MovieChat Forums > The Hunchback of Notre Dame (1996) Discussion > Is this film really too "Disneyfied"?

Is this film really too "Disneyfied"?


Hi there, I recently rewatched HoND after many years and was stunned by how well made and gripping it was. The last time I watched it I doubt I really had the knowledge of film making or story telling that I do now to really appreciate it.

One thing I’ve noticed online is that a lot of people claim that it "Disneyfied" the original Victor Hugo story. Obviously this has some validity as regards the songs and comic relief, but is it really fair overall? Compared to other film versions of the story I’ve seen, this was much more disturbing and tense. I’ve only really seen the theme of gypsy persecution take such a centre stage in the Disney version for example. There also were mature elements included in the film that really didn’t need to be in there for the overall plot to work e.g. Frollo’s lust for Esmeralda. They could have just written it so that he just wants to execute her for witchcraft and the plot doesn’t really change, but they deliberately included the sexual aspect.

The actual plot itself doesn’t really seem very "Disneyfied" to me, and is actually more adult than other non-Disney animated films that are viewed as being aimed at an older audience. For example I’d say that HoND is far more mature than any of Hayao Miyazaki’s films, which are generally seen as dealing with adult themes.

reply

Agreed on all points. My all time favorite disney film, this is by far the darkest and most adult they've been. Sexual lust and religious corruption and racism? Disney wouldn't dare go near that now. As far as disneyfied goes... yes and no. The gargoyles make the film suffer a bit tonally, but i understand why they are there - for the kids. It would be an even more intense film for kids without that comedic relief. And the ending obviously had to be disneyfied.

reply

And the ending obviously had to be disneyfied.


Technically all of the English language film versions have a "disneyfied" ending in the sense of Esmeralda not being executed and Quasimodo not starving to death while embracing her corpse (as in the book). It's not really fair to single out Disney on this aspect.

However, one thing that Disney's version did do (which the others don't necessarily) was earn their happy ending. They amped up the darkness in the rest of film to compensate for it e.g. Quasimodo's mother being killed and Frollo nearly throwing him down a well is neither in the book or the other films. The other versions take the story from the book but then give it a happy ending which makes it much less dramatic overall. It would be like adapting one of Shakespeare's tragedies but giving it a happy ending while leaving the rest the same.

reply

And in the Disney stage musical (at least the latest staging; it seems from Wikipedia that it was originally more like the film's ending, minus Esmeralda), they even keep the tragic ending: Esmeralda's "Disney death" from the film turns out to be actual death; Quasimodo throws Frollo off the bell tower, then mourns that the only people he's ever loved are dead and carries Esmeralda's body out; years later his skeleton is found wrapped around Esmeralda's, and they both turn to dust when touched. The stage version also is way lighter on the gargoyles -- they're just there for Quasimodo to bounce his thoughts off of and to represent the conflicting chorus of voices in his head -- and it's made clear that they are his imagination. The film was already wonderfully dark and mature for Disney, so ... I'm not big on their live-action remake kick, but dang, if they could remake this in live action with combined elements from the film and the stage version ... I'd say shut up and take my money. TAKE IT ALL.

reply

You should compare to the novel, not the other movie versions.

And make sure you get the unedited novel, because some reprints have been reworked.

Was it too Disneyfied? In comparison to the original story, yes it was. Both Quasi and Esmeralda alive and well at the end...? Really???

reply

Was it too Disneyfied? In comparison to the original story, yes it was. Both Quasi and Esmeralda alive and well at the end...?


What fascinated me is that this 1996 film was already in the works alongside the production of Aladdin(1992) and The Lion King(1995). Which studio head approved of adapting this dark story and try to market it to kids?

This film was clearly an attempt for mature storytelling which was done well in certain parts. The Disney logo shoots itself in the foot as any parent automatically assumes Disney = family friendly.

reply

I wish I had seen this earlier but I'm still going to respond to it.

Hi there, I recently rewatched HoND after many years and was stunned by how well made and gripping it was. The last time I watched it I doubt I really had the knowledge of film making or story telling that I do now to really appreciate it.


Interesting, because as I've grown and watched this more over the years, I feel it largely gets worse over time. It's story telling is surprisingly clunky a lot of the time.

