Recently re-watched the movie, which I still find to be one of Disney's best, but every time I watch it I find that Frollo is quite an unconventional Disney bad guy and doesn't really fit the mould of the quintessential Disney bad guy. I'm not suggesting he was in any way a good guy, but I did notice he seemed erratic from the beginning, and then as the movie progressed he seemed to become more and more insane. Thoughts?
shareMy understanding is that, in the book, he is complex. But, as much as I love this movie, I have to admit he is rather one-note in it.
We saw from the very beginning that he was evil and hypocritical enough to try to kill baby Quasimodo just because he was ugly - though, to be fair, he did say it was an "unholy demon." Maybe we're to believe he was just so hyper-religious and superstitious that he really thought Quasi was a demon. But, on the other hand, his taking him in (only at the archdeacon's command) and general treatment of Quasi isn't indicative of a holy man who's afraid of a demon in human form. So I think we're just supposed to see him as purely bad.
I have to add to what you said and I feel the same that even though The Hunchback of Notre Dame is one of my favorite Disney films I feel people overrate Frollo as a villain and I think a lot of that has to do with the song Hellfire.
While I agree Hellfire is a powerful song and it is also probably the only point in the movie where his character is given some depth, but outside of that song his character in the film is completely one note.
Even some of his lines I found over the top and just poorly written such as when Frollo mentions to Quasimodo that any other person would have drowned him and at the end where he bizarrely and out of the blue for no reason confesses to Quasimodo that he killed his mother.
I feel he was basically a one note character which is unfortunate because I think that there is so much more that could have been done for his character to make him more rounded while still remaining a clear villain or "bad guy" which should be expected from a Disney film.
at the end where he bizarrely and out of the blue for no reason confesses to Quasimodo that he killed his mother.
I disagree. I love Frollo as a villain. His complexity comes from his own self-righteousness. He views himself so pious and his actions are justified in the name of God. When he begins to lust for Esmeralda, he can't fathom that a "holy" man such as himself could ever have those feelings, so he blames the "witch" for casting an evil spell on him. But even so, he cannot fight them, hence the line, "she will be mine or she will burn." (And asking God to have mercy on the both of them)
It's funny you bring up Maleficent because a lot of people are upset that they made a movie "explaining" why she's evil and "why can't she just be evil for the sake of being evil?"
To show him as redeeming would undermine all his atrocities and water down his evil-ness. His badness stems from his hyper-religious beliefs. It's portrayed clearly, IMO, right at the beginning when he tries to drown Quasi for being an "unholy demon."
JMO, though. :)
Here comes the smolder...
I'm a Disnerd and proud
Resident Tangled expert
I just think they don't portray him as being conflicted at any moment other than in Hellfire. When he sadistically grabs her from behind in the chapel and threatens her/clearly is reveling in his lust for her, he doesn't recoil with sudden horror or something because he was attracted to her. Then he has this smug tone and expression when he calls her a "clever witch" because she's onto him, as if to say, "You're smarter than I thought, but it doesn't matter because no one will believe you that I'm actually a pervert."
Then suddenly in Hellfire he's all conflicted and guilt-ridden over it. It's just a little flip-floppy, to me.
Okay, I don't know if this is going to make perfect sense, but bear with me xD
While I can kind of see what you're saying, I think the way he was portrayed to seem "conflicted" at only one time was exactly the point.
Here we have this man, who is supposedly hyper-religious and God-fearing (and he also has a tremendous amount of power)
Despite this, he commits unspeakable crimes (murder, attempted murder - multiple times, genocide (the gypsies live outside the normal order, and despite all my hard work, they have thrived), arson etc.) all for what he sees as "the greater good."
When he begins to lust after Esmeralda, he sees her as nothing more than a sexual object and a witch. (Remember, in that scene in the cathedral, he says "such a clever witch. So typical of your kind to twist the truth and cloud the mind with unholy thoughts.")
While this is not necessarily a clear example of inner conflict/guilt, he knows deep down that she was right, but tries to turn the tables and make it seem like she is the one who is perverted.
When Hellfire rolls around, we finally see his inner conflict/guilt come through and we can (for lack of a better word) "understand" how much it is destroying him (and yet he still tries to blame Esmeralda for it, which is the reason for the red-hooded figures chanting "Mea culpa!")
However, in the end, he cannot fight these demons and lustful feelings and they win out, prompting him to terrorize and decimate the city/citizens of Paris. This was the perfect way, IMO, to show that despite his beliefs and supposed "higher standard" to which he held himself, he is still just a man and as vulnerable to sin as "the common, vulgar, weak licentious crowd."
