I'm the only person here that loves this film? - The Hunchback of Notre Dame (1939) Discussion

[–] crisso 20 years ago

No, you're not the only person. I've had this message board on my favourites list for a while now and am pleased that someone has started a thread! The film has just been shown on UK TV (it finished about 1/2 hour ago), had you just watched it? One of the great Hollywood films of it's day. Charles Laughton is so good as Quasimodo (a performance to equal Boris Karloff's as Frankenstein's monster in terms of pathos and feeling). I love the rest of the cast too (especially Cedric Hardwicke as the nasty Frollo and nineteen-year-old Maureen O'Hara as Esmerelda). Paris of the middle ages is spectacularly brought to life, hard to believe it was all filmed in California (a huge mock up was built of Notre Dame in the San Fernando Valley). I don't know how true the film is to Hugo's original story but it is a tremendous cinematic acievement. Could you imagine a version this good being made now?

Crisso

reply

[–] CHIZNAT7 20 years ago

I was just about to respond to that!

No you're not the only one. It's one of my favorite versions. Someone should do a remake, but excatly like the book.

reply

[–] potatoperson 19 years ago

YES! It would make for an amazing remake, especially with the technology available nowadays. It's such an interesting movie to watch, and the similarities in the appearances of Frollo and Quasimodo to the same charachters of Disney's cartoon are astonishing. I wonder if animators used this movie as a reference.

I am nobody's little weasel.

reply

[–] crankenstyne 18 years ago

I have also noticed the similarites between this version and the Disney version and I think there is no doubt that Disney used the 1939 version as reference. Not only the appearances of Quasimodo and Frollo but Disney even used the goat (Aristotle) in an expanded role.

reply

[–] RoamingTigress 19 years ago

I adore this movie. Always brings me to tears.

~Roaming Tigress~
http://not-just-a-pretty-face.freewebhosting.com/MainPage.html

reply

[–] DMERCER8 19 years ago

This writer considers R-K-O's 1939(considered by most film scholars as the year the largest amount of classic films were made by Hollywood) Hunchback Of Notre Dame as the greatest version ever done of this classic novel.This version stars the Great Charles Laughton in one of his best performances as the deaf, disfigured and hunchbacked Quasimodo.There's great support by a gorgeous Maureen O'Hara as a ravishing Esmeralda and superb villiany played to the hilt by Sir Cedric Hardwicke as a secretly sexually covetous Frollo of the gypsy Esmeralda.
It's an epic that's truly worth watching with Laughton playing Quasimodo as the ultimate tragic figure who asks the stone gargoyles the question,"why was I not made of stone like thee?" This version continues to go through history as a
classic.
To Better Days,
BRAD

reply

[–] movie_crazy999 19 years ago

Oh my gosh! Hardwicke was so great!!!

reply

[–] silverwhistle 15 years ago

I prefer the 1956 version: closer to the book. The Hays Code made a nonsense of the plot in the 1939 version in some respects.

reply

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] MADDOXRJM 19 years ago

No you are not the only one. This movie is superb. I have no desire to see a remake of this or numerous other movies that are excellent just the way they are. It would be almost sinful to remake The Maltese Falcon, Casablanca, Goodfellas, Treasure of the Sierra Madre, White Heat, On The Waterfront, Apocalypse Now, and on, and on, and on, just to name a so very few. I am very much surprised that you don't hear much about this wonderful movie. It is going to be shown tonight on TCM and I will be watching. The performance by Charles Laughton is as good as any performance that I can think of. It's a shame that this movie is not appreciated in the manner it so richly deserves.

reply

[–] nateba 19 years ago

As far as I'm concerned, this movie is up there in my personal pantheon of great films. It's got tons of atmosphere and one of Alfred Newman's best sound-tracks (he incorporates the Tomas Victoria "Ave Maria". You can hear it in the opening credits and throughout the film). It's a feast of great acting and great characterizations: from Thomas Mitchell's Clopin and Cedic Hardwicke's Frollo right down to Etienne Girardot's funny little doctor insisting that the world is flat. Did you know that the beggar who tries to hang Gringoire is George Tobias who ended up as Abner Kravitz on "Bewitched"?
The storming of Notre Dame is amazing. Charles Laughton is incredible. I could go on about my other favorite moments, but I'm out of breath.

cinefreak

reply

[–] chiznat7-1 19 years ago

Of course. I would never touch the movies you listed above to be remade, it's sacrilege. Also, this version of the "Hunchback" is my favorite of all adaptations. What I am saying though is not to remake the RKO, but instead I'd like to see a new version of the original book "Notre-Dame de Paris." I want a version that deals with all of that dark and depressing stuff (i.e. Frollo a priest trying to rape a 16 year old Esmerelda, Esmerelda and Quasimodo dying together, Phoebus alive and hiding the fact he was going to cheat on his fiancee with Esmerelda). That is a version that has yet to be made. And I think in this day in age it would be acceptable to tackle it. In the 30's and 40's you couldn't show (or imply for that matter) a priest try and rape a teenager.

reply

[–] onebadgungan 15 years ago

Not that I disagree with your comments, but I just wanted to point out that The Maltese Falcon with Bogart was the third version of that film - in essence a remake that surpassed the original. However, I would not be pleased with a remake of it now.

reply

[–] pelicans_and_such 19 years ago

I actually liked this movie a lot. Of course, the Disney version will always hold first place in my heart. Frollo in this one was great, too, though. I wish there had been more of him in the movie. Charles Laughton was brilliant as Quasimodo. You pitied him, yet he was still physically horrifying. Maureen O'Hara was a good Esmeralda, too. I didn't check to see who played Gringoire, but, though his character's role in the plot differed A LOT from that in the book, he still played the character remarkably well. Bravi to everyone in this film!

Dumbledore's girl through and through...

reply

[–] tabari 19 years ago

I just watched this movie again after finishing Maureen O'Hara's biography "Tis Herself". Her memories of making this movie (and of many others) are well worth reading. She thought Laughton was the finest actor ever and tells of how he achieved the effects for the Hunchback. Very effective without all the aids available today. And the pathos of his acting.
His bellringing in the last segment was evidently carried away as his reaction to the very recent declaration of war for Gr. Britain and the knowledge of what that would involve for his nation and others.
I think my biggest surprise was Edmund O'Brien. I have always thought of him as rather homely, though a good actor. But, he was rather handsome and not having his hair slicked back in the 40's and 50's style really changed his appearance. I had never seen him before when young.He always played such serious dark roles. He was so vibrant and animated in the Hunchback of Notre Dame. And, can you imagine the crowd scenes being filmed today with all the strange people and acrobats, etc.

reply

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] billyinnes 18 years ago

This movie remains my all-time favorite version of the Quasimodo story.
And it's just one of many reasons as to why 1939 has got to be THE best year ever for cinema...

reply

[–] montaukgirl18 18 years ago

You are not the only one. I have loved this film since I was a child (that means the past 50 years). The acting is amazing, and the music!!! The music played at the end, after he says "Why was I not made of stone like thee?" is so moving.

reply

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]