One thing I’ve noticed online is that a lot of people claim that it "Disneyfied" the original Victor Hugo story. Obviously this has some validity as regards the songs and comic relief, but is it really fair overall? Compared to other film versions of the story I’ve seen, this was much more disturbing and tense. I’ve only really seen the theme of gypsy persecution take such a centre stage in the Disney version for example. There also were mature elements included in the film that really didn’t need to be in there for the overall plot to work e.g. Frollo’s lust for Esmeralda. They could have just written it so that he just wants to execute her for witchcraft and the plot doesn’t really change, but they deliberately included the sexual aspect.


The story and much of it's purpose is changed from the original novel and making Frollo essentially the lone bad guy takes a lot away. As for the interesting things Disney does try, they really aren't that impressive mainly because they are barely explored. Realistically, no one would pay them much praise if it weren't for the fact that they're in a Disney film. Disney shouldn't get special bonuses just because they do something slightly unusual for them but normal for the vast majority of other films. Also, those other films don't have distracting talking gargoyles, amateurish writing, and enough cheesy sappiness to override any so called darkness the film has.

The actual plot itself doesn’t really seem very "Disneyfied" to me, and is actually more adult than other non-Disney animated films that are viewed as being aimed at an older audience. For example I’d say that HoND is far more mature than any of Hayao Miyazaki’s films, which are generally seen as dealing with adult themes.


This is the statement that bothers me the most. I'm assuming you have quite the resume of animated films under your belt to make this bold claim. If the best you could name drop is not even Studio Ghibli as a whole, just Hayao Miyazaki on his own then I'm not impressed. But just the same, this Hunchback doesn't even compare to the maturity of his work either.

"If life is getting you down and needs uplifting, then please come dance with me!"

reply

Disney shouldn't get special bonuses just because they do something slightly unusual for them but normal for the vast majority of other films.


So you're saying that all films should be judged by exactly the same standards regardless of genre and target audience?


I'm assuming you have quite the resume of animated films under your belt to make this bold claim.


You do realise how comical this statement is considering that you yourself have just levelled criticisms at an animated film? It could be I'm being presumptuous though. Maybe you have directed some animated films.


If the best you could name drop is not even Studio Ghibli as a whole, just Hayao Miyazaki on his own then I'm not impressed.


Why would you be impressed either way? I mentioned Miyazaki rather than Ghibli because my point applies to his films specifically rather than the other directors who've worked there. I genuinely hope that you don't go around bringing up Studio Ghibli in conversations, with the intention of impressing people.

But just the same, this Hunchback doesn't even compare to the maturity of his work either.


Which of his films deal with real world discrimination, sexual obsession and moral corruption?

reply

So you're saying that all films should be judged by exactly the same standards regardless of genre and target audience?


Obviously context will always come into play so I would say different genres can cause some variants but target audience should mostly be irrelevant. On the whole though, there should be some common standards for all films so to a degree, yes, films should be put on equal footing. Disney in particular often gets a lenient grading scale and that's hardly fair.

You do realise how comical this statement is considering that you yourself have just levelled criticisms at an animated film? It could be I'm being presumptuous though. Maybe you have directed some animated films.


It seems my statement may have been misunderstood. You made the following statement:

The actual plot itself doesn’t really seem very "Disneyfied" to me, and is actually more adult than other non-Disney animated films that are viewed as being aimed at an older audience.


This is a blanket statement that implies Hunchback is one of, if not, the most adult animated film ever made. Of course what's technically adult is rather subjective, but it's a rather bold statement to claim something is the absolute best of anything. And while I don't think I should have to point this out, my response was about viewing and possibly analyzing animated films, not making them.

Why would you be impressed either way? I mentioned Miyazaki rather than Ghibli because my point applies to his films specifically rather than the other directors who've worked there. I genuinely hope that you don't go around bringing up Studio Ghibli in conversations, with the intention of impressing people.


This goes hand in hand with my above statement. You claim HoND is the pinnacle of maturity and adult animation, then only site one specific non-Disney source and no other. No I don't believe Studio Ghibli is the epitome of anything, great as their track record is, but my point is that they are very easy to name drop so no it's not impressive. I just find it suspect when anyone would consider a Disney movie to be the epitome of maturity and adult themes. I love Disney films as much as anyone and I consider some rather brilliant, but only a tiny handful might qualify as having deep mature themes and I don't feel this is one of them. It tries, but it's pretty much all surface level, nothing underneath, nothing really interesting.