IMO, if he was shown as feeling conflicted every other time, that would have seemed more flippy-floppy.
I really hope this made sense and I'm definitely not trying to change your mind or diminish your opinion. I just wanted to explain fully what I thought. :)
Here comes the smolder...
I'm a Disnerd and proud
Resident Tangled expert
Oh, don't worry. The thread is all for debating! I guess my main argument, though, is that Frollo just seems like he's a bad guy and knows it. He always has this evil-looking facial expression, kind of smug, or even a creepy, evil smile when he comes to see Quasimodo for lunch. So it seems more to me like he's evil and perfectly OK with that, like most Disney villains, he just puts on a pious act so as to keep his position of power and not be overthrown or something. But then in Hellfire we're shown he actually is conflicted about it. So I guess I just find the portrayal of Frollo as too sinister, from the very beginning, for it to be as believable that he truly would be this religious man who feels great guilt over sinning. I mean, he said and did things that clearly were very callous to Quasimodo, lying and telling him his "careless mother" abandoned him and anyone else would have tried to drown him, when deep down he knows he only took him in because the archdeacon told him it would save his soul. And that his mother died trying to protect him. So I guess we're supposed to think Frollo just doesn't realize what an ass he is? Haha.
shareI love debates, too! :)
*And I apologize if my statement below is unclear... I have many thoughts lol*
I guess the way I see it, (now that I think about it more) Frollo doesn't feel so much "guilt" over his feelings of lust, but self-loathing. He hates the gypsies and thinks they're witches/heathens/demons, what have you, and wants them all dead. When he commits these terrible crimes, he is so clouded by his own hatred, he doesn't really see that what he is doing as wrong, and feels he's doing a public service by eliminating the gypsies. [Remember the line from the song "The Bells of Notre Dame" -- 'Judge Claude Frollo saw corruption everywhere, except within' (paraphrased)]
Obviously this is most apparent in Hellfire where, while he expresses his desire for her, he also wants her to burn and destroy her because he doesn't want to (or can't) bring himself to admit that these feelings are
A.) Wrong and sinful
B.) he is lusting after a girl who comes from a culture of people who he despises.
By him putting the blame on her, it makes him feel better about himself and gives him personal justification to go out and kill her/other gypsies to save his soul and the souls of the citizens of Paris from their "evil spell."
Granted, I could be over thinking the whole thing (I do that a lot with Disney movies haha) but that's just the way I perceived it.
So I guess we're supposed to think Frollo just doesn't realize what an ass he is? Haha.
He seems to be quite good at emotional manipulation, too, which usually I see as a self-aware trait that people use to their advantage (the way he guilts Quasi into staying in the tower because "anyone else would have drowned him.") But maybe he really did somehow convince himself that was true (even though he knew the archdeacon clearly didn't want baby Quasi to die) to further his delusion of being pious. I wish we'd gotten a little more character development from him in that way, like another scene or song where we get a little more of a peek into his psyche.
Kind of tying in with one of the points you made earlier, his quote about Esmeralda being a "clever witch," I always interpreted as him basically saying, "Well, don't you think you're so clever! But you're just perverting the truth." But maybe he really was giving himself away there, and was sincerely admitting that she was clever by figuring him out, then quickly caught himself and made up the "twist the truth to cloud the mind with unholy thoughts" thing. Even if only subconsciously.
He seems to be quite good at emotional manipulation, too, which usually I see as a self-aware trait that people use to their advantage (the way he guilts Quasi into staying in the tower because "anyone else would have drowned him.") But maybe he really did somehow convince himself that was true (even though he knew the archdeacon clearly didn't want baby Quasi to die) to further his delusion of being pious. I wish we'd gotten a little more character development from him in that way, like another scene or song where we get a little more of a peek into his psyche.
Kind of tying in with one of the points you made earlier, his quote about Esmeralda being a "clever witch," I always interpreted as him basically saying, "Well, don't you think you're so clever! But you're just perverting the truth." But maybe he really was giving himself away there, and was sincerely admitting that she was clever by figuring him out, then quickly caught himself and made up the "twist the truth to cloud the mind with unholy thoughts" thing. Even if only subconsciously.
I heard about the TV show! I'm kind of surprised they're doing that after almost two decades, but I'll take it! I fear they won't be able to keep the characters as true to how they were in the movie, though. I'll still watch out of curiosity, but it just won't be the same, an Esmeralda without Demi Moore's husky voice. Plus they'll probably get someone really young, when - with her attitude, voice and looks - I always peg Esmeralda as being in her early 30s. If she's not supposed to be that old in the movie (I know she's a teen in the book), I don't know why they got someone with such a mature voice to play her. None of the Disney princesses have kid-sounding voices, though, and most of them are supposed to be teens. It's weird.
