live version and I'd be fine with it never happening. But I really appreciate your insight on the novel and its adaptions.
I have noticed how it is always men who bemoan the fact that Quasi didnt get the girl at the end. It is always men talking about how they didnt understand how he didnt get the girl. It's interesting because i think the movie makes it pretty obvious that that isnt what Quasi's arc is about at all. I have never heard a single woman talk about how Quasi should have gotten the girl at the end. I myself am a woman and Disney's Quasimodo is one of my all time favourite disney characters. I felt i could relate to hin so much when i was a kid. Meanwhile, Esmeralda was the very image of the goodness and strength we all strive to become in life. I could relate to quasi and the pain of unreciprocated love. We all go through that and it is part of life to learn to accept that you dont always get what you want. In Quasi's case it is the accept of the common folk and the friendship he makes with Esmeralda and Phoebus that is his true need. I always liked that message in the movie. While Esmeralda stood for the ideals that we should all strive for in life, to be good people, Quasi stood for the selfless love that is just as important. How you arent owed anything in life, but you can still do the right thing and you can still get the best out of the life you have. I remember the first time i heard men talk about how Quasi should have gotten the girl and it was deeply confusing to me. How could anyone watch this movie and still come away with such an entitled impression? That really bothered me. I too have met a lot of men who felt entitled to my or other women's attention and bodies and who would cry and throw hissy fits when they didnt get their way. Im glad i managed to meet a man who wasnt like that eventually, because that is seriously a concerning thing that so many men feel like they are owed a girl with they pretend to be nice. Quasimodo never pretended to be nice. He never felt he was owed Esmeralda's love. He respected her autonomy and he wanted her to be happy even if that wasnt with him. I have been in love with guys who were my esmeralda. They didnt like me like that or had eyes for someone else and even though it wss painful, I stepped down and removed myself from the equation without throwing hissy fits because i knew i wasnt owed their affection. I am not lying when i say that Quasimodo's grace is something i took with me during the awkward dating years whenever i fell for a guy who didnt like me back. But wow. How can anyone watch this movie and have the only take away be that Quasi deserves the girl. I bet if the roles were reversed and it was a deformed woman whos being nice to the handsome hero, no man would think that she was owed the man as a prize for her kindness by the end of the film.
Don't know if you're speaking to me or just in general... but I wanna say the movie came out the year I was born and I'm speaking from the perspective of a really young child because that is what I was when watching this over and over again. I don't even think I saw Quasi as hideous or deformed by the end of the movie because he's such an adorable and wholesome character. I didn't see a mismatch and I didn't understand because I was a child back then, not a man. The extent of my analysis at this age was what I said in the video-- main characters get together in the end. I know my sister felt the same when we watched it. Of course now as an adult I don't think they should be together or that just because he loves her, he should receive her as a prize. It would be absolutely ridiculous
If i were to guess the type of man who would not grasp this, or feel offended that Quasi did not get the girl are usually the type who in real life also struggle to find a partner. Who did not like that Esmeralda chose the good looking charming guard's captain over the pure of heart outcast they themselves root for. It also defied the known formular where the protagonist and hero get's the girl at the end of the story. I as a man, and many others totally understood this. And especially growing up we all know that physical attraction is also a real thing whether we like it or not. And i still love that the movie did somewhat realisticly portrait this. Especalda did love Quasimodo's pureness, his selflessness to safe her and being so kind in general. But instead of the unrealistic trope that any connection between a man and a woman MUST be romantic, displayed it more as a admiration and eventual friendship. While she felt booth physical and emotional attraction with the guard captain, who recipricated this. And was also a good strong person of ideals just as she was. Making them at least romanticly a much better match. And Quasimodo's one sided love was also something realistic, that he did come to terms with. Instead of becomming bitter of jelious. Quasis arc as pointed out was never about getting the girl. It was tied to Frollo the "man of the church". It was about who was the true monster, and who was the man. Something we even understood as children. Despite the appearance of booth on the outside. Simple as that.
I've read an article that Esmerelda chose Phoebus because he treated her like a person compared to Quasimodo and Frollo, who saw her as an angel and a demon respectfully. I don't think any woman wants to be put on a pedestal and certainly not looked down because of her background. I love Quasimodo and this movie is among my top 3 favorite Disney movies as a kid, and I remember watching its sequel which was forced to give Quasimodo a love interest and didn't need it.
I'm with you on how refreshing it is that she didn't end up with the main character, because "the main boy always gets the girl" can be pretty toxic. At the same time, it was odd to me that the one time this is broken in a Disney movie is when the main guy is someone who's conventionally considered hideous, versus the handsome blond guard. Still, it was all up to Esmerelda's choice (...and the way writers chose to write her, or whatever the executives may have wanted). As for no women wanting Esmerelda to end up with Quasi, I do have one! My best friend watched it when she was close to her 20s. I introduced her to the movie and she loved it but she found the ending absolutely tragic and wanted them two end up together. She was able to relate the most to Quasi as someone who was bullied for many similar reasons, has a heavily asymmetrical face, a slight hump back, etc. However there's also the issue that @DulciToo1 brings up. I think overall, there's nothing they could actually do with the pairings that would keep even half of the audience happy. All I can think of is that if she chooses *no one* that's a more neutral stance than choosing the handsome guard, versus the "monster" with a heart of gold, etc. But then that goes into "What, so women aren't even allowed to find love anymore?" territory as Disney has been releasing more animations than not where romance is removed completely.
I think those guys just want one of the good guys getting the girl. Because he is a good person. Especially after a life of essentially torture. Me? I'm just glad he found someone in the sequel even if it sucked because he didn't die of depression and grief hugging Esmerelda's moldering corpse.
i adored this essay. hunchback is one of my favorite disney movies, but i have never seen any other the other adaptations, so this was a wonderful insight into the characters and symbolism against their original forms.
Movie Phoebus has Phoebus’s look (well, less dandified) and position but is more like book Gringoire. He has the good humored detachment of Gringoire, almost an audience surrogate walking into the world and observing all this interesting people. His courage and later sense of righteousness is an invention, just like Esmeralda’s. I think you’re a little too shocked by Esmeralda’s naive infatuation. Like you said, she’s only sixteen, a child. It’s not rational perhaps but Hugo is a writer of the romantic era, so emotions are larger than life and all consuming. Plus, if you’ve been a sixteen year old girl, it’s not unbelievable. She’s not a protagonist but an axis of emotion that moves the characters around her, much like Fantine is Les Miserables.
All of this! Plus the infatuated virgin trope was a common thing in a lot of gothic literature of the time, and the novel sits within that particular genre
@@raymondteodosbandlabvlog1676 You reminded me of one heroine in the book Teutonic Knights (Polish novel) where exact same trope appears. But, surprisingly, author had killed her off (for a very good reason) and gave the protagonist a strong woman (in the positive sense of the trope), which was a better suit for him. And of course - she is a young girl (around 12 yrs old) falling for a knight to be (18 yrs old) who also falls in love with her at first sight. Something that Shakespeare ridiculed in Romeo and Juliet (no, it's not meant to be a tragedy at all, quite the opposite).
Anyone who has ever read Victor Hugo knows it must end in tragedy. I remember reading an adaptation of it when I was young and even though it wasn’t as tragic as Hugo’s original- I remember reading it and hating Phobous. I remember Quasi and Esmeralda sharing a grave or rather his skeleton holding hers. It was effective in its themes. I’m not surprised they are struggling to make the non- animation version. I can’t imagine that the French would watch it because it won’t stay true to Victor Hugo and I can’t imagine it will make money.
Hugo was heavy on fatalism, emotions and nihilism. Many of his characters just died needlessly or senselessly. But the way he described all that... As for the French - TBH most of book adaptations suck, especially if they are heavy in emotional load that the author pours on the reader, that is why I am glad that some books were never turned into a movie, because it would ruin them.
Frollo's death seems a little bit like a cop out, but I like it and I'll tell you why. For the whole movie, from the very beginning, Frollo is told that he cannot hide from "the very eyes of notre dame". So it's already alluded to and woven into the narrative that Notre Dame is watching and judging him. In the end it is Notre Dame herself which judges and executes Frollo, the spout that he manages to catch onto coming to life and separating from the building to plunge him to his death. You can call it a neatly wrapped Disney ending, that allows the story's hero to not have to have a murder on his hands, which sure it is, but it's not an out of left field, undeserved deus ex machina. It's well set up.
The only issue I have with this video is the inaccurate definition of Romani as being a race (and the alleged importance of race in the story) when it is not a race in the slightest, it is a culture and ethnicity that is all over the world, meaning that even though Esmeralda in the original is revealed to have been abducted as a child, she was raised Romani, taught Romani, and is for all intents and purposes a Romani woman even though she was born from a French family, which is used in the book to emphasize that discrimination and bias is horrendous not only because it shows what people are willing to do to each other just because of cultural differences and stereotypes, but also showed the lengths readers and later film producers would go through to add on whatever other excuses they need in order to be able to better relate, excuse, or understand the inherent bias in the story. For example: Making Esmeralda a "pure" Romani woman actually takes away from the importance of the message involved in her being born French, which originally showed the fact that bias in medieval Europe wasn't about race, it was primarily about religion and culture because racism in what would be Europe pretty much didn't exist historically until only the past few hundred years with the first examples of racism itself only actually appearing in history starting in ancient Africa and the middle east and wouldn't even be what is considered to be modern racism until the mid to late 1600s, which is several hundred years after the setting of this story and can even be backed up by the fact that anti-slavery laws didn't start being about race until AFTER the American colonies had been established, with all prior laws being about what religious groups were allowed or not allowed to be slaves, with one of the first anti-slavery laws being a religious doctrine passed by Christians that made it illegal for Jews to own Christian slaves. When you make Esmeralda a modern depiction of what is popularly considered a marginalized and discriminated group (in America specifically), you actually lose the depth of the meaning of what bigotry actually is when you break it down to its core components, which is just a hatred or discrimination of another group because of any number of preconceived notions regardless of if they are justified or unfounded, which is exemplified by the fact that even though Esmeralda was born French, the French people treated her just like all the other Romani people because that's what her culture was. I ranted a little bit here and there, but it's also a bit of a hot button issue for me because I am from Roma heritage but there is casual racism from a lot of "pure" Romani people where they will heavily insist that the only "true" Romani people are all dark haired with tan skin even though that's complete BS and is literally just discrimination. Yes the suspected origins of Roma culture are from around the areas around India and Egypt, but that is only a suspicion and is such an old point of origin that it's on par with saying that all Christians are POC because Christianity originated in the middle east. It's ridiculous and just an excuse to be a bigot and you can find whole discussion threads on reddit defending this kind of racist perspective.
Great video that touched upon what I like and dislike about the film! I wanted to point out another reason Disney may be delaying the film is that they don't know how to cast Esmeralda, or they don't want to cast her appropriately. Disney has had a history with casting non-Roma as Romani characters and erasing their ethnicity, Scarlet Witch and Dr Doom are some examples, so they clearly don't care about casting accurately when it comes to Romani characters. But unlike the aforementioned Marvel characters who generally received a small amount of backlash for their casting, if they did the same with Esmeralda it would cause a even bigger backlash and force Disney to confront the issue of their anti-romani sentiment. Another reason is because Esmeralda is not marketable. Her outfit alone would cause controversy about cultural appropriation of Romani fashion and culture which America has had and still has a issue with doing. She is also independent in the Disney film and uses her sexuality to her advantage. With how sanitized Disney has become, having the female lead who is supposed to be marketed to young girls dance provocatively is a very understandable concern (one of the few) for the company. If Disney ever does make this film, I hope they fix or address these issues and also get ACTUAL ROMA to work on the film and help bring to light the issues they face. Along with making this a stepping stone for introducing more POSITIVE Roma representation in media. Especially cause Disney is trying to pride itself on being "progressive" but only when it comes to some people, not all people.
To know how much they improved on the original is even more proof of how they should embrace this character instead of trying to forget it. She moves the story with her actions and inspires with her kindness
I remember reading the book for the first time (an abridged version) after growing up with the movie and crying so much at the ending. It also just made it hard to enjoy Disney Phoebus and Esmeralda.