Which of his films deal with real world discrimination, sexual obsession and moral corruption?


Off the top of my head, with the possible exception of moral corruption, none. However, I'm not convinced HoND does much to tackle or say anything about these issues either. Just the same, films don't need the exact same subject matters if you're simply comparing things like maturity and how intellectually stimulating they can be for adults.

"If life is getting you down and needs uplifting, then please come dance with me!"

reply

Obviously context will always come into play so I would say different genres can cause some variants but target audience should mostly be irrelevant. On the whole though, there should be some common standards for all films so to a degree, yes, films should be put on equal footing.


So the answer is no basically.



This is a blanket statement that implies Hunchback is one of, if not, the most adult animated film ever made.


There was no blanket statement, and even if there had been it would still be immaterial to my filmography or lack there of, and still makes your statement hypocritical.


You claim HoND is the pinnacle of maturity


The word “pinnacle” was never used, nor any equivalent.



but my point is that they are very easy to name drop so no it's not impressive.


I don’t understand your fixation with being impressive. I was trying to make a point using another reference for comparison. I wasn’t trying to impress anyone, nor would I expect anyone to be impressed by use of said reference.



only a tiny handful might qualify as having deep mature themes and I don't feel this is one of them. It tries, but it's pretty much all surface level, nothing underneath, nothing really interesting.


Can you give an example of another Disney animated film that deals with mature themes in a deeper way, and how it does this more successfully than Hunchback?



Just the same, films don't need the exact same subject matters if you're simply comparing things like maturity and how intellectually stimulating they can be for adults.


So which equivalently adult themes have been used in Miyazaki films to greater effectiveness?

reply

So the answer is no basically.


Actually the answer was yes, within reason.

There was no blanket statement, and even if there had been it would still be immaterial to my filmography or lack there of, and still makes your statement hypocritical.


The blanket statement was this:

and is actually more adult than other non-Disney animated films that are viewed as being aimed at an older audience


How is the above not a blanket statement? You are calling a film better at something than a whole group of films. The reason I bring up what animated films you have or haven't seen because I believe you need strong backing to make these kinds of statements.

The word “pinnacle” was never used, nor any equivalent.


It didn't have to, it was implied. But if I'm completely wrong about that, I apologize.

I don’t understand your fixation with being impressive. I was trying to make a point using another reference for comparison. I wasn’t trying to impress anyone, nor would I expect anyone to be impressed by use of said reference.


My only point was more references are needed to make your point work better. You that Hunchback can go up against all non-Disney but only brought up one director to represent non-Disney.

Can you give an example of another Disney animated film that deals with mature themes in a deeper way, and how it does this more successfully than Hunchback?


Perhaps outright mature themes wasn't the right use of words, we're talking about Disney after all. However, three films off the top of my head stand out for standing up very well to a deeper analysis. First is Pinocchio with it's outstanding metaphorical representations of morality and real world temptations. Second would be Bambi, which isn't highly reflective of humans necessarily, but is the perfect showcase nature at it's most beautiful, cruel, and realistic. The last would be The Little Mermaid and I know I'll catch some flack for bringing it up. However, this film actually is a brilliant piece dealing with prejudice, anti authority, and even identity.

So which equivalently adult themes have been used in Miyazaki films to greater effectiveness?


I'll need you to be more specific as I don't feel like breaking down every Miyazaki film. I would also say that mature execution is more of his specialty than actual hard adult themes. Off the top of my head, Nausicaa, Castle in the Sky, Princess Mononoke, and The Wind Rises would have the most outright adult themes, even with those first two featuring a lot of adventure aspects as well. Now if at anytime you'd like to go beyond Miyazaki, the options would really start to open up.

"If life is getting you down and needs uplifting, then please come dance with me!"

reply

You are calling a film better at something than a whole group of films


I don’t know why you would have read it that way. I was speaking to the claim I’ve seen that this film is overly “Disneyfied”. I pointed out that not only is it more mature than other Disney films that are generally perceived to be aimed at a younger audience, but it’s also more mature than some other animated films that are viewed as being aimed at a broader audience. That’s it.

Perhaps outright mature themes wasn't the right use of words, we're talking about Disney after all. However, three films off the top of my head stand out for standing up very well to a deeper analysis.


The maturity of the themes was the whole centre of my argument though. I never said all other Disney films were totally shallow.