I always thought Esmeralda was about 22-23 because Phoebus looks about 26-27 so that would fit since they do end up together. I read that they chose Demi because she had an "unusual" voice (not quite sure what that means, though aha)
I am most excited to see who would play Frollo :)
Starting with Ariel, all the Princess voices have been pretty age-appropriate (except for Elsa, who sounds 20 years older than she's supposed to be)
Aurora's voice, though, sounds the most mature, especially when she sings. But that was just the time period that the movie was made.
Here comes the smolder...
I'm a Disnerd and proud
Resident Tangled expert
See, I think Kevin Kline has a very mature-sounding voice, too, so I always imaging them both to be in their early 30s.
Maybe I'm just thinking of how people talked when I was a teenager, which was a bit after the Disney renaissance, but I think Ariel, Belle, etc., sound very feminine and all, but still like full-grown women. Though I suppose it helps that they make them have that very regal, old-fashioned way of speaking in most cases.
That could be it. Rapunzel and Anna especially, speak more "modern" so that could be a reason why Esmeralda/other Disney princesses seem older because they speak more in line with their time period.
(Sort of OT -- I absolutely love Phoebus' line to Esmeralda in the cathedral when he looks at Djali: "I didn't know you had a kid." Hilarious. )
Here comes the smolder...
I'm a Disnerd and proud
Resident Tangled expert
Haha. I love Phoebus' sense of humor. It may be a little unrealistically modern for 15th-century France, but it makes for a better movie, in my view.
shareAgreed. Just like Phillip in Sleeping Beauty. "Now, Father, you're living in the past! This is the 14th century!" lol
Here comes the smolder...
I'm a Disnerd and proud
Resident Tangled expert
LOL. Is that an actual line from the movie, or were you just paraphrasing? I haven't seen Sleeping Beauty in years. I want to watch again, though. Even looked for a copy at Goodwill a while back. All the non-Pixar Disney movies are getting really hard to find anywhere but online! That's where I had to order Hunchback.
shareNope, that is the actual line! ahhaaha
I had to order HoND online, too. (but that's where I got most of them anyway.)
Here comes the smolder...
I'm a Disnerd and proud
Resident Tangled expert
Haha. Those progressive dark-ages types...Interesting, though, that it takes place in the 14th century. I would have guessed 13th, not that that's so far off.
I rented HonD on a whim when I saw Charter had it, and then I became all obsessed, more so than when I was a kid! I looked at basically every store that sells movies in town, even places like Safeway, since they sometimes have really random movies. But nothing! It was worth buying online, though.
Definitely worth it! Amazon is awesome xD
A few years ago I bought a lot of Disney movies for my sister's birthday and decided to just build on the collection. I have about 32-33 now (including a few sequels) I'm missing a lot of older ones like Peter Pan, Alice in Wonderland, 101 Dalmatians etc. TBh, though, I'm not huge fans of those but I would get them anyway. (eventually)
Here comes the smolder...
I'm a Disnerd and proud
Resident Tangled expert
Yeah, the really old ones aren't my favorites. It probably has something to do with the fact that I was fortunate enough to be a little kid during the Disney Renaissance of the '90s, so I had those to get all excited about seeing when they came out.
We had quite a hodge-podge of the movies, though, including some old ones. But somehow we didn't have Hunchback. Now no one else in my family wants them, so my Mom let me take all the VHS copies! They're great if even just for nostalgia's sake.
I grew up during the DR, too!! I can't tell you how many times I watched Mulan and Lion King, especially aha
All of our VHSs are either broken or donated haha.
But I'm glad to have all my faves on DVD so I can watch them (often aha)
Here comes the smolder...
I'm a Disnerd and proud
Resident Tangled expert
Those were some great movies to grow up with.
It's funny what you should say about getting rid of the VHS copies, because my mom just messaged me and said she has a bunch she's going to get rid of unless I take them the next time I visit. I told her to wait, of cours! Haha.
haha. xD
Here comes the smolder...
I'm a Disnerd and proud
Resident Tangled expert
Why not tell him the truth.. Frollo thought Quasimodo would be dead within a few seconds anyway.
shareYeah, it did seem that towards the end with Frollo, they didn't know how to get rid of him logically so that's probably why then that they had him outright tell Quasmodo that he killed his mother even though it wouldn't make sense for him to do so.
