MovieChat Forums > The Hunchback of Notre Dame (1982) Discussion > Very Depressing *Spoilers*

Very Depressing Spoilers

posted 19 years ago by yohabroha86
24 replies | jump to latest

I just saw this on TV a few minutes ago. I didn't even know Anthony Hopkins (sp?) played in a hunchback movie. He's such a good actor, and he was brillant and moving this.

When he talks about his ugliness to Esmerelda, he made me wanna cry, he couldn't stop apologizing to her for being ugly and he was so sweet.

Everyone was brillant, and I thought Leslie-ann down (I think thats her name) that played Esmerelda was really good, and really pretty.

However, I find myself totally depressed now. The only version I had seen is the disney version (which i'm totally CRAZY about) but I knew this was based more on the novel than the disney one was so I knew it would be a tad different.

I couldn't believe Quasie died in the end! That's so sad, Esmerelda and her husband escape and live happily ever after because of Quasie, and he ends up dying, and right before he lets go, he simply says "Why?" we see him falling then total black then the credits. I sat there shocked. I was like "Thats the end? oh my god how depressing!!"

I thought that Esmerelda would ask him to come with them instead she just kissed him and left. She knew they would kill him for helping her and she just left him there to die. I was pissed at her when she did that honestly.

Then once she left and Quasie was running from everyone trying to kill him, I kept hoping she'd come back and rescue him like he had rescued her from not only being killed several times, but being raped as well. You think she'd return the favor you know.

Anyways, i'll stop raving. I did think it was sweet when she gave him water and then we see him later smiling and saying "She gave me water!" that was so adorable.

Anyway thanks for listening to me go on. This was a good version and Anthony holds the whole movie. He's one of the best actors ever. Way to go Anthony!

Melissa

Does Barry Manilow Know You Raid His Wardrobe?

[–] Blue_Moonlight 18 years ago

I am replying to your post a bit late (seeing as you posted several months ago), but I only recently discovered this gem of a film.

Anthony Hopkins is by far my favorite movie Hunchback (Lon Chaney and Charles Laughton were brilliant in their own ways, but Hopkins really got to me on an emotional level, quite moving; Chaney was too animalistic and Laughton delivered the lines he spoke to Esmeralda after giving her sanctuary as if he were reading them off of cue-boards...but anyway.) My only complaint is that he is too gentle, at least much more than in the novel (where he felt tender emotion only for Esmeralda and Dom Claude Frollo), but I suppose that's what was necessary to endear him to the audiance within the time confines of a film.

I'll try not to spoil the novel, but the ending is tragic for most of the characters and very few survive to the end. The ending of the novel is also a shocker, as is the ending of the movie, delivering similar moods with totally different twists on the tragedy. Interesting translation from page to screen, the aura was not lost, and Quasimodo lived out (or rather died) his promise to Esmeralda to give his life for her.

On a side note, I also enjoyed the Disney version (the first Hunchback retelling I saw and what got me into reading the novel, which got me into trying to see as many of the movie versions as time would allow), but after reading the novel realized that the only similarity between Disney and Hugo were character names and superficial description of social status (Esmeralda-gypsy dancer, Phoebus-captian of the archers, etc.; it delicately makes Frodo a judge instead of a priest (archdeacon) and totally destroys his "shades of gray"). Character traits and personality types bear no resembelance.

But back to the topic at hand, Hopkins did a fine job (understatement); his laugh, his stumbling over his words, he silences, hand and facial gestures enhanced the character of Quasimodo as much as the actual words he said. Lovely piece, it's a shame it's not as well known as some of the other versions.

[–] dtice1 18 years ago

I remeber a version that follows the book were Esmeralda does hang while Frollo and the Huntchback watch. I had always thought it was this version. All I know is that it would have been made at about the same time as the Hopkins version.

[–] silverwhistle 8 years ago

I think you may be thinking of the BBC adaptation with Warren Clarke as Quasimodo and Kenneth Haigh as Claude.

"Active but Odd"

[–] lh_lh82 18 years ago

Melissa,

If you think this movie version is depressing, I wouldn't suggest that you read the original book by Victor Hugo, titled, in French, "Notre Dame de Paris".

In it, every one of the main characters die: Esmeralda (is finally hung), Quasimodo (dies with Esmeralda's body in his arms) and Claude Frollo (Quasimodo pushes him off Notre Dame). The book is, of course, much better than any dramatization I've ever seen of it; but apparently a lot of people can't handle the idea of the whole thing falling apart and every one dying tragically.

Claude Frollo is also really well-written in the book; he's much more sympathetic than he is usually portrayed. He's usually depicted as practically a moustache-twirling, chuckling villian.

The book deals very movingly with the force of love: how it blinds people, redeems them, renders them mad.

[–] aitch-10 18 years ago

A great story, well told. Made at Pinewod studios UK.

Aitch,

http://web.ask.co.uk/web?q=%22Harry+Fielder%22

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] esther-eisenhauer 18 years ago

I just read the adapted version of "The Hunchback of Notre Dame" and yes, it is very sad. Phoebus *DOES* allow Esmerelda to die. He plays on her emotions and says that he loves her, even though he doesn't. He's also engaged, and just likes playing around with women.