I would also say that mature execution is more of his specialty than actual hard adult themes.


As I said, the themes were my main point. Maturity of “execution” is a much more subjective and technical issue and wasn’t relevant to my overall point. I wouldn’t even compare (any) Disney films with Miyzaki films in execution anyway, because the former are musicals, and the later generally have a much longer running time.



Off the top of my head, Nausicaa, Castle in the Sky, Princess Mononoke, and The Wind Rises would have the most outright adult themes, even with those first two featuring a lot of adventure aspects as well.


Haven’t seen The Wind Rises. What themes would you say those other films deal with?

reply

I don’t know why you would have read it that way. I was speaking to the claim I’ve seen that this film is overly “Disneyfied”. I pointed out that not only is it more mature than other Disney films that are generally perceived to be aimed at a younger audience, but it’s also more mature than some other animated films that are viewed as being aimed at a broader audience. That’s it.


I apologize if I've misunderstood then. Just the same, I am on the side that the film is rather Disneyfied as you say. I also stand by my previous notion that anything interesting the film tries to do is surface level only and wouldn't be praised if this wasn't a Disney film. I also disagree with this film standing up to other mature films since any maturity it does have is largely cancelled out by silliness and weak writing.

The maturity of the themes was the whole centre of my argument though. I never said all other Disney films were totally shallow.


Yes, I was more speaking from my perspective. I don't necessarily think Disney films are shallow in general, just that they don't usually have themes that run deep. I already gave examples of films I think do hold that criteria, but I enjoy many Disney films that don't.

As I said, the themes were my main point. Maturity of “execution” is a much more subjective and technical issue and wasn’t relevant to my overall point. I wouldn’t even compare (any) Disney films with Miyzaki films in execution anyway, because the former are musicals, and the later generally have a much longer running time.


Execution is always important because otherwise it doesn't matter what a film is trying to do in the first place. I understand that Ghibli and Disney films are handled differently, but I believe they can still be compared by looking at their individual purposes, the successes of their execution, and of course things like story telling and characters if applicable. And just a minor nitpick, not all Disney films are musicals. 

Haven’t seen The Wind Rises. What themes would you say those other films deal with?


That is a tough question to answer actually if only because all three films are the type where different people will get different things out of them. As they are all your typical Miyazaki epics, they do share some common themes. Miyazaki films are well known in their dealings with things like war, culture, environmentalism, morality, and even a touch of feminism, the positive kind. The thing about something like HoND is that, whether you like the film or not, it's pretty obvious with the ideas it's going with and doesn't leave much to interpretation. I realize it's a personal preference, but I like films that can give you connections and meanings that the film may not have even intended.

Edit: If our conversation has ended, I would just like to thank you. This was the funnest talk I've had on these boards in a while.

"If life is getting you down and needs uplifting, then please come dance with me!"

reply

I also disagree with this film standing up to other mature films since any maturity it does have is largely cancelled out by silliness and weak writing.


In contrast to which other animated films?


And just a minor nitpick, not all Disney films are musicals.


I’ve never watched a Disney animated film that wasn’t. Nor have I watched a Miyazaki film that was.


That is a tough question to answer actually if only because all three films are the type where different people will get different things out of them. As they are all your typical Miyazaki epics, they do share some common themes. Miyazaki films are well known in their dealings with things like war, culture, environmentalism, morality, and even a touch of feminism, the positive kind. The thing about something like HoND is that, whether you like the film or not, it's pretty obvious with the ideas it's going with and doesn't leave much to interpretation.


The problem with this comparison though is that it can end up being an “emperors clothes” situation. Themes should just flow from the conflicts of the narrative if they’re well written. Films shouldn’t be dramatically engaging just on a deeper level ie if you think about them really hard. Those themes you’ve listed are really vague and in my opinion are largely just furniture in those films. They fill up the background, but they’re not presented in a thought provoking way. They don’t make me feel uncomfortable or tense, like some parts of HoND do. The only time I’ve felt tense during a Miyazaki film was when it looks like the little sister in Totoro might have died. That’s just a minor plot point though. The film wasn’t actually about death or lost children on a thematic level.

reply

In contrast to which other animated films?


You want a list? My comment was meant to be more generalized for mature animated films in general, just in the same way you found Hunchback more mature than non-Disney films in general.

I’ve never watched a Disney animated film that wasn’t. Nor have I watched a Miyazaki film that was.