It's a shame, really. In the Berlin musical of Hunchback that's getting a Broadway adaptation, not only are most of the plot holes with Frollo fixed, he's also much closer to how he was in the novel. Like in the musical, Frollo is a priest first before becoming a minister of justice which explains his obsession with religion and piety. Frollo wanted to be a priest here because he wanted to live apart from the world, hence why he tells Quasimodo how "fortunate" he is to be shut away; however, Frollo's need to impose his views on others made any self-made isolation impossible. In addition, Frollo in the musical wanted to raise Quasimodo to "think like him," not to "be of use to him." Like it's implied that locking people away is musical Frollo's only way of connecting emotionally with anyone. Musical Frollo even admits to Esmeralda that he wanted to lock her away for himself in the same manner as Quasimodo, that that was his ultimate plan for Esmeralda besides sex. Lastly, in the musical, Frollo dies by Quasimodo pushing him off Notre Dame himself at the urging of the gargoyles without ever telling Quasimodo what happened to his mother (Esmeralda dies before Frollo in the musical).
So yeah, the Berlin Hunchback musical was really good at tying up the loose ends in Hunchback, especially Frollo, and though it would've made Hunchback a much darker film, it probably would've been for the better. Musical Frollo was so wonderfully complex as he was and not a one-dimensional villain at all.
I really hope that the Broadway adaptation stays the same (and not Disney-fied) because it would be cool to see another version. I still give credit to Disney for taking on such a project, though. Even though they had to change numerous things, it was still incredibly dark by Disney standards and I really appreciate that they took that risk. TBH, I wish they would do more things like that, but they probably won't.
The only explanation I can give for Frollo telling Quasi that he killed his mother was, in that moment, he was planning to kill Quasi and was caught up in the moment and it just came out. Like someone said before, Frollo is incredibly sadistic, and maybe in his mind, by telling Quasi that he killed his mother, it would expose just how evil Frollo was and be the last thing Quasi heard before he died. That's pretty sick.
It's similar to how Scar reveals to Simba that he was the one who killed Mufasa right before he was about to push him over the cliff.
EDIT: Frollo never actually says, "I killed your mother."
His exact words were, "I should have known you'd risk your life trying to save that gypsy witch. Just as your own mother died trying to save you." Now, obviously there's a lot of implication in that, but he never outright says it.
Here comes the smolder...
I'm a Disnerd and proud
Resident Tangled expert
Frollo is incredibly sadistic, and maybe in his mind, by telling Quasi that he killed his mother, it would expose just how evil Frollo was and be the last thing Quasi heard before he died. That's pretty sick.
And of course, Frollo trying to kill Quasi in the first place is a deep betrayal that would indicate he's actually a murderous creep, so Quasi still would have had plenty of anguish to mull over on his way to death even without the admission about his mother.
I don't think he suits the conventional Disney bad guy, because he isn't trying to be a bad guy. He is delusional in thinking that he is cleansing the world of wickedness via killing off the gypsies, without realising he is actually the problem instead of them. He also seems to get more hungry for power as the things he thinks of being 'right', 'proper' and 'godly' are being flip-turned from what he thinks they should be, thus making him come down with a more insane, iron fist.
shareHe is delusional in thinking that he is cleansing the world of wickedness via killing off the gypsies, without realising he is actually the problem instead of them.
I think of him like Carrie's mom in "Carrie" or the Westboro Baptist Church. Certainly evil, but they have a sick twisted sense that they're right and everyone else is evil because of how they interpret the Bible
shareThe concept behind Frollo -a priest torn apart by his guilt over lusting for a Roma (Gypsy) girl, and running away from the consequences of using others to hide said lust- is indeed complex, but it could have been better implemented if the character in this film wasn't so obviously evil (still one of my favorite Disney villains, but this doesn't save him from being a one-dimensional adaptation of the original Frollo).
share[deleted]
Absolutely, he is one of the most complex Disney villains. He finds it difficult to accept that he is lusting after a woman he thinks he's supposed to hate. He is cold and cruel and has gone far past the point of being able to be saved.
The Hellfire song is one of the darkest scenes and songs in any Disney film.
Go to bed Frank or this is going to get ugly .
I think he's a somewhat complex and pretty sympathetic and effective villain although "Hellfire" is definitely a turning point and he becomes a lot more fully bad afterward.
sharecome on frollo was the most complex realistic villian in the cannon he is a judge/ priest who lusts after a young women he has desires he strikes me as complex
shareHe's more complex in the various movies depending on the actor playing him.
His is torn between his devout idea of Christianity and his lust for the gypsy girl. I don't find it as obvious in the cartoon as in the human cast movies.
I has overtones of Brian de Bois-Guilbert's conflicted feeling over Rebecca in Ivanhoe.