I'm not psycho, just a little loopy...
*~Es~*

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] chiznat7-1 18 years ago

Sparky, allow me to explain. Esmeralda is not really a gypsy. When Esmeralda/Agnes was a baby, she was kidnapped and raised by gypsies. Her birth mother used to be a rich widow, but after the kidnapping of her child, this drove her nuts and she locked herself in a little dungeon. She was known to the public as "The Recluse of Roland Tower." Her birth mother, Paquette, has an enormous hatred for gypsies, especially Esmeralda because she would've been the same age as her daughter had she not been kidnapped. But unaware to Paquette, Esmeralda is really her daughter Agnes. The two of them finally realize this before Esmeralda is hung. Paquette tries to stop the soldiers from hanging her by repeatedly telling them that she's her daughter. But ultimately it is the job of the soldiers to follow the king's order, and his orders were to hang Esmeralda because she was framed for attempting to kill captain Phoebus. Now going back to the kidnapping, when Esmeralda/Agnes was kidnapped she had one of the shoes on her. Paquette had the other and kept it for 15 years because it was te only thing she had of her daughter. Hope this helps.

If anyone is interested, in 2007 I'm making a short film faithfully adapted from the novel and I'll be touching upon scenes that were never dramatized in previous film versions, such as the backstory mentioned above.

Visit:
http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendid=17409544

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] DwightFry 18 years ago

How are you going to get such a long novel into a short film?

Anyway, I hope you choose to portray Quasimodo the way it was in the book and not as the retard he's in most movie versions (incluiding this).

Non vos riades, que o conto é triste.

[–] chiznat7-1 18 years ago

It's a long short film. We're guessing 30-45 min. in length. A huge section of the middle we'll be done in sort of a montage with music underscoring, it's sort of hard to explain. Also, in the novel, there are many chapters which only talk about the Cathedral alone, it's architectual details, and history. the book goes on and on about this. That of course, will be omitted. Some scenes in the film will overlap each other as well. Also, tight editing, for example: We don't need to see excess footage of Quasimodo walking up to the pillory or stumbling back into the Cathedral.

Quasimodo is not the main character in the movie, though he does dominate most of the ending of the movie. Other than the Cathedral itself, Esmeralda is the star, the movie is all about her, and everthing that happens within the story happens because of her. As for Quasimodo, we want to go with a more realistic Quasimodo, so he'll sound more like how a deaf person would sound, not as audible and eloquent as Charles Laughton, he won't be making stupid retarded sounds like Anthony Quinn in the 56 version or Laughton's when he's pouring molten lead, if that's what you're thinking. We want to make him more of a handicap person, not so much a monster, but still aware of his surroundings. Also, we'll see a bit of Quasimodo's gruesome side, such as when he kills Claude's brother Jehan, which will be quite gory.

Hope this helps.

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] krustiesrus 17 years ago

are you doing a musical version? cause thats really what somebody should do its truly brilliant! if u haven't seen it you must! and yes this is very depressing but thats the whole point if it wasn't depressing it would be lame! i love how everyone practically dies.(not in a sick way)If they didn't die there would be no feeling to it and i doubt i would watch it! lol

[–] silverwhistle 15 years ago

Her birth mother used to be a rich widow

Um, no. The novel says she was a courtesan or prostitute in Reims. Esmeralda's father is unknown.

[–] WishfulDreamer 17 years ago

This is one of the only versions where Esmerelda lives- and I like it that way! The only other one I can think of that lets her live is the Disney one. I loved this version because it nearly held true to the book, but allowed the kind-hearted gypsy girl to live.

[–] Blue_Moonlight 17 years ago

Esmeralda lives in all the major film versions (1923, 1939, 1982, 1996) except 1956, where she is played by Gina Lollobrigida.

[–] silverwhistle 15 years ago

The point of difference is between the novel, where the main trio all die, and some of the earlier stage and screen adaptations. The 1939 Laughton film had Esmeralda going off with Pierre Gringoire. Hugo's 1835 stage version and the 1923 film inspired Disney's decision to turn Phœbus into the hero.

[–] silverwhistle 15 years ago

Yup: the book is wonderful. I first read it in 1981. And Claude is simply heartbreaking: one of the great tragic heroes/anti-heroes of 19C literature. (He's also a good bit younger than usually portrayed, too: only 36.)

Film-wise, the 1956 version has more of the book.

[–] silverwhistle 8 years ago

The 1956 film is the best so far. Alain Cuny, Anthony Quinn, Gina Lollobrigida.

Claude is the tragic hero/anti-hero of the book.

"Active but Odd"

[–] Woodyanders 15 years ago

The sequence where Quasimodo keeps apologizing to Esmeralda for being ugly was indeed very touching. The ending was likewise a total heartbreaker. Anthony Hopkins did a magnificent job showing the kind and gentle soul that exists underneath Quasimodo's monstrous exterior.

"We're all part Shatner/And part James Dean/Part Warren Oates/And Steven McQueen"

[–] silverwhistle 15 years ago

I like the 1956 version with Anthony Quinn best. It's closer to the novel.

[–] Moss-37 11 years ago

Your forgetting the retard had chucked a few slabs over onto the crowd,killing a few people, so it was way too late for Elza to offer protection.And rightly so,who would want that thick dipstick tagging along with you and your husband anyway.

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]