The fact that Miyazaki hasn't made a musical is irrelevant to this conversation. As for Disney films, off the top of my head the following are not musicals:

Bambi (no character in it sings)
The Rescuers and it's sequel
The Black Cauldron
The Great Mouse Detective ( the villain has a song, but that's it)
Pretty much every Disney film from 2000 to 2008
Wreck-It Ralph
Big Hero 6

The problem with this comparison though is that it can end up being an “emperors clothes” situation. Themes should just flow from the conflicts of the narrative if they’re well written. Films shouldn’t be dramatically engaging just on a deeper level ie if you think about them really hard. Those themes you’ve listed are really vague and in my opinion are largely just furniture in those films. They fill up the background, but they’re not presented in a thought provoking way. They don’t make me feel uncomfortable or tense, like some parts of HoND do. The only time I’ve felt tense during a Miyazaki film was when it looks like the little sister in Totoro might have died. That’s just a minor plot point though. The film wasn’t actually about death or lost children on a thematic level.


This response sounds like a difference in both perspective and preferences. In that case, there can be no winner in that conversation since all people react differently. I have no problem with movies that put things front and center as long as it's handled well. Still, as I said, I love things even more when things are not so obvious and you can get something unique out of them. I get quite a bit out of films like Nausicaa and Kiki's Delivery Service but it's fine if you don't. You get a lot out of Hunchback of Notre Dame and it's fine that I don't. I do think the themes in the films I mentioned are more than just "furniture" as you put it though, I often find the deepest movies are the ones that do it on the most subtle levels. But once again, that may just be preference and that's okay as I said before.

"If life is getting you down and needs uplifting, then please come dance with me!"

reply

I have no problem with movies that put things front and center as long as it's handled well. Still, as I said, I love things even more when things are not so obvious and you can get something unique out of them. I get quite a bit out of films like Nausicaa and Kiki's Delivery Service but it's fine if you don't. You get a lot out of Hunchback of Notre Dame and it's fine that I don't.


The two things aren't mutually exclusive though. You can have very surface level themes at play while still leaving a lot of ambiguity that is open to individual interpretations. There are plenty of films that have both. Ultimately though, they're supposed to be dramatically effective and you can't do that without that strong surface level of conflict. For example, Princess Mononoke appears to have a lot of environmental subtext but what questions is it really asking? What are the opposing viewpoints being presented through the narrative? Lady Eboshi is clearly pro-industrialisation. Is Prince Ashitaka anti-industrialisation? I don't know. This is what I mean when I say the themes are like furniture. Ashitaka and San are ostensibly the two main characters of the story but they never even have an exchange where these issues are explored. I don't mean in some kind of overt philosophical way, just naturally through the dialogue.

reply

Yes I realize the two aren't mutually exclusive, I never meant to imply that they were. I think this conversation is reaching it's end as we're getting very close to a "my movie is better than yours" discussion. I know I won't convince you or make you understand what I see in certain Miyazaki films. Just the same, you won't convince me that HoND has anything interesting to say about the themes it barely brings up. Eventually you have to just agree to disagree and call it a day. Once again, thanks for the conversation, it was quite fun.

"If life is getting you down and needs uplifting, then please come dance with me!"

reply

Every Disney film is "Disneyfied",every single one of them.

reply

While this is without a doubt, one of the darkest Disney films along with Pinocchio, Sleeping Beauty, Fantasia, The Black Cauldron etc. I've personally considered a lot of Bakshi's fantasy films such as Lord of the Rings and Fire and Ice to be far darker. Even though I never saw Wizards (I hope to watch it) I heard it's dark and I understand since none of Bakshi's films are marketed towards children. The one aspect of Hunchback that I never cared for was Phoebus being good. I personally think he could've still been a villain in the Disney version. Again, I found Phoebus being good to be odd as opposed to bad per se. I've always found Hugo to be my favorite character in this film but I never really liked the other two gargoyles in the film. I have always wondered why Disney never attempted to adapt Les Miserables for that matter on account they did Hunchback and I can't help but wonder how it would've played out. Another thing that comes to mind is Prince of Egypt is another dark animated film. Same goes for Secret of NIMH and All Dogs Go To Heaven for that matter. Land Before Time has always more so struck me as emotional than dark and we all know the infamous number of sequels it has been cursed with despite Don Bluth's lack of involvement.

reply