Why? Disney Esmeralda is a much better character than book Esmeralda. She's an adult who is a Romani (book Esme was kidnapped and isn't Romani). She fights against prejudice. She has way more agency.
@l.n.3372 Exactly bruh, I can't understand how people prefer the ugly book compared to the beautiful Disneyified version with an actual happy ending and a brown girl who isn't dead and is in a happy relationship with a white man. The Disney version is very progressive for its time tbh, movies today wouldn't even pair the brown girl up with the white man due to racism from conservatives.
@TheSkinnyLegend1997 I mean frankly I do not prefer Disney Esme because she gets a happy ending. It's fine that the book ends with tragedy after all. But I prefer her as an adult with more agency. She also stands for a good message. Book Esme is 15 and has 0 agency and dies because she can't control her crush on Phoebus.
@l.n.3372 my life is already sad enough as is. When you go through struggles your whole life you tend to idolize more wholesomeness in media. If you live a very privileged life you tend to prefer darker medias. I know that life is hard enough as is so a wholesome ending is most likely what a modern audience prefers, hard times create strong men, good times create weak men, and all that stuff.
@TheSkinnyLegend1997 WTF are you on about how times create strong vs weak men??!! We are talking about a Victor Hugo novel and it's Disney adaptation. If you do like sad media, you don't need to consume it. But Victor Hugo novels aren't happy or sunshine. And that's ok. Book Esme is flawed as hell and that's why I prefer Disney Esme. But I don't prefer happy endings over sad endings inherently.
Say what you will about Michael Eisner (and don't get me wrong-- he's earned it), but his enthusiasm and willingness to let Disney get dark at times is incredibly awesome and I wish Iger had even a fraction of that same mindset.
For real! Part of what made the Disney Rennessaince era so great was they took chances, they weren't afraid to "go there" and they actually put some heart and soul into their movies. From the music, the story, the writing, the art, the acting...they were all memorable. Sure, we may have some criticisms and noticed plot holes, but even with live action remakes filling in the odd plot hole, there are reasons many of us still prefer the animated classics...and so do many children of today. Michael Eisner sucked on many levels, but Disney movies did not while he was in charge 🤷♀️ ....Although I will say Encanto was fantastic. They could easily save Disney if they simply expanded the Encanto universe. We all want a sequel and every single character (even the grandma) in the family Madrigal is worthy of their own movie. But yeah, they'd rather ruin Snow White and other tales as old as time....
This whole time I was wondering if you would bring up the musical as I’m a huge fan of it, and I’m glad you did. While there are still tweaks to be made, I the the musical would be a great starting point for the live action.
The saddest part is that, in any discussion pertaining to Disney live action adaptations, I always name The Hunchback of Notre Dame as a prime example of an animated film that COULD be a truly great live action film as well. It has already been immortalized on screen time and again, and with Disney's endless coffers we could have the definitive movie adaptation of the novel to date. All it requires is a competent director able to effectively and daringly adapt a truly dark and tragic tale for the big screen, studio interference and potential controversy be damned.
I WAS HOPING YOU'D TALK ABOUT THE STAGE ADAPTATION ITS BRILLIANT! I hope the adaptation, if it ever happens, leans more toward the stage adaptations decisions and characters than the Disney version.
I'm french and when you started to talk about the musical I thought you were going to talk about the french one with Garou as the hunchback 😂. Your essay was great and you pointed out the issues of Disney quite right I think.
I have always loved that esmeralda doesn’t end up with quasi. I’ve always been so tired of the story arc of “homely man with a good personality manages to win over beautiful girl due to his personality” because it feels like saying a man’s value is only in his personality whereas a woman’s is only in her looks. A beautiful kind girl should be able to fall in love with a man who is both kind and beautiful too, without that being seen as shallow.
while I clearly see the benefit of Quasi killing Frollo himself, I do actually like the animated version, because Frollo damns himself there. Quasi wasnt trying to save his master I think, he just before finally rejected Frollo and said his part about him. then Frollo even revealed to him that he lied about Quasi's mother. during Hellfire Frollo was asking for relief from the damnation he was facing and his prayers were answered, a guard interrupted him, backed by light blue "heavens light", telling him that Esmeralda was gone. but Frollo decided to pursue her anyway, no matter the cost. I like that, Frollo actually had a chance to turn around, but instead he walked his path onward to hell willingly. and I do totally agree that the romani plight shouldve been a plight brought about by structural injustice. it's not simply Frollo being a racist prick, it's the whole of society and it's systems treating peopler who are "othered" like shit, to manifest arbitrary hierarchies and political power.
What a great analysis 😍 you did a great job. I love the book, the Disney movie and I've seen the Notre Dame de Paris musical (the one by Plamondon). It's a masterpiece
omggg a new video!!! even though i found ur channel a few years ago fairly recently, i rewatch your videos a lot especially the disney and harry potter ones. so glad ur backkk!!!! aghaggagag!!!!
@@TropeAnatomy feels like I've manifested this, I was ona very long train ride a few days ago and binged all your videos, we definitely still care!! Your video about the Susan problem was so healing, it's one of my faves
Great essay and analysis. I quite like the three mediums (film, stage and book) being for three different audiences and having three different endings, all three provide a much richer point of discussion and flexibility in character portrayals and relationships. I like Disney’s film ending. The message in overcoming religious abuse with a found family, standing up to someone who is so lustfully aggressive to you and being the survivor, finding love, are important and hopeful messages. There’s something important there that different adaptions are not wrong, but allow for a greater depth of exploration and discussion.
Quasimodo and Esmeralda being a couple never, ever crossed my mind 😂 even as a child I knew he intimately loved her, but no.. she loved the Phoebus. And, not even that.. it was obvious that they weren’t compatible. I also knew the priest guy was a straight up dark creep.
I disagree with your opinion and think that they are perfect for each other and I explained why in another comment to a different guy but I respect your opinion.
The version of the musical that played in Germany is still, in my opinion, the best version. The ending is so much closer to the novel, and Quasimodo yelling "Du bist ein guter Lehrer, Meister Frollo, EIN SEHR GUTER LEHRER!" (You're a good teacher, Master Frollo. A VERY GOOD TEACHER!") as he kills Frollo is one of the most chilling things I've ever heard. The Gargoyles are still in that version, but even they are given a bit of a dark side, being the ones who convince Quasi to go ahead and kill his master. Clopin is also the narrator in that version, which works sooooo much better than the "living environment narrators" the new version of the musical gives us. If they ever did a live action version on film, I would want them to base it off of the German stage musical. By the way, Disney never announced that they were doing a live action version. That was a lot of internet wish-listing, along with Josh Gad saying he wanted to do it.
I have grown up with this story, I watched the Disney movie and read part of the novel as a kid, and it introduced me to my biggest passion that is musical theatre cause here in Italy we have a stage version. And in my opinion the Disney musical is the best version ever made, it draws the best parts from both the animated movie and the novel while adding moving songs and depth to characters that were already amazing, it's insane
I really hope that Disney make a live action close to the stage play, with a more gritty and closer to the book ending. Because really, what’s the point of doing a live action if it’s just going to be an exact replica of the cartoon? If parents don’t want their children watching a darker adaptation, then they can just watch the animated version. It doesn’t have to be “adult”, it can still be suitable for young audiences, but just more serious theme (think Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter, or Phantom of the Opera). Also, I would love to see more historically accurate costuming, especially with Esmeralda. 🙏✨
Awesome analysis! I think the animated version was as true to the original novel as possible while still ending on a high note and I still love it. I'm a little torn on what I'd like to see from a live action. I generally like hopefully endings, but the stage version you summarized does sound very thoughtful.
I dont doubt Esmeralda throws a wrench in the works. It is hard to toe the line between depicting racism & reproducing racism. Like the very name of the ethnic group the animated version uses is controversial. That alone is gonna cause problems Because even to this day there is quite a lot of violence and discrimination towards the Romani still.
@@jonathanhosh4459 I don't know what sounds more absurd, if "French Romani" or "Romani writers", LMAO. The Romani are a special demography, totaly self-marginalised, even if they live in France, they're not French and don't want to be. And writers, well... most Romani kids don't even attend mandatory school.
@@MomockDamockyou are showing the trademark European racism lol. There’s a reason all those things are true to an extent, and Romani writers and academics do exist, you fool.
@MomockDamock as a Slovenian Romani I was going to respond but then I checked my schedule and saw that I had self marginalisation booked in 15 minutes 😔 alas I must return to the shadows
I'll have to disagree with you on the ending scepticism. Yeah Disney's Hunchback of Notre Dame doesn't have a dark ending, not just because it's a pg movie, but because it's not the story of Esmeralda this time, it's Quasimodo's. The novel meant to illustrate feable lives of our protagnist, aganist the majesty of the sanctuary, Notre Dame herself. It shows that despite all the horror and tragedy, in the dead center of it all stands the cathedral, unmoved and unfazed by it all, connecting all of their lives together. It's a tragic tale mainly for Esmeralda, but it very much is sexist and racist nowadays, with all the points you provided. That's why I think Disney decided to put their focus on a different character, that being Quasimodo. So as much as you might dislike it, the ending had to change, to fit the new direction of the story. The animated hunchback still focuses on the issues of lust, prejudice, racism, religious obsession and so forth, but the conflict of the movie is now "Who is the monster and who is the man?". It clearly shifts it's focus onto the relationship, parallels and differences of Quasimodo and Frollo. Yes, Esmeralda is still a major character in the movie, the story wouldn't function without her and she's still the centerof the story, but she's not the protagonist anymore, Quasi is. That's why the ending had to be positive, because after everything that happened to the Hunchback, after the kindness and support he had shown, he and the people he loves deserve it. It's about standing up for yourself, escaping a toxic and abusive relationship, having to deal with rejection in a positive way, showing the real hardships of people with body deformity, it can't be denied what a traiblazer this movie was when it comes to physical disability in animation back in the 90s. It's message differs from the one in the Victor Hugo's version, but that's because stories evolve, find new interpretations of the story to fit in with today's societal problems. Hell, even Hugo himself couldn't decide on an ending since he himself reinvented it a few years later in his play "La Esmeralda" which actually ends with Esmeralda surviving it all. If that's not a proof that stories evolve and aren't always a result of corporate cynicism, I don't know what is. Huge props to Lindsay Ellis for all the insightful analysis on Hunchback, go check out her video about it!
I like how Quasimodo had the compassion to still try and save his enemy, because that is a true Christian belief. I think it made a good contrast to the villains twisted Christian beliefs.
I see how you feel the way you do about the ending but I think it was fitting for what the movie was. Quasi is a loving person. He'll fight to protect, but its totally consistent with his personality that he wasnt ready to drop Frollo into the depths. I choose to see it as 'the eyes of Notre Dame' catching up to Frollo. Frollo believed he could atone for his wickedness by raising Quasimodo, but he himself was never good, and also he raised a blade to Quasi. Therefore Notre Dame damns him to hellfire.
In this vein of thought, I think Notre Dame can be seen as the secret parent figure of Quasi. As if it watches over him for his mother. It protected him from Frollo throwing him into the well, it sheltered him, protected his friends, the bells comfort him and even the gargoyles that are attached act as his friends and confidants. Notre Dame fights along with him and finishes the job when Frollo raises his blade at Quasimodo. Frollo was never truly there for him, but Notre Dame was.
Really excellent look at the issues! I also believe in the musical Quasi is Frollo's nephew. The story is so powerful, and I can see people being upset by the ending, but this would be a cool live action one to see revived. They cannot leave out Hellfire. Seriously one of the best villain songs and just a masterful piece of music.
Hunchback is my favorite Disney movie. Everything but the gargoyles was just so well done. Frollo was such a good villain. Febus was awesome. The way Quasimodo accepted and promoted Febus and Esmerelda getting together was just such a good show of character.
excellent video essay. oof….i had no idea the degree to which this story was a tragedy, thank you for illuminating me. it’s interesting how the theme of desire in stories; is usually interwoven with manipulative lust, obsession, & trying to make that object of desire subservient to you. weirdly: this reminds me of how too much trust, is dangerous-unwarranted/wrong people; at least that’s what some versions of this story evoke for me. thanks again.
Firstly, your work is so good and I thank you greatly for the effort and insights you put into your videos. Just watching and I had a thought about Quasimodo's attempt to save his master and how the master dies without any blood being cast on the hands of our heroes... this looks like justice to me. If an evil person is convicted of murdering someone close to you, is it right for you to kill them? They would be tried by the justice system... whatshishame falling from Notre Dame is a form of justice in a similar way. Also, the indecision that Quasimodo experiences shows how systematically he was manipulated bu this man, the inner turmoil when this man, who was all he knew, was about to fall to his death seem fitting and realistic. It grounds Quasimodo's experience and shows how wrong it is to manipulate someone and keep them captive. Love it. Thanks for the brain activity Trope Anatomy.
Esmeralda: I love you Phoebus! Phoebus: I love you to Esmenarda Esmeralda: That’s….that’s not my name. Phoebus: Oh-well…your name is just so unique that it’s hard to remember. Esmeralda: …..yeah that totally makes sense 😍 (Not word for word but pretty much the dialogue from the book)
Pocahontas is going to be loads of "fun" too. I liked the movie, but cried at the same time knowing it doesn't end well for her and her people in real life.
I always, especially as a kid, liked how Frollo quotes a specific passage in the Bible about falling in to fire, and then a gargoyle basically lets him know he’s the baddie before he plunges to his fiery doom. It felt very satisfying as a kid, and the hero didn’t murder anybody, which is even better.
Honestly, this story might just be a little too much for Disney. It is, at its very core, and by its very nature, controversial. Victor Hugo was in fact making bold criticisms about society, specifically religious hypocrisy and bigotry, which even now, HUNDREDS of years after this story takes place, we are STILL dealing with. Changing the ending is like changing the ending of Romeo and Juliet. I haven't seen the stage version, but by the description in the video, it sounds like a very good retelling that keeps the spirit, while giving Esmerelda a bit more... agency? I very much want to seek this out now, thanks for the great breakdown!
Thank you for including clips from the TV version from 1997. I know it takes its own liberties with the source material, but I think it still a good and solid adaptation in its own right. I think I saw this one before the Disney version (it was on TNT in the USA). actually enjoy the relationship between Pierre and Esmeralda in this version and Frollo was captured perfectly by Richard Harris (Dobelldore, Harry Potter). l do agree with many of your points here and you have an interesting take on the twist of Esmeralda's parentage could have a deeper meaning in that her death and the hate against the Romani is senseless. Also regarding Phoebus in the Disney version I heard somewhere that he was a mesh up of Phoebus from the book (a captain) and the good hearted Pierre which I think is neat. And yes I think the stage show is that well blended merge between book and Disney film. Being able to capture Quasimodo's deafness when speaking, but in his head when by himself was a great way to use the medium of live theater. It is very interesting and also sad that Disney in the 90s were able to take SUCH Big risks with this movie and while not a perfect film, I'm grateful we got it. Thank you for this essay and I would be interested if you could do maybe a mini essay on the 1997 TV version since as I said NO ONE talks about it or seems to remember it which is a shame because it did capture some of the books themes (the question of the church's power/importance vs the printed books) better than a lot of other versions I've seen. I mean as English speaking audience we are drawn to the human story of the characters, but Hugo was focused on Notre Dame herself as the central figure of the book. No worries if not, (another essay) just a suggestion. Keep up the great work :).
Disney really looked at Hugo's Phoebus and said "I can fix him" I also agree that the stage play is probably the best route to go with for the live action adaptation. I think it balances the dark themes and ending with a hopeful look at the characters as people (Esmeralda gets to be the best version of herself and also a Roma, Phoebus is an actually good person, Quasimodo gets genuine love and support for once and also takes down his abuser)
As a child, I loved books. My grandfather had his own personal library where I would pick out some books that piqued my interest. I think I was about 11 or 12 when I first read Victor Hugo's The Hunchback of Notre Dame along with other classics. When the Disney renaissance began, I watched the films and was thoroughly surprised at how different each one was from the books that I have read.
I never knew that some folks had an issue with the gargoyles until I was older, when I was a kid I loved them. Even now they don't bother me. Quasi imagining they were real so he wouldn't feel alone felt natural to me, even though the movie played with the idea that they were actually sentient I just chalked it up to run of the mill Disney magic.
I think Quasimodo trying to save Frollo is perfect, actually, because it highlights his compassion and empathy. Murder is never "justified", and when one of the themes of the Disney movie is answering the question "who is the monster and who is the man?" having Quasi show empathy for a man that was nothing but cruel is beautiful. It really cements Quasi as a truly kind, compassionate man (in contrast to Frollo's cruelty), and imo true strength comes from compassion. That's the beauty of so many of the Disney (cartoon) protagonists: they remain kind and fair in the face of mistreatment and wickedness.
The story of Esmeralda's mother is also quite tragic. She absolutely hates the Romani after her daughter's abduction. Therefore she hates Esmeralda too. She is one of the first who accuses Esmeralda of being a witch and is constantly riling up the crowd against her, with success, as she is very respected. Only to find out just before Esmeralda's execution that she was advocating for the death of her own daughter. Edit: She dies trying to save Esmeralda.
Actually in the book Esmeralda’s mother dies trying to save her daughter but is thrown to the ground and cracks her skull…
@@Layra.wawa1234I came here to say this 😭
In the book she's not respected, she's considered a madwoman.
@georgespiggott5615 I read it a long time ago, but I think she's respected by a lot of people, despite her madness, as she's kind of a walled in hermit.
@@Layra.wawa1234 Oh, you're right. I read it a long time ago.
I like the fact that Quasimodo did not throw Frollo off the tower. The way it played out in the movie reads like God himself is rejecting Frollo, with the church itself killing him. It is very fitting to me that the man obsessed with God and commiting great evil in his name, is rejected by him. It is the utmost refusal of his entire belief system.
Kinda reminds me of the Castlevania adaptation wherein there is a bishop who claims to burn a Witch at the stake in the name of God. When the monsters inevitably come for him, they tell him that God is repulsed by his work, seemingly with some authority on the matter. Again, a beautiful rebuttal to his beliefs, by the one he claims to serve. Good stuff.
YEEES, Netflix’s Castlevania is INCREDIBLE
Depends on whether you believe in God, I guess.
@JohanDanielsson8802 I do not. But Frollo does. It is more about the rejection he feels than whether or not God is an active force.
@@JohanDanielsson8802 I don’t think it’s important whether the audience believes in God or not because it’s pretty well established that it is an important institution within the film and the characters believe it or at least struggle with it. So yeah it fits that Frollos fake devoutness is seen through by the eyes of God and leads to his death. Basically he pretends to be a holy man and gets called out by God for not being genuine or you could say hell recognizes their own and swallowed him.
yes yes yes i said this same thing too
A solid essay. Thanks for sharing! Esmeralda remains, to this day, one of my fav Disney characters. I really hope they never make that live-action adaptation 🤞
Pretty sure they won't.
Bob Iger said in an interview that Hunchback of Notre Dame is his least favorite movie,so live action remake is a no-go
The musical adaptation was really something else (good), so if they ever make a film and actually want it to be successful idk that they could base it on anything else if they take their audience seriously.
There are very good movie adaptions of the original book… and there is an absolutely slaying french musical adaptation
@@DragonGoddess18 That's intriguing! The animated movie is Michael Eisner's favourite. What a difference between the former CEO and the current CEO!
@@DragonGoddess18 and probably to represent true inclusivity towards physical disabilities, the socially purged and stigmatised gypsy culture, abuse and corruption of power would be actually doing the right thing.
Ps. I am sure Phoebus would be Asian and would be safe by Esmeralda who actually was a soldier in disguised
Esmeralda was one of, if not my absolute favorite Disney female character growing up and remains one of my favorites today. While I now understand this is based on a classic novel with differing plot points, I can assure you as a little girl who actually liked most of the darker themes in the movie even as a child, I wouldn't have been able to handle Disney killing off Esmeralda.
Most people wouldn't tolerate Disney's few brown girls dying by a white racist.
I love her too because she's so gutsy and has such a big heart and inspires people to defend others in need like how she does in the film. She's also a bit saucy and not technically a princess but definately a leader :)
She fitted right into the 90s Girl power she was strong independent and took no shit off anyone and no doubt could handle herself in a fight I still admire her
I have a feeling that the problem Disney has with the live action adaptation of tHoND, is that Disney doesn't create tragedies. And this story, at its very core, is a tragedy.
Disney does know how to create compelling characters and heartbreaking moments, but in the end the story HAS to end on high note.
On the grand scale, majority of highly popular movies and franchises have a happy ending, because it feels rewarding to the audience. The tragic endings are almost solely reserved for genres like horror, thriller, some epics or dramas. And even though those movies can be well received, popular and praised, the most important thing for a company is the number under the line.
A tragedy in every sense!
The animated Hunchback movie ended on a high note, why couldn't they just do the same for the live action remake?
Disney were originally planning for Quasi to get murdered by Frollo and Esmeralda would be the one to kill Frollo. Of course Disney decided to cut that ending, but the 1997 adaptation (which just so happens to be my second favourite of all the versions made) took inspiration from it. As well as that, Mandy Patinkin (actor for Quasi in 1997 version) was going to voice Quasi in the Disney animation but he turned down the role because of creative differences.
Pocahontas at least had a bittersweet ending, and that had came just before this.
I think main issue of live action movie that this video doesn’t discuss is the casting. In todays climate you can’t cast anyone but Romani for Esmeralda. And disabled for Quasimodo. Quasimodo should also be Romani based on his mother (unless he was a foundling?) although they could add what was in the book that Frollo is uncle and focus on that.
And where can those actors be found?
@@sarasamaletdin4574 Really, you don't think there are any good disabled actors who could play Quasimodo?
I read the book in high school. I honestly was shocked at how different it was from the beloved movie. But it was so good. Victor Hugo is still one of my favorite authors.
I was also shocked when I first listened to the audiobook version of the novel to learn how different it was, but I also thought it was very good!
When I tell you I was shook when I read Les Miserables for the first time. The reading experience elevated what I thought of the stage musical cause holy frick if youre reading the shiz Fantine and Jon Valjean had to go through with the musical lyrics stuck in your head *perfect combo* I still need to read Hunchback of Notre Dame so I can have the same experience listening to the stage musical
There’s a rabbit whole of a discussion to be had about Hugo’s voice as a writer and the zeitgeist he existed in. Speaking power to hypocrisy, irony… he is a master and we see the same level of mastery in Les Mis 🤌
It was a book on architectural history with the occasional diversion into a storyline.
Les Miserables, especially little Cosette made me cry hard, when I was a teenager. Never went back, although of course, writing is superb.
Another big issue of Esmeralda not being Romani: it's not that she was adopted (which could've been a way to portray Romani people as compassionate and caring for a helpless baby), she was ABDUCTED. Which is an extremely harmful prejudice against Romani people.
What makes it even more horrible is that historically it were often Romani children taken away forcefully from their families to be "integrated", which often meant that they weren't even treated like adopted kids but servants by their new "families". What Romani people did when "kidnapping children", was only trying to get their own back
Yes great point. I also didn't mention that they left Quasimodo in her place because of his disability. The whole framing just makes them cartoonishly evil. Like even Frollo wasn't that cruel, he took Quasi out of pity. Disneys version where Quasis parents loved him and his mother was killed by Frollo, which causes religious guilt and fear of damnation was much better.
Yep stealing children is a harmful stereotype, didnt know about the sad background thou.
And even oif she were adopted in a romani family, she i think would be romani because its a cultural thing too, it has a lot in common with judaism there i think?! Through romani are more close knit pretty sure. So she still very much would be romany because its a cultural member of that community raised?
Just dont have hernot kidnapped, that would be a terrible trope if she were abducted.
@@TropeAnatomy Both white and non white charaters viewd Quasi as an adomination tho.
And ,historially, it was 100% accurate how people in the past thought that those children were from demons to simply condemed from birth that they could not survive in this tuff society and live a normal life. Ancient Sparta for exaple.
They are devided by racism,but united by the hatred towards deformed and disabled children lol!
I had no idea Romani were accused of kidnapping babies. Their culture has really suffered from prejudice and hate from the world but the world is stupid.
Not true, because for the rest of the book, we see the Roman people as loving family members and a wonderful community that has raised Emelda as one of their own and they’re seen as sympathetic in the light of the audience.
So that one act that they had happened, didn’t taint the audience, his view or create anything bad in the mind of the people watching the play or reading the book of the Roman people
It seems to me the problem is Disney doesn’t actually understand what these ‘issues’ even are.
They just know that if they do _something_ , they’ll receive backlash.
yeah because the Disney company is a bunch of CEOs wanting to make a prfoit by writting the most horrednous adaptions and stealing art by better artists. I agree, no further proof then disney (animation studio) not realizing the Golden Age need a renaissance
I think that they know a lot of the issues are political ones: Quasimodo is a hunchback but does this mean they take a risk and cast an actor who is one, or play it safe and go with a handsome actor with prosthetics because they think that'll be a more crowd-pleasing choice? Then, who do they cast as Esmeralda given her race/Romani/French description? Everyone THINKS of Esmeralda as Romani, because they're picturing the animated character, but anything they pick might be called racially inaccurate/insensitive, or there'll be screams of 'woke' from the childish crowd. Then, there are the religious issues with Frollo. Given how crazy the Christian audience reacted to A Life of Brian back in the day, I don't know how they'd take his character in a live action Disney movie.
@@SevenEllen I don't know about the last part. Frollo is very clearly catholic, so the protestants at least could just say "Catholics!" and leave it at that - and Catholics themselves do not usually teach that all their high-ranking members in history were saints.
Yeah just look what happened with the casting of Heathcliff for Wuthering Heights and Dr. Doom. Disney really needs to be mindful of who they pick.
@@SevenEllenthe characterization of Esme in the live action more serious when you factor that she was kicked out of the Disney Princess lineup back in ‘03 because parents felt that her dancing on the arrow made her a bad role model for girls. I have a strong feeling that those people will speak again if they put that scene.
It makes sense that Quasi would try to save Frollo despite how bad he is bc Frollo was basically his father, also Quasi was sheltered.
But he stopped seeing him as a father figure when he tried to kill Esmeralda, realizing that the world is only cruel because of people like him.
@@vetarlittorf1807 true, but that doesn't immediately undo years of attatchment.
@@UltraVioletKnightI don't think he had much of an attachment. Frollo abused him, gaslit him and hurt him. Quasi was terrified of him. He whimpers into a corner like a dog when Frollo came to visit in the beginning.
@@vetarlittorf1807 It does not stop him from trying to save Frollo though. He may have been the worst parental figure around, but he was Quasi's father-figure. He had to try. And he did, to his shame.
@@vetarlittorf1807You can still love an abusive parent. Even if they hurt you, even if they make your every waking moment a living hell, some part of you will always love them, even after you realize they don't deserve it, because whether they did a good job or not, they raised you.
Personally, I think Quasimodo trying to save frollo makes more sense for his character. Regardless of how frollo treated him, he was still Quasi's father for the majority of his life, and part of him will always see him as one, no matter what.
I resent calling Esmeralda in the book stupid. She's a 15 year old child being taken advantage of
There are “issues” with this video.. lol
I agree
Once again, everything is in context of history, culture region, as well as the individuals experience.
Year-old during that time. We’re not children. Nor were they raised as children so you can’t look at them in a 2024 lens and still think that your highschooler who is a freshman, no emotional maturity, is the same 15 year-old who would probably be married off by this time and a mother and also performing her own chores in her own home. 😂
Not to mention, she’s in a totally different culture of the Romani culture.
This constant victimization of teenagers has got to stop , because I understand an American culture we infantilize our own teenagers and we don’t expect much maturity from them, hence why there’s a lot of handholding in high school and there’s a lot of rules parameters and a lot of responsibility taken out of the kids, hands and put into everybody else’s. But even if you are emotionally stuck at an age life still goes on around you and your experiences. Do change as you get older so even if you’re not emotionally, an adult people will treat you like one, if so for dating underage people because they’re “emotionally not there” 🙄
But this had nothing to do with her and more so the people around her and the men who all wanted her , two of them wanted her for very selfish reasons and wanted her for more pure reasons, but wasn’t able to verbalize those feelings or feel he would be accepted because of how he looked. At the end of the day, it’s a tragedy.
Has nothing to do with Esmeralda an individual she’s more so , The catalyst of these events.
So you’re definitely stating her importance in the book 😅 or even how her relationship with these men were.
Agree. If anything, it shows how cold and alienating that society was, to the point that any act of decency could make a marginalized person fall sooo in love. The bar was rock bottom.
ONLY AN ILLITERATE WITH ANOTHER AGENDA CAN CALL VICTOR HUGO'S ESMERALDA STUPID.
i have severe ADHD and often struggle to sit down and only focus on a singular thing, so the greatest compliment i can give here is that you really had my full attention for the entirety of this video.
Wow 😭 I’m diagnosed as well and it’s why making videos is such a struggle for me. Thank you! It means a lot 😊
I will never understand why people criticize these Disney movies as being in a sense unrealistic. I think the way they did the animated version of the Hunchback was a nice balance of diving into the darkness but also giving us a form of wish fulfillment with a nice ending. I suppose I wouldn't mind an animated version based on the stage play. But the Hunchback is one of my favorite Disney movies, and I don't mind the happy ending at all. You don't go to Disney movies for historically accurate depictions of things. You go to Disney movies for a good time. Even better if like the hunchback, they are able to take you for an emotional ride along the way.
Same for Pocahontas imo. I understand the controversy surrounding the actual story of Pocahontas nowadays, but back then the problem wasn’t nearly as enflamed as it is now. I understand representation of different ethnicities is important, but I think a lot of people forget or straight up ignore Disney’s Pocahontas was NEVER marketed as a historically accurate portrayal of the real story of Pocahontas. This is coming from an era when Aladdin became popular simply because it had Robin Williams, despite the movie had problematic depictions of Middle Eastern culture, specifically with how Jasmine is portrayed as an exotic beauty with no actual character or dreams/desires. When I first watched Pocahontas, I already knew the real story of Pocahontas and she wasn’t in love with John Smith, let alone the same age, and I remember she was married to a different Englishman in reality before her untimely death. But that didn’t prevent me from enjoying the movie as an entirely fictional story, especially when Balto came out the same year and was based on a real sleddog called Togo, a movie that still is pretty beloved and isn’t nearly as criticized for historical accuracy (especially when you learn the actual story of Balto and Togo) Same with Anastasia, considered to be one of Don Bluth’s best movies, and doesn’t really portray the actual account of Anastasia, a REAL Russian princess who had a tragic life as well. I understand Pocahontas had a lot of problems in so many ways, specifically from the themes of racism and prejudice, but I wish more people would remember it was NEVER meant to be an accurate portrayal or a history lesson of early Virginia. I don’t go to movies, especially Disney, to be educated or expect to analyze a movie from a specific perspective. I go to movies to ESCAPE reality and have a good time. People really need to read some of the stories several Disney movies are based on before constantly ridiculing Pocahontas, but all the other movies get a pass because “they’re not real” especially if you know anything about Greek mythology in comparison to Disney’s take on Hercules.
I’ve seen some people say Hunchback handled the racism and prejudicial themes a lot better than Pocahontas, but I have to disagree. As this video mentioned, even in the Disney adaptation the Romani are still presented in a pretty terrible manner. Specifically all the Romani characters except Esmerelda are portrayed as ugly and wearing filthy rags and aren’t afraid to scam or cheat others to make money. The song Court of Miracles is a pretty racist song when you really listen to the lyrics, all while they’re about to k*ll two men trying to help them. Fast forward to the end of the movie after the fight scene, there are absolutely no Romani characters in sight except Esmerelda, Clopin and Quasimodo. Everyone in the crowd are Parisians/Caucasians as Quasimodo is celebrated as a hero. Its like the movie actively avoided showing the Romani except Es and Clopin, and never actually addressed the issue of other people aside Frollo treating them terribly and as cheating thieves and criminals.
@kristinahuchison2511 Out of curiosity, how does Disney's "Aladdin" measure up against DreamWorks' "Sinbad" in terms of cultural representation? They are technically both based in the same culture.
As a kid and it still is my favourite watch it a lot and still got a lot of the merchandise
I came here to say the same. While I agree with most of this video analysis, I don't wish to change the story's happy ending to a tragedy. I think we shouldn't forget that these movies - first and foremost - were created for children. And even though now, as adults, we enjoy looking back at these films with an analytic eye, we shouldn't forget that children cannot cope with deep tragedies in general. It's much harder for them. They feel deeply, get very invested in fantasy worlds, and don't have the words or the maturity yet to handle some disturbing feelings. (I'm talking in general, of course. Every child is different, with various maturity levels.) So when someone is suggesting to make these stories even darker, without the relief of a happy ending, I suggest they ask themselves: would they show that cartoon to their own 6-7 year-old? Or would it have hurt them watching it at that age? Of course, parents shall wisely monitor what their kids can watch or not, within the scope that they believe that they (the kids) could handle. And discuss every emerging question meanwhile or after that. But I would call it a pity (and honestly, kind of selfish) to make children media too mature and grounding so that it would please adult needs. Children need great movies too - that's why many of us are here, looking back with nostalgia, how much we loved this piece, for example. Let future generations have that fun and blessing, too. No need to make everything grim in order to mimic reality more. They would need to face with it eventually anyhow - just as we did.
I would not say that in the animated film they took out Esmeralda’s husband but combined him with Pheobus instead. You notice that Esmeralda does save Pheobus twice in the novel from drowning and from the the court of miracles (with Quasi) the saving plot is similar to the one where Esmeralda saves her husband in the novel from being executed (which is very similar to Pocahontas saving John Smith that was just done so could not be repeated). Also 1939 adaptation I saw the character also was advocating for justice like Pheobus ultimately ends up doing in the Disney film.
I think this combination makes Pheobus more compelling character, although more conventional one perhaps (although less so since he is fourth most important character in the story). He has a character arc (also sense of humor), plot purpose of leading the resistance in the end and saving Quasi in the end, and his and Esmeralda’s relationship can show more healthy version of love than Quasi and Frollo’s obsessions, one too idealized and one too sexual and controlling. It’s for younger audiences so it’s good there is more a role model regarding this.
There is a French musical called "Notre Dame de Paris" that adapts the story, and imo Gringoire played/sung by Bruno Pelletier is one of the best parts of the musical. 😌 It's definitely worth checking out.
Tbh, I think the reason why the movie is in limbo isn't because they don't know what to do about Esmeralda, but that sentiment towards migrants asking for asylum isn't really the best these days... if you don't want to create controversy, making such a movie is really difficult right now.
you're the second person to mention it, I'll check it out!
@@TropeAnatomy Really, it is the best adaptation according to me. It really respects the tragedy aspect, the character of Phoebus, Quasimodo's love and friendship for Esmeralda, makes her a stronger character and Gringoire is improved and used as a narrator. And the songs are awesome, especially for the lyrics, but I don't know if it translates well in english
It's a great musical. I recommend the French version as the English translation doesn't hit as hard
The musical is a masterpiece!!
I think it´s important to consider that the Disney version have its own approach: Who is the monster and who is the man. For that narrative a lot of their were necessary. It´s not just the kid friendly version but a version with its own important moral.
Watching this with my friend and about halfway through i stated that the musical did it best because they kept the strong characters of the disney movie, added even more hauntingly beautiful songs AND managed to end it without sunshine and rainbows. So happy that you touched on it in the end, as it often gets forgotten
Agreeded it's my favorite musical because of its music and the fact it is such a good tragedy and in my opinion is the perfect mix of the book and the Disney movie
At the end of the day Disney wanted a movie that children and parents accept so they could do money. Still they risked with this movie and I 24:23 appreciate the effort.
Frollo is killed by himself actually.
It's maybe the only time I dont complain about the accidental death of a disney villain,as they wanetd to portray that his actions are what truly killed him,not a "trecherous' act of anyone! He never loved him anyway in the Disney version,to have a tragic nature when he 'd see the child that he raised and cared about killing him!
I think not many people, influenced obviously by the commercial version of the story,truly understand the book!
Esmeralda is supposed to be naïve because of her innocence.
She is perceived as a siner.A public dancer. And in medieval Europe,women who displayed themselves that way were viewed as extremely inappropriate! In the translation I ve read,they even call her a woman "of the night".😳
But, despite society's views,she is a pure inoccent girl,who even keeps her virginity, despite we assume how many men probably want it!
"Agnes" (αγνή) means literally pure!
Her attraction to Phoebus is an illusion,not stupidity.It's her hope of escape, it's the disenchantment of "the knight with shiny armour" trope.who's gonna save the damsel without demanding anything in return.
I don't think that Frollo is meant to be an unredeemable monster either.
He is a self -destructive and sexuality repressed man, frustrated by his failure to make his brother a descent person. Those and his worship of fate (anagi ) are what leading to his downfall!
If you ask me , they ll never make the live action happen.And even other versions that were not targeted to family audiences didn't achieved to fully portray what the book was truly about.
The book needs to be understood as every other classic book of it's kind.Not something that needs to fit modern standards or be sugarcoated!
With all due respect, there is a difference between being naive and being clueless, a distinction a lot of people struggle with in these kinds of conversations. Just because someone is naive, that doesn't mean that they'll just blindly go along with everything and anything and turn off their senses and reasoning. I've known people that were brought up in sheltered upbringings and none of them displayed this level of obliviousness. Now, I will say it's harsh to call (Book) Esmeralda "stupid" and chalk her up as a solely unintelligent character but she is definately delusional and willfully ignorant so that ultimately falls on her. She ignored the clear warning-signs and reality of the situation in favor of clinging to her fantasy of "Phoebus loves me and we'll be married and live happily ever after". That's the true tragedy of Esmeralda, not naivety but abandonment of reality for the sake of a fantasy.
You really nailed it! I also didn't feel like Esmeralda was stupid but more so naïve, I didn't dislike her character at all. Because I actually could see my younger self in her, when I was 16 I also had a crush on a boy and would imagine whole scenarios in my head. I felt like she was very naïve, but also kind hearted. Even though she was repulsed by Quasimodo looks, she still helped him. In the song, Frollo says "Celle qu'on prenait pour une fille de joie" refering to Esmeralda, "une fille de joie" means a prostitute so yeah, you're spot on :)
@@prunelicious7437 My thoughts exactly! I know that as teens we might have been annoying to older people,but that's how teens actually are! We fall in love and we think he/she was the most important person in the world [and then we break up and we have the first taste of reality,lool]
I read the book in Greek [my native language] and I remember the phrases from the court.
When they trailed Quasimodo,they claimed he offenced a "Woman of the night" . And when Esmeralda is charged for killing Phoebus,they accused her for prostitution as well. That's how it has been translated at least.
Merci for the response!
My goodness, so this is why I've found video essays about this particular film so fascinating for all these years...mostly due to the fact that it _is_ a particularly fascinating film. Who knew, not me! Thank you for sharing. 🙂😀
And book!
@@ElizabethMcCormick-s2n the book sucks. Disney is better in every way.
@@TheSkinnyLegend1997 I don't agree, I think that the ending is a bit of a downer, and I also think that Hugo spends WAY too much time talking about Parisian architecture in 15th century France, but other than those two things, I rather enjoy it!
@ElizabethMcCormick-s2n one man's trash is another man's treasure.
One issue they must be having is the difference in how the Romani people were treated in the US vs the rest of the world. Americans practically worshipped the "Gypsy", which made America is safe haven for them. But the rest of the world, it's hard for Americans to even comprehend how they were viewed. While we have a terrible history with genocide and discrimination, nothing we have, in modern history, resembles how Europe treated the Romani- and still does. So the people who would be writing and directing the script probably are having a hard time being respectful to the history.
I'm sure they're also struggling with Quasimodo's disability. They might be trying to avoid offending people with similar disabilities. Honestly I wouldn't be surprised if they outright got rid of them, lol.
Yeah the disability seems like a huge thing to navigate. Especially when discussing who would play him, how would you achieve the look of him etc. They CGIs the 7 dwarves recently instead of casting real people so I can imagine they don't want to even tackle this.
yeah I think the vast majority of Americans would be shocked to hear about how Romani people get spoken about TODAY in Europe, let alone in Medieval times. And you're right Quasimodos disability is also definitely holding them back (the video would be too long if I went into it). But yeah even beyond the hunchback-- they will have to contend with how ugly to make him. Its much easier to make him both "ugly" and cute in an animation, but in real life ugly can be scary and off-putting. They have to think about whether he's partially deaf because of the bell ringing like he is in the novel, he's also deaf in the Disney play. Whether he's mentally disabled or not etc. And like you said, whether this would offend people with similar disabilities.
@herb_rolls
Yeah, Peter Dinklage said casting real dwarfs would be offensive so Disney ended up with something else
They are. Confirmed by my friend, who works at Disney. Disabled people don't sell, so they won't even try.
Nah thats not the problem
Btw in the book it gets even more tragic as they found out too late that Esmeralda was born to a parisian Woman and was abducted as a child. So the hate is focused on a gypsy person who was not actually gypsy. A person that if things had only gone slightly different might have stood with the likes of Phoebus and condemmned another woman in Esmeraldas position. It is a beautiful point about the uselessness of judging people based on a persons or societys perception, hate, and discrimination
He brought this up and even criticized this plot point in the video, did you even watch it all the way before commenting?
Btw, there's a reason she's referred to as Romani throughout the whole video. The G-word is a slur for the Romani people. We accept that the movie is a product of its time, but you are not.
don't ever call romai people as g*psies. it is a slur!
@@darvinherdegenIt's not a slur. Gypsies are just different from Romani.
omg babe wake up new trope anatomy dropped
🥹 even after 2 years off you're still one of the first commenters like always. I appreciate it a ton! Thank youu
@@TropeAnatomy hey sometimes we just need a nice long break. i've made one essay this entire year. doesn't matter how long it's been you're still one of the best video essayists on the platform. take care man
@@TropeAnatomythe Hunchback of Notre Dame is my second favorite Disney movie next to Mulan
Can’t believe I’m here for this historic moment so early
lolol think the channel might be dead but we'll see. Thanks for being here!
I LOVE Hunchback of Notre Dame video essays. Esmeraldas character always fascinates me so thank you for posting this video!
thank you for watching!
I like how they respect this movie enough to stall the live action
Might be the only time, in recent history, they've actually sat down and thought about the potential consequences. They can't afford to be flippant about this.
@@ghostratsarah
Yeah, I can only imagine the public outcry if disney applies the same laziness they did with The Little Mermaid and Snow White and the rest of their remakes to The Hunchback of Notre Dame. This movie is radically different from most disney films because 1) its not a wish fulfillment magic fairytale, 2) its based on a actual book written by one of the best writers of all time and 3) it touches upon some pretty sensitive subjects like racism, disability, and religious hypocrisy.
If they screw it up, they risk offending some pretty vocal groups--the disabled, brown-skinned women, Catholics, and everyone else who defends them.
I really enjoyed this video essay - this is my favourite animated movie of all time, my favourite musical and Quasimodo is my favourite Disney character. I’ve read the novel a few times, but the stage musical is my favourite Disney adaptation ever and I honestly think in terms of the storyline it is more compelling in many ways. (The La Jolla version)
To respond to some of your points though: I think another reason why the “happy ending” happens isn’t to detract from / sanitize the message of the original novel, or wasn’t just because Disney needed a happy ending - but rather, to reflect the needs of the people at that time. Though it’s not a fairytale, throughout history, fairytales have been changed and retold. In some stories, Little Red Riding Hood saves herself, in some she dies, in some she is saved by the huntsman etc. Different communities told the stories in different ways to pass on different messages. Though Disney works with material that are not always fairytales, they make them into fairytales, and it is only human to reform fairytales to suit the needs of the society because their purpose was to reflect the common folk. I think that to them, society needed to see a character like Quasimodo win, especially when we have so few disabled characters even now in 2024. In making him the centre of the story, they needed him to succeed and that’s what facilitated the creative choice to have Esmeralda live. If the thesis of this movie is “What makes a monster and what makes a man?”, it is Quasimodo, a “monster”triumphing over a “man” like Frollo. A good monster and an evil man. Esmeralda dying would feel like a narrative loss, like Quasimodo failed in some way and lessen the impact of Disney’s formula of the victim/villain dynamic. Every musical has a thesis and the happy ending may be “neat and tidy”, but it ultimately delivers on the thesis from the opening number.
The reason why the stage musical works though is because it has a different thesis, and because Esmeralda feels more like an equal protagonist to Quasi. The thesis is not just about “what makes a monster and what makes a man?”, but rather, becomes about the world. It’s whether or not the world is worth saving. Esmeralda dying helps to facilitate that theme because Esmeralda died with power - she sparked a revolution with Phoebus and the others to fight against injustice and cruelty. “The world is cruel, the world is ugly, but there are times and there are PEOPLE when the world is not. And at its cruelest this is the only world we got” etc.
TLDR; the movie’s thesis is about Quasimodo as the underdog, hence Quasimodo needs to win against evil, but the musical’s thesis is about EVERYONE as the underdog in an unjust world, and whether or not our society and world is worth fighting for - whether it’s worth it to do the right thing. How Esmeralda is portrayed will influence the thesis of the live action adaptation, but I don’t know if it’s her they are struggling with as much as they don’t know the thesis they want the movie to have. I think the world could use the thesis of the stage musical right now, but I think it’s just a fact that Broadway is more willing to accept that messaging.
I'm just genuinely so happy to hear Alan Menken is still kicking! ❤
You're so back.
the stage musical sounds like the the best material to adapt from. you've made me curious to watch it.
I liked the fact that Quasi didn't kill Frollo, as in trying to make the story more kid-friendly they inadverently provided a rather realistic depiction of abused children.
Good essay!
But considering people alredy blindly call this movie "sort of racist" becouse they simply used the term "ghipsy" in a historically acrate way, I doubt a tragic ending would be what would "save" a live action adaptation.
I WISH it where a nuanced reason like you proposed here! I just honestly lost hope that it is, becouse everyone now a days is affraid of offending someone with something.
What an incredible essay. Thank you!! Immediately subscribed. I adore Disney’s Esmerelda and after learning the books original story, I actually love the changes they made to the story and characters to tell a more easily consumable story, but also agree the ending of the movie always felt a little too perfect and lacking in substance after the darkness the film had us sit through.
Esmerelda has always been one of my favorite Disney characters so learning her origin is so fascinating.
Glad you liked it :) thanks for subscribing!!
I don't have a problem with Quasimode trying to save Frollo at the end because he's the hero of the story, he is selfless and tries to save the villain at the end of the story. I like that troupe because it sends the message that you should be a hero and protect people but also be willing to forgive. That is something the modern world has completely lost now and its a reason why the western world is so bitter, angry and twisted. I had a terrible abusive childhood but I chose to make peace and forgive because being angry all the time leads to an inevitable spiral. It's not just Hunchback that does this, Tarzan does it as well, the hero doesn't need the blood of the villain on their hands. People need to understand that revenge only ever leaves you cold, bitter and hateful, even if it's years in the future.
I don't think you need to turn Quasimode into a murderer to make him more heroic.
I'm on the fence about it, but I definitely see this side! And I did find it quite compelling that it was, in the end, his own church that killed him, like God himself rejected him. Which can be even more powerful imo.
Does the hero have on their hands the blood of the people the villain goes on to harm after the villain is saved?
"And he shall smite the wicked and *plunge* them into the firey pit of hell!"
This line wouldnt have hit as hard if quasimodo was the one to kill him.
"Western world is so bitter, angry and twisted". And do you think that Eastern world is an absolute paradise, when it comes to human behavior?🤦♀ I'm an Eastern European and I'm going to dissapoint you - no, we aren't morally better than the West. The most of people who were mean and rude to me were from my own country. There are shitty people EVERYWHERE! Even in East Asia, people aren't that polite and angelic as you might think. They can be polite on the surface to not "lose face" but then they will talk shit about you behind your back.
@@peachesandcream22I don’t know why but people idolise east Asia so much
The live action Hunchback will be soulless and bland like all the recent Disney live action remakes.
They're all soulless and bland. Except maybe Cinderella.
@@vetarlittorf1807no, that one is bad too.
@@vetarlittorf1807hey, Aladdin was absolutely amazing
@@Blondieyee No it wasn't.
@@vetarlittorf1807 It was
I agree with your analysis. Just one thing, the novel is not named after Quasimodo, it’s not called The Hunchback of Notre Dame, it’s name given by Victor Hugo is simply Notre Dame de Paris.
^^^ The title in translations is misleading. Hugo's focus is -and is throughout the story - the Notre Dame de Paris. But I guess "Notre Dame of Paris" didn't make a good title in other languages
@@leroyjenkins1249 That really threw me when I got around to reading it a few months ago. Hugo is CONSTANTLY stopping to make asides about Notre Dame, specifically the architecture. I remember complaining that Hugo couldn't seem to make up his mind on whether he was writing a novel or a philosophical treatise on architecture!
Come to find out, "philosophical treatise on architecture" is EXACTLY what Hugo is trying to do. Specifically, after the French Revolution, when the leaders insisted that the French people had no use for religion anymore, people were using Notre Dame as a wine storage facility and a vandalism center. Hugo was making the argument that such an architectural symbol ought to be protected, whether people have a "use" for religion or not. Throughout the book, he references Notre Dame as though it was a main character.
When I read that, it made the book make a LOT more sense!
1) Welcome back! 2) I'm so glad you brought up the stage version, because I was thinking of it basically the entire video.
The thing I keep wondering about with respect to this work is the G* slur. It's in the lyrics of several songs (not that they can't change it for Romani for characters that are sympathetic to the Romani people, with the scansion suffering slightly). I could see a lot of criticism being hurled at Disney, both with and without nuance, however they handle it. None of that is very specific to Hellfire, so I'm not saying it's what Menken was referring to, but I do see it being really difficult to please everyone.
The "G-word" has existed for centuries in the English-speaking world, both as a neutral term and as a slur. "Romani" started to go mainstream only in the 1970s, and it was a very slow process even then. It's not easy to get people to stop using a "new" word that sounds so vague, since it is easily confused with "Romanian" and "Roman" (and, just to compound the confusion, both Romania and Rome contain populations of these people).
Using "Romani" exclusively in the period setting would be nonsensical. No one but the Romani themselves even knew of the word then. Even as a student in junior high school, I recognized that it was ridiculous to use a modern term to describe a historical situation, no matter how respectful the modern term is.
Taking it out would cause massive backlash too, look at what happened with Boba Fett’s ship - Slave 1. Even just avoiding using the name causes problems because there are a lot of people very sensitive about “freedom of speech” (in this case freedom to harass others without consequence).
I don't think it's that hard (musically) - I studied "Part of Your World" and "God Help the Outcasts" back in 2014 as audition songs, and the official sheet music we had for "God Help the Outcasts" had the initial line as "I don't know if you will listen/To a humble prayer". I hadn't seen the movie in a few years, and the scansion is very similar, so not only did I not notice, seeing the original lyrics when I'm singing trips me up now.
You know what I want to see instead of another Hunchback adaptation? Romani Wolfwalkers. (As in, a mythology-inspired fantasy story steeped in history and using animation to echo traditional romani art, but with motion, similar to what Wolfwalkers did with it's Irish roots.)
Of course, this would be made by a studio on the level of something like Cartoon Saloon, not a Disney, but that usually leads to better art these days tbh.
@@000Dragon50000 omg yeah! That would be amazing! I would definitely watch it as soon as it came out
Just rewatched a ton of your older videos so seeing an update gave me whiplash, so excited to watch the video!
edit: Great video!! I personally think there's no need to make a live version and I'd be fine with it never happening. But I really appreciate your insight on the novel and its adaptions.
thank you! Hope you enjoy it
@@TropeAnatomyI give Esme from Hunchback of norte dame 8/10
I have noticed how it is always men who bemoan the fact that Quasi didnt get the girl at the end. It is always men talking about how they didnt understand how he didnt get the girl.
It's interesting because i think the movie makes it pretty obvious that that isnt what Quasi's arc is about at all.
I have never heard a single woman talk about how Quasi should have gotten the girl at the end.
I myself am a woman and Disney's Quasimodo is one of my all time favourite disney characters. I felt i could relate to hin so much when i was a kid. Meanwhile, Esmeralda was the very image of the goodness and strength we all strive to become in life. I could relate to quasi and the pain of unreciprocated love. We all go through that and it is part of life to learn to accept that you dont always get what you want. In Quasi's case it is the accept of the common folk and the friendship he makes with Esmeralda and Phoebus that is his true need.
I always liked that message in the movie. While Esmeralda stood for the ideals that we should all strive for in life, to be good people, Quasi stood for the selfless love that is just as important. How you arent owed anything in life, but you can still do the right thing and you can still get the best out of the life you have.
I remember the first time i heard men talk about how Quasi should have gotten the girl and it was deeply confusing to me. How could anyone watch this movie and still come away with such an entitled impression? That really bothered me.
I too have met a lot of men who felt entitled to my or other women's attention and bodies and who would cry and throw hissy fits when they didnt get their way. Im glad i managed to meet a man who wasnt like that eventually, because that is seriously a concerning thing that so many men feel like they are owed a girl with they pretend to be nice.
Quasimodo never pretended to be nice. He never felt he was owed Esmeralda's love. He respected her autonomy and he wanted her to be happy even if that wasnt with him. I have been in love with guys who were my esmeralda. They didnt like me like that or had eyes for someone else and even though it wss painful, I stepped down and removed myself from the equation without throwing hissy fits because i knew i wasnt owed their affection.
I am not lying when i say that Quasimodo's grace is something i took with me during the awkward dating years whenever i fell for a guy who didnt like me back.
But wow. How can anyone watch this movie and have the only take away be that Quasi deserves the girl.
I bet if the roles were reversed and it was a deformed woman whos being nice to the handsome hero, no man would think that she was owed the man as a prize for her kindness by the end of the film.
Don't know if you're speaking to me or just in general... but I wanna say the movie came out the year I was born and I'm speaking from the perspective of a really young child because that is what I was when watching this over and over again. I don't even think I saw Quasi as hideous or deformed by the end of the movie because he's such an adorable and wholesome character. I didn't see a mismatch and I didn't understand because I was a child back then, not a man. The extent of my analysis at this age was what I said in the video-- main characters get together in the end. I know my sister felt the same when we watched it. Of course now as an adult I don't think they should be together or that just because he loves her, he should receive her as a prize. It would be absolutely ridiculous
If i were to guess the type of man who would not grasp this, or feel offended that Quasi did not get the girl are usually the type who in real life also struggle to find a partner. Who did not like that Esmeralda chose the good looking charming guard's captain over the pure of heart outcast they themselves root for.
It also defied the known formular where the protagonist and hero get's the girl at the end of the story. I as a man, and many others totally understood this. And especially growing up we all know that physical attraction is also a real thing whether we like it or not.
And i still love that the movie did somewhat realisticly portrait this. Especalda did love Quasimodo's pureness, his selflessness to safe her and being so kind in general. But instead of the unrealistic trope that any connection between a man and a woman MUST be romantic, displayed it more as a admiration and eventual friendship. While she felt booth physical and emotional attraction with the guard captain, who recipricated this. And was also a good strong person of ideals just as she was. Making them at least romanticly a much better match. And Quasimodo's one sided love was also something realistic, that he did come to terms with. Instead of becomming bitter of jelious.
Quasis arc as pointed out was never about getting the girl. It was tied to Frollo the "man of the church". It was about who was the true monster, and who was the man. Something we even understood as children. Despite the appearance of booth on the outside.
Simple as that.
I've read an article that Esmerelda chose Phoebus because he treated her like a person compared to Quasimodo and Frollo, who saw her as an angel and a demon respectfully. I don't think any woman wants to be put on a pedestal and certainly not looked down because of her background. I love Quasimodo and this movie is among my top 3 favorite Disney movies as a kid, and I remember watching its sequel which was forced to give Quasimodo a love interest and didn't need it.
I'm with you on how refreshing it is that she didn't end up with the main character, because "the main boy always gets the girl" can be pretty toxic. At the same time, it was odd to me that the one time this is broken in a Disney movie is when the main guy is someone who's conventionally considered hideous, versus the handsome blond guard. Still, it was all up to Esmerelda's choice (...and the way writers chose to write her, or whatever the executives may have wanted). As for no women wanting Esmerelda to end up with Quasi, I do have one! My best friend watched it when she was close to her 20s. I introduced her to the movie and she loved it but she found the ending absolutely tragic and wanted them two end up together. She was able to relate the most to Quasi as someone who was bullied for many similar reasons, has a heavily asymmetrical face, a slight hump back, etc.
However there's also the issue that @DulciToo1 brings up. I think overall, there's nothing they could actually do with the pairings that would keep even half of the audience happy. All I can think of is that if she chooses *no one* that's a more neutral stance than choosing the handsome guard, versus the "monster" with a heart of gold, etc. But then that goes into "What, so women aren't even allowed to find love anymore?" territory as Disney has been releasing more animations than not where romance is removed completely.
I think those guys just want one of the good guys getting the girl. Because he is a good person. Especially after a life of essentially torture.
Me? I'm just glad he found someone in the sequel even if it sucked because he didn't die of depression and grief hugging Esmerelda's moldering corpse.
i adored this essay. hunchback is one of my favorite disney movies, but i have never seen any other the other adaptations, so this was a wonderful insight into the characters and symbolism against their original forms.
glad you liked it! You should check them out or the novel if you have the time, its interesting seeing the differences. I left out a ton
Movie Phoebus has Phoebus’s look (well, less dandified) and position but is more like book Gringoire. He has the good humored detachment of Gringoire, almost an audience surrogate walking into the world and observing all this interesting people. His courage and later sense of righteousness is an invention, just like Esmeralda’s.
I think you’re a little too shocked by Esmeralda’s naive infatuation. Like you said, she’s only sixteen, a child. It’s not rational perhaps but Hugo is a writer of the romantic era, so emotions are larger than life and all consuming. Plus, if you’ve been a sixteen year old girl, it’s not unbelievable. She’s not a protagonist but an axis of emotion that moves the characters around her, much like Fantine is Les Miserables.
All of this! Plus the infatuated virgin trope was a common thing in a lot of gothic literature of the time, and the novel sits within that particular genre
@@raymondteodosbandlabvlog1676 You reminded me of one heroine in the book Teutonic Knights (Polish novel) where exact same trope appears. But, surprisingly, author had killed her off (for a very good reason) and gave the protagonist a strong woman (in the positive sense of the trope), which was a better suit for him. And of course - she is a young girl (around 12 yrs old) falling for a knight to be (18 yrs old) who also falls in love with her at first sight. Something that Shakespeare ridiculed in Romeo and Juliet (no, it's not meant to be a tragedy at all, quite the opposite).
Anyone who has ever read Victor Hugo knows it must end in tragedy. I remember reading an adaptation of it when I was young and even though it wasn’t as tragic as Hugo’s original- I remember reading it and hating Phobous. I remember Quasi and Esmeralda sharing a grave or rather his skeleton holding hers. It was effective in its themes. I’m not surprised they are struggling to make the non- animation version. I can’t imagine that the French would watch it because it won’t stay true to Victor Hugo and I can’t imagine it will make money.
Hugo was heavy on fatalism, emotions and nihilism. Many of his characters just died needlessly or senselessly. But the way he described all that...
As for the French - TBH most of book adaptations suck, especially if they are heavy in emotional load that the author pours on the reader, that is why I am glad that some books were never turned into a movie, because it would ruin them.
Frollo's death seems a little bit like a cop out, but I like it and I'll tell you why. For the whole movie, from the very beginning, Frollo is told that he cannot hide from "the very eyes of notre dame". So it's already alluded to and woven into the narrative that Notre Dame is watching and judging him. In the end it is Notre Dame herself which judges and executes Frollo, the spout that he manages to catch onto coming to life and separating from the building to plunge him to his death. You can call it a neatly wrapped Disney ending, that allows the story's hero to not have to have a murder on his hands, which sure it is, but it's not an out of left field, undeserved deus ex machina. It's well set up.
The only issue I have with this video is the inaccurate definition of Romani as being a race (and the alleged importance of race in the story) when it is not a race in the slightest, it is a culture and ethnicity that is all over the world, meaning that even though Esmeralda in the original is revealed to have been abducted as a child, she was raised Romani, taught Romani, and is for all intents and purposes a Romani woman even though she was born from a French family, which is used in the book to emphasize that discrimination and bias is horrendous not only because it shows what people are willing to do to each other just because of cultural differences and stereotypes, but also showed the lengths readers and later film producers would go through to add on whatever other excuses they need in order to be able to better relate, excuse, or understand the inherent bias in the story.
For example: Making Esmeralda a "pure" Romani woman actually takes away from the importance of the message involved in her being born French, which originally showed the fact that bias in medieval Europe wasn't about race, it was primarily about religion and culture because racism in what would be Europe pretty much didn't exist historically until only the past few hundred years with the first examples of racism itself only actually appearing in history starting in ancient Africa and the middle east and wouldn't even be what is considered to be modern racism until the mid to late 1600s, which is several hundred years after the setting of this story and can even be backed up by the fact that anti-slavery laws didn't start being about race until AFTER the American colonies had been established, with all prior laws being about what religious groups were allowed or not allowed to be slaves, with one of the first anti-slavery laws being a religious doctrine passed by Christians that made it illegal for Jews to own Christian slaves.
When you make Esmeralda a modern depiction of what is popularly considered a marginalized and discriminated group (in America specifically), you actually lose the depth of the meaning of what bigotry actually is when you break it down to its core components, which is just a hatred or discrimination of another group because of any number of preconceived notions regardless of if they are justified or unfounded, which is exemplified by the fact that even though Esmeralda was born French, the French people treated her just like all the other Romani people because that's what her culture was.
I ranted a little bit here and there, but it's also a bit of a hot button issue for me because I am from Roma heritage but there is casual racism from a lot of "pure" Romani people where they will heavily insist that the only "true" Romani people are all dark haired with tan skin even though that's complete BS and is literally just discrimination. Yes the suspected origins of Roma culture are from around the areas around India and Egypt, but that is only a suspicion and is such an old point of origin that it's on par with saying that all Christians are POC because Christianity originated in the middle east. It's ridiculous and just an excuse to be a bigot and you can find whole discussion threads on reddit defending this kind of racist perspective.
Aaah, so happy! Welcome back!
thank you!!
Great video that touched upon what I like and dislike about the film!
I wanted to point out another reason Disney may be delaying the film is that they don't know how to cast Esmeralda, or they don't want to cast her appropriately. Disney has had a history with casting non-Roma as Romani characters and erasing their ethnicity, Scarlet Witch and Dr Doom are some examples, so they clearly don't care about casting accurately when it comes to Romani characters. But unlike the aforementioned Marvel characters who generally received a small amount of backlash for their casting, if they did the same with Esmeralda it would cause a even bigger backlash and force Disney to confront the issue of their anti-romani sentiment.
Another reason is because Esmeralda is not marketable. Her outfit alone would cause controversy about cultural appropriation of Romani fashion and culture which America has had and still has a issue with doing. She is also independent in the Disney film and uses her sexuality to her advantage. With how sanitized Disney has become, having the female lead who is supposed to be marketed to young girls dance provocatively is a very understandable concern (one of the few) for the company.
If Disney ever does make this film, I hope they fix or address these issues and also get ACTUAL ROMA to work on the film and help bring to light the issues they face. Along with making this a stepping stone for introducing more POSITIVE Roma representation in media. Especially cause Disney is trying to pride itself on being "progressive" but only when it comes to some people, not all people.
Disney be like: Mindy Kaling casted as Esmeralda 💀💩
After 2 long years of waiting for another trope anatomy relief has arrived :P Love to see another great essay of yours
"Welcome to Trope Anatomy! After 2 years in development, we hope it will have been worth the wait."
thank you! 💙
To know how much they improved on the original is even more proof of how they should embrace this character instead of trying to forget it. She moves the story with her actions and inspires with her kindness
I remember reading the book for the first time (an abridged version) after growing up with the movie and crying so much at the ending. It also just made it hard to enjoy Disney Phoebus and Esmeralda.
Why? Disney Esmeralda is a much better character than book Esmeralda. She's an adult who is a Romani (book Esme was kidnapped and isn't Romani). She fights against prejudice. She has way more agency.
@l.n.3372 Exactly bruh, I can't understand how people prefer the ugly book compared to the beautiful Disneyified version with an actual happy ending and a brown girl who isn't dead and is in a happy relationship with a white man. The Disney version is very progressive for its time tbh, movies today wouldn't even pair the brown girl up with the white man due to racism from conservatives.
@TheSkinnyLegend1997
I mean frankly I do not prefer Disney Esme because she gets a happy ending. It's fine that the book ends with tragedy after all. But I prefer her as an adult with more agency. She also stands for a good message. Book Esme is 15 and has 0 agency and dies because she can't control her crush on Phoebus.
@l.n.3372 my life is already sad enough as is. When you go through struggles your whole life you tend to idolize more wholesomeness in media. If you live a very privileged life you tend to prefer darker medias. I know that life is hard enough as is so a wholesome ending is most likely what a modern audience prefers, hard times create strong men, good times create weak men, and all that stuff.
@TheSkinnyLegend1997
WTF are you on about how times create strong vs weak men??!! We are talking about a Victor Hugo novel and it's Disney adaptation.
If you do like sad media, you don't need to consume it. But Victor Hugo novels aren't happy or sunshine. And that's ok. Book Esme is flawed as hell and that's why I prefer Disney Esme. But I don't prefer happy endings over sad endings inherently.
Say what you will about Michael Eisner (and don't get me wrong-- he's earned it), but his enthusiasm and willingness to let Disney get dark at times is incredibly awesome and I wish Iger had even a fraction of that same mindset.
For real! Part of what made the Disney Rennessaince era so great was they took chances, they weren't afraid to "go there" and they actually put some heart and soul into their movies. From the music, the story, the writing, the art, the acting...they were all memorable. Sure, we may have some criticisms and noticed plot holes, but even with live action remakes filling in the odd plot hole, there are reasons many of us still prefer the animated classics...and so do many children of today. Michael Eisner sucked on many levels, but Disney movies did not while he was in charge 🤷♀️
....Although I will say Encanto was fantastic. They could easily save Disney if they simply expanded the Encanto universe. We all want a sequel and every single character (even the grandma) in the family Madrigal is worthy of their own movie. But yeah, they'd rather ruin Snow White and other tales as old as time....
This whole time I was wondering if you would bring up the musical as I’m a huge fan of it, and I’m glad you did. While there are still tweaks to be made, I the the musical would be a great starting point for the live action.
What kind of tweaks were you thinking about?
I`m so glad that someone did analysis of Agnesa-Esmeralda from the book!❤❤❤❤❤
So happy you’re still making video essays! Discovered you a couple days ago (the Susan video) and am now going through everything you’ve ever made 😁
Thank you so much! 💙
The saddest part is that, in any discussion pertaining to Disney live action adaptations, I always name The Hunchback of Notre Dame as a prime example of an animated film that COULD be a truly great live action film as well. It has already been immortalized on screen time and again, and with Disney's endless coffers we could have the definitive movie adaptation of the novel to date. All it requires is a competent director able to effectively and daringly adapt a truly dark and tragic tale for the big screen, studio interference and potential controversy be damned.
I WAS HOPING YOU'D TALK ABOUT THE STAGE ADAPTATION ITS BRILLIANT! I hope the adaptation, if it ever happens, leans more toward the stage adaptations decisions and characters than the Disney version.
I'm french and when you started to talk about the musical I thought you were going to talk about the french one with Garou as the hunchback 😂. Your essay was great and you pointed out the issues of Disney quite right I think.
thank you! People seem to really love the French one, I'll see if I can find a subtitled version or something
I'M SO GLAD THE DISNEY STAGE MUSICAL WAS MENTIONED
it's my favourite version of the story and one of my favourite musicals
I have always loved that esmeralda doesn’t end up with quasi. I’ve always been so tired of the story arc of “homely man with a good personality manages to win over beautiful girl due to his personality” because it feels like saying a man’s value is only in his personality whereas a woman’s is only in her looks. A beautiful kind girl should be able to fall in love with a man who is both kind and beautiful too, without that being seen as shallow.
while I clearly see the benefit of Quasi killing Frollo himself, I do actually like the animated version, because Frollo damns himself there.
Quasi wasnt trying to save his master I think, he just before finally rejected Frollo and said his part about him.
then Frollo even revealed to him that he lied about Quasi's mother.
during Hellfire Frollo was asking for relief from the damnation he was facing and his prayers were answered, a guard interrupted him, backed by light blue "heavens light", telling him that Esmeralda was gone.
but Frollo decided to pursue her anyway, no matter the cost.
I like that, Frollo actually had a chance to turn around, but instead he walked his path onward to hell willingly.
and I do totally agree that the romani plight shouldve been a plight brought about by structural injustice. it's not simply Frollo being a racist prick, it's the whole of society and it's systems treating peopler who are "othered" like shit, to manifest arbitrary hierarchies and political power.
What a great analysis 😍 you did a great job.
I love the book, the Disney movie and I've seen the Notre Dame de Paris musical (the one by Plamondon). It's a masterpiece
thank you!
@@TropeAnatomy you're welcome :) I enjoyed this video so much!
omggg a new video!!! even though i found ur channel a few years ago fairly recently, i rewatch your videos a lot especially the disney and harry potter ones. so glad ur backkk!!!! aghaggagag!!!!
thank youuuu!! glad you're still here
Love this! I grew up watching the French 1998 live musical! I absolutely love it and recommend it!
This is probably the best movie Disney has ever done.
This was such a good video essay. Well articulated, informative discussion, and extensive research. Subscribed!
thank you so much!! Welcome to the channel 😊
Wait omg you're back? I'm so happy!
Can’t believe people still care after the channel has been so quiet for ages 😭 thank you!
@@TropeAnatomy feels like I've manifested this, I was ona very long train ride a few days ago and binged all your videos, we definitely still care!!
Your video about the Susan problem was so healing, it's one of my faves
Great essay and analysis. I quite like the three mediums (film, stage and book) being for three different audiences and having three different endings, all three provide a much richer point of discussion and flexibility in character portrayals and relationships.
I like Disney’s film ending. The message in overcoming religious abuse with a found family, standing up to someone who is so lustfully aggressive to you and being the survivor, finding love, are important and hopeful messages.
There’s something important there that different adaptions are not wrong, but allow for a greater depth of exploration and discussion.
Quasimodo and Esmeralda being a couple never, ever crossed my mind 😂 even as a child I knew he intimately loved her, but no.. she loved the Phoebus. And, not even that.. it was obvious that they weren’t compatible. I also knew the priest guy was a straight up dark creep.
I disagree with your opinion and think that they are perfect for each other and I explained why in another comment to a different guy but I respect your opinion.
❤❤❤ I just found this channel weeks ago I’m so glad it’s active again😭😭😭
😭 💙 gonna try to stay active this time lol
The version of the musical that played in Germany is still, in my opinion, the best version. The ending is so much closer to the novel, and Quasimodo yelling "Du bist ein guter Lehrer, Meister Frollo, EIN SEHR GUTER LEHRER!" (You're a good teacher, Master Frollo. A VERY GOOD TEACHER!") as he kills Frollo is one of the most chilling things I've ever heard. The Gargoyles are still in that version, but even they are given a bit of a dark side, being the ones who convince Quasi to go ahead and kill his master. Clopin is also the narrator in that version, which works sooooo much better than the "living environment narrators" the new version of the musical gives us. If they ever did a live action version on film, I would want them to base it off of the German stage musical. By the way, Disney never announced that they were doing a live action version. That was a lot of internet wish-listing, along with Josh Gad saying he wanted to do it.
I have grown up with this story, I watched the Disney movie and read part of the novel as a kid, and it introduced me to my biggest passion that is musical theatre cause here in Italy we have a stage version.
And in my opinion the Disney musical is the best version ever made, it draws the best parts from both the animated movie and the novel while adding moving songs and depth to characters that were already amazing, it's insane
You’re back !🎉
😊🎉
I really hope that Disney make a live action close to the stage play, with a more gritty and closer to the book ending. Because really, what’s the point of doing a live action if it’s just going to be an exact replica of the cartoon? If parents don’t want their children watching a darker adaptation, then they can just watch the animated version. It doesn’t have to be “adult”, it can still be suitable for young audiences, but just more serious theme (think Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter, or Phantom of the Opera).
Also, I would love to see more historically accurate costuming, especially with Esmeralda. 🙏✨
This says EXACTLY everything I've been thinking for YEARS. well put. thank you
Awesome analysis! I think the animated version was as true to the original novel as possible while still ending on a high note and I still love it. I'm a little torn on what I'd like to see from a live action. I generally like hopefully endings, but the stage version you summarized does sound very thoughtful.
I dont doubt Esmeralda throws a wrench in the works. It is hard to toe the line between depicting racism & reproducing racism.
Like the very name of the ethnic group the animated version uses is controversial. That alone is gonna cause problems
Because even to this day there is quite a lot of violence and discrimination towards the Romani still.
If the wanted to they would have French Romani writers involved in the remake that would reduce or eliminate the controversy
@@jonathanhosh4459 I don't know what sounds more absurd, if "French Romani" or "Romani writers", LMAO. The Romani are a special demography, totaly self-marginalised, even if they live in France, they're not French and don't want to be. And writers, well... most Romani kids don't even attend mandatory school.
@@MomockDamockyou are showing the trademark European racism lol. There’s a reason all those things are true to an extent, and Romani writers and academics do exist, you fool.
I bet Disney will cast an Indian Woman to play Esmeralda. I expect Mindy Kaling since she's on their payroll already with Velma. 💀💩
@MomockDamock as a Slovenian Romani I was going to respond but then I checked my schedule and saw that I had self marginalisation booked in 15 minutes 😔 alas I must return to the shadows
I didn't watch the movie yet and don't want to get spoiled, but really glad you are back!
Yeah don't watch if you still wanna experience any of the novel, films or animation for the first time. Thanks for leaving a comment anyway!
I'll have to disagree with you on the ending scepticism. Yeah Disney's Hunchback of Notre Dame doesn't have a dark ending, not just because it's a pg movie, but because it's not the story of Esmeralda this time, it's Quasimodo's. The novel meant to illustrate feable lives of our protagnist, aganist the majesty of the sanctuary, Notre Dame herself. It shows that despite all the horror and tragedy, in the dead center of it all stands the cathedral, unmoved and unfazed by it all, connecting all of their lives together. It's a tragic tale mainly for Esmeralda, but it very much is sexist and racist nowadays, with all the points you provided.
That's why I think Disney decided to put their focus on a different character, that being Quasimodo. So as much as you might dislike it, the ending had to change, to fit the new direction of the story. The animated hunchback still focuses on the issues of lust, prejudice, racism, religious obsession and so forth, but the conflict of the movie is now "Who is the monster and who is the man?". It clearly shifts it's focus onto the relationship, parallels and differences of Quasimodo and Frollo. Yes, Esmeralda is still a major character in the movie, the story wouldn't function without her and she's still the centerof the story, but she's not the protagonist anymore, Quasi is. That's why the ending had to be positive, because after everything that happened to the Hunchback, after the kindness and support he had shown, he and the people he loves deserve it. It's about standing up for yourself, escaping a toxic and abusive relationship, having to deal with rejection in a positive way, showing the real hardships of people with body deformity, it can't be denied what a traiblazer this movie was when it comes to physical disability in animation back in the 90s. It's message differs from the one in the Victor Hugo's version, but that's because stories evolve, find new interpretations of the story to fit in with today's societal problems. Hell, even Hugo himself couldn't decide on an ending since he himself reinvented it a few years later in his play "La Esmeralda" which actually ends with Esmeralda surviving it all. If that's not a proof that stories evolve and aren't always a result of corporate cynicism, I don't know what is.
Huge props to Lindsay Ellis for all the insightful analysis on Hunchback, go check out her video about it!
The stage version sounds awesome. Just do that. Disney is SO big that they can afford a risk or two
I like how Quasimodo had the compassion to still try and save his enemy, because that is a true Christian belief. I think it made a good contrast to the villains twisted Christian beliefs.
I see how you feel the way you do about the ending but I think it was fitting for what the movie was. Quasi is a loving person. He'll fight to protect, but its totally consistent with his personality that he wasnt ready to drop Frollo into the depths.
I choose to see it as 'the eyes of Notre Dame' catching up to Frollo. Frollo believed he could atone for his wickedness by raising Quasimodo, but he himself was never good, and also he raised a blade to Quasi. Therefore Notre Dame damns him to hellfire.
In this vein of thought, I think Notre Dame can be seen as the secret parent figure of Quasi. As if it watches over him for his mother. It protected him from Frollo throwing him into the well, it sheltered him, protected his friends, the bells comfort him and even the gargoyles that are attached act as his friends and confidants. Notre Dame fights along with him and finishes the job when Frollo raises his blade at Quasimodo.
Frollo was never truly there for him, but Notre Dame was.
Really excellent look at the issues! I also believe in the musical Quasi is Frollo's nephew. The story is so powerful, and I can see people being upset by the ending, but this would be a cool live action one to see revived. They cannot leave out Hellfire. Seriously one of the best villain songs and just a masterful piece of music.
Hunchback is my favorite Disney movie. Everything but the gargoyles was just so well done. Frollo was such a good villain. Febus was awesome. The way Quasimodo accepted and promoted Febus and Esmerelda getting together was just such a good show of character.
I agree with most of this, but due to my unusual childhood, Lon Chaney will always be my favorite hunchback.
excellent video essay.
oof….i had no idea the degree to which this story was a tragedy, thank you for illuminating me. it’s interesting how the theme of desire in stories; is usually interwoven with manipulative lust, obsession, & trying to make that object of desire subservient to you.
weirdly: this reminds me of how too much trust, is dangerous-unwarranted/wrong people; at least that’s what some versions of this story evoke for me.
thanks again.
The ending is not diluted. When the little girl touches his face, I broke. It was beautiful.
Disney's Hunchback of Notre Dame is an absolute perfect masterpiece and has no flaws. If any future version kills her, I will burn things.
Firstly, your work is so good and I thank you greatly for the effort and insights you put into your videos. Just watching and I had a thought about Quasimodo's attempt to save his master and how the master dies without any blood being cast on the hands of our heroes... this looks like justice to me. If an evil person is convicted of murdering someone close to you, is it right for you to kill them? They would be tried by the justice system... whatshishame falling from Notre Dame is a form of justice in a similar way. Also, the indecision that Quasimodo experiences shows how systematically he was manipulated bu this man, the inner turmoil when this man, who was all he knew, was about to fall to his death seem fitting and realistic. It grounds Quasimodo's experience and shows how wrong it is to manipulate someone and keep them captive. Love it. Thanks for the brain activity Trope Anatomy.
Esmeralda: I love you Phoebus!
Phoebus: I love you to Esmenarda
Esmeralda: That’s….that’s not my name.
Phoebus: Oh-well…your name is just so unique that it’s hard to remember.
Esmeralda: …..yeah that totally makes sense 😍
(Not word for word but pretty much the dialogue from the book)
Pocahontas is going to be loads of "fun" too. I liked the movie, but cried at the same time knowing it doesn't end well for her and her people in real life.
I always, especially as a kid, liked how Frollo quotes a specific passage in the Bible about falling in to fire, and then a gargoyle basically lets him know he’s the baddie before he plunges to his fiery doom. It felt very satisfying as a kid, and the hero didn’t murder anybody, which is even better.
Honestly, this story might just be a little too much for Disney. It is, at its very core, and by its very nature, controversial. Victor Hugo was in fact making bold criticisms about society, specifically religious hypocrisy and bigotry, which even now, HUNDREDS of years after this story takes place, we are STILL dealing with. Changing the ending is like changing the ending of Romeo and Juliet. I haven't seen the stage version, but by the description in the video, it sounds like a very good retelling that keeps the spirit, while giving Esmerelda a bit more... agency? I very much want to seek this out now, thanks for the great breakdown!
Thank you for including clips from the TV version from 1997. I know it takes its own liberties with the source material, but I think it still a good and solid adaptation in its own right. I think I saw this one before the Disney version (it was on TNT in the USA). actually enjoy the relationship between Pierre and Esmeralda in this version and Frollo was captured perfectly by Richard Harris (Dobelldore, Harry Potter). l do agree with many of your points here and you have an interesting take on the twist of Esmeralda's parentage could have a deeper meaning in that her death and the hate against the Romani is senseless. Also regarding Phoebus in the Disney version I heard somewhere that he was a mesh up of Phoebus from the book (a captain) and the good hearted Pierre which I think is neat.
And yes I think the stage show is that well blended merge between book and Disney film. Being able to capture Quasimodo's deafness when speaking, but in his head when by himself was a great way to use the medium of live theater. It is very interesting and also sad that Disney in the 90s were able to take SUCH Big risks with this movie and while not a perfect film, I'm grateful we got it.
Thank you for this essay and I would be interested if you could do maybe a mini essay on the 1997 TV version since as I said NO ONE talks about it or seems to remember it which is a shame because it did capture some of the books themes (the question of the church's power/importance vs the printed books) better than a lot of other versions I've seen. I mean as English speaking audience we are drawn to the human story of the characters, but Hugo was focused on Notre Dame herself as the central figure of the book. No worries if not, (another essay) just a suggestion.
Keep up the great work :).
Disney really looked at Hugo's Phoebus and said "I can fix him"
I also agree that the stage play is probably the best route to go with for the live action adaptation. I think it balances the dark themes and ending with a hopeful look at the characters as people (Esmeralda gets to be the best version of herself and also a Roma, Phoebus is an actually good person, Quasimodo gets genuine love and support for once and also takes down his abuser)
As a child, I loved books. My grandfather had his own personal library where I would pick out some books that piqued my interest. I think I was about 11 or 12 when I first read Victor Hugo's The Hunchback of Notre Dame along with other classics. When the Disney renaissance began, I watched the films and was thoroughly surprised at how different each one was from the books that I have read.
That ending twist of Esmeralda's origins reveal justification for fear people have of Romani; they steal children.
He's back 😮😮😮😮
I never knew that some folks had an issue with the gargoyles until I was older, when I was a kid I loved them. Even now they don't bother me. Quasi imagining they were real so he wouldn't feel alone felt natural to me, even though the movie played with the idea that they were actually sentient I just chalked it up to run of the mill Disney magic.
I think Quasimodo trying to save Frollo is perfect, actually, because it highlights his compassion and empathy. Murder is never "justified", and when one of the themes of the Disney movie is answering the question "who is the monster and who is the man?" having Quasi show empathy for a man that was nothing but cruel is beautiful. It really cements Quasi as a truly kind, compassionate man (in contrast to Frollo's cruelty), and imo true strength comes from compassion. That's the beauty of so many of the Disney (cartoon) protagonists: they remain kind and fair in the face of mistreatment and wickedness.
Well done video essay, I enjoyed it.