This version is so unremarkable. Nothing about this movie stands out in way that is appealing. It is one of the most tepid movies I have ever seen. It’s so bland and that is slightly amazing. Typically movies have something about that makes them standout even if its negative point but this is so under-whemling, that at 25 minutes I felt we should have been at the thrity  minute mark and nothing happened.

Marc-André Grondin as Gywnplaine and Emmanuelle Seigner as Josiana The Man Who Laughs picture image

Marc-André Grondin as Gywnplaine and Emmanuelle Seigner as Josiana

The plot does follow the book, though it has it differences. Like Barky just seems to want to keeps his position, Josiana is aged and is Gywnplaine’s cousin (I think) and they do sleep together which causes Dea’s depression and suicide by arsenic. Homo does very little and he not really a plot point like in the book. The movie puts a lot of focus one the performances of  Gywnplaine, Ursus and Dea.  Gywnplaine  tries to quell his love for Dea not because of the blindness but because of their sister/brother being raised together  relationship. Barky doesn’t send Ursus and Dea away in fact he brings to  Gywnplaine and Dea hears Josiana and  Gywnplaine going at it. Also no David and the Queen wasn’t present or seem to care about screwing over Josiana.  That is all the differences I care to recall.

So how is this movie unremarkable. Well first off the acting. If these people were acting they either were directed terribly  or they didn’t care. I also thought the casting on Dea and Josiana were way off. Dea is supposed to be a celestial ethereally young lady and do not get me wrong, the lady they cast is lovely but she had the wrong type for the role. She seemed earthy and natural. Mary Philbin was better cast. I hate to even say this but the lady who played Josiana was too old. I thought Josiana was supposed to be like Esmeralda, careful and full of life. This women just seemed like a bored housewife. It was a decision the filmmaker made that I neither get nor like though she was the best actress so there is the tradeoff.

Marc-André Grondin as Gywnplaine and Christa Théret as Dea The Man Who Laughs picture image

Marc-André Grondin as Gywnplaine and Christa Théret as Dea

The we have the colors, or rather lack of them. This movie likes grey, black and white. So the acting is dull and boring and so is the color palette. I won’t say that movies can’t have this style but you need to make it visually interesting and its not. The shots are pretty basic and when it tries to have an interesting shot it just seem like uninspired.

Marc-André Grondin as Gywnplaine The Man Who Laughs picture image

Marc-André Grondin as Gywnplaine

The costumes were also boring but what is really was flat,  Gywnplaine’s make-up. It literally looked like they just drew on red paint to make his smile. This make him humanized but it looks so lazy. I can’t see why people would find it fascinating the same way as the 1928 version.


Also the music was inappropriate. At ending where Dea and  Gywnplaine die the music during the credits is like super happy and carnival-esque. It was like a slap in the face.

At least Homo was a wolf but that is the only positive thing.

One more thing, I don’t want to give the impression that I know a ton about art history on a whole but at one point in the movie Barky brought out portraits of  Gywnplaine’s parents. The first one was of his mother and it was a John Singer Sargent Portrait of the Duchess of Sutherland. Lovely portrait but it took me right out of the movie.


Do not recommend this version.  Just watch the 1928 version.


Full Disclosure, I couldn’t actually watch this movie, I tried but the trailer told me everything I could ever need know about this version and then someone on IMDB gave the specifics.

The Who Laughs 1966 Poster picture image

The Who Laughs 1966 Poster

This version seems precious.

You can watch the trailer here,

Where do I even start?  What were the screenwriter and the director smoking with this movie? First, The Man who Laughs is not an Adventure Novel. Oh, that just brought a smile to my face.

I mean what is this movie? There is nothing of the novel to be seen in this trailer but my god is this not the best one minute and thirty nine seconds? I feel like the movie’s craziness just leeches off the screen.

Apparently someone did see it according to a post of IMDB and here some core differences, so SPOILERS;

-Dea’s mother didn’t die and travels around with Dea, Ursus and Gwynplaine. And here I thought they cut Ursus as he didn’t seem to be in the trailer. (This is a weird change but it seems harmless, misses a point but whatever.)
-Gwynplaine is the royal court executioner and not a mountebank. Though he says cool lines and such before he axes people. (But still why? It’s just No, that is stupid.)
-Gwynplaine and Josiana sleep together (That is BS but we’ll see this change again.)
-Apparently Barkilphedro and soldiers gang rape Dea. (That is just awful, F-U movie, you ruined it. You had this stupidity that was darling and now it’s all gone. I hate you.)
-Gwynplaine keeps his title and gets sugery to correct his deformity and Dea’s eyes get magically fix. (This movie should be destroyed!)

Well it seems like this movie had some idea of a story they wanted to make, some Royal Court intrigue but they needed a source for characters so they attached the Man who Laughs. This movie seems like a Fan-Fiction.

If it wasn’t for the some BIG plot changes like Dea and the very stupid happy ending it would seem like hilariously naive version but it seems more waste of the original source material and I didn’t even like the original source material but this movie seems like crap-poo, no wonder you can’t watch it.

Also it takes place in Italy instead of England and it’s the Borgias. So wrong place and time. That doesn’t bother me, just saying. Though I did like the Showtime show of The Borgias.

Conrad Veidt as Gwynplaine and Mary Philbin as Dea The man who laughs picture image

Conrad Veidt as Gwynplaine and Mary Philbin as Dea

I just finished watching the 1928 The Man Who Laughs. Maybe it’s that I have a low attention span for silent films based on books I don’t really like or maybe it was because I have been on a crazy Modern Family watching binge, either way this movie was work to finish.

I will admit I was a little interested in seeing this movie as Mary Philbin, who was in Phantom, Conrad Veidt who I just saw in another movie recently where he plays a Frolloesque character and Brandon Hurst who played Frollo in the 1923 version. Here Hurst plays the villain again, man he is type-cast as Hugoian villains. So I didn’t not want to watch it but then it started…

Like the book the plot just goes Zoom-By. I still didn’t really get a feeling for any of the characters, in fact we lost Homo’s sensitivity and Ursus’ grumpiness but we didn’t get long histories of the peerage system OR that snow storm as sea scene, so take you pick at which one was better.

Conrad Veidt as Gwynplaine and Olga V. Baklanova as Josiana The man who laughs picture image

Conrad Veidt as Gwynplaine and Olga V. Baklanova as Josiana

Really, the only good thing about this movie is Veidt’s facial or rather eye emotions. The look of Gwynplaine it so otherworldly that is the only thing memorable about anything along with Veidt’s acting. The other people aren’t bad but there isn’t much to go on really.

The ending was a mixed bag too. The lovers live and that is fine, I actually think the ending didn’t make much sense in the book, Hugo just wanted a tragic ending so it was trite but before they can get to the happy ending there is a big dumb chase because silent movies love big dumb chases at the end, ask Phantom of the Opera. And if that wasn’t bad or dumb enough Homo kills Barky. It doesn’t really matter, Barky was a lame villain anyway but still he could have just drown which would have been at least a call back to the book. Also Homo was a dog not a wolf, that isn’t a complaint just a fact, was more likely easier on the production.

Now here are some weird things;

-The lady who played Josiana, Olga V. Baklanova, looked like Madonna, the singer…. good thing they didn’t remake this movie in Madonna’s heyday. Josiana also got a monkey,. Apparently Baklanova’s resemblance to Madonna has been noted by modern critic…… and people on IMBD but if you have eyes you can see it too, it not subtle.
-I don’t know what the heck they did to David’s character. I thought he was suppose to be sophisticated but he acted so derpy in this movie. Was he meant to be a flop?
-This movie is ALL over the place with its costumes and set pieces timeframe. Like it said 17th century (pretty sure), at the start but the costumes range from the 1700s to late Victorian to the 1920’s. They had no idea of what period this story takes place in. But you know that didn’t REALLY bother me but you know what did a little bit, the amusement park rides. This movie has a rides at the 17th century fair. This just looked so out of place.
-as of 2015 there hasn’t been an American remake of this movie and the 1928 movie it is the ONLY American version.
-This version is the basis for the Joker’s look, not a weird thing just awesome…

Basically with the this version of the book the best thing you can say is the make-up and the acting were decent but the rest of it felt moldy. I wish the characters were better developed but then we wouldn’t have gotten that chase scene…….. can’t win…….it’s either a snow storm or a chase.

When I was making a page on Frollos of Notre Dame de Paris (which I probably needs to updated or something), I was struck with how young the Italian cast was skewing on their casting for Frollo.

Vincenzo Nizzardo as Frollo  10th anniversary cast of the Italian Notre Dame de Paris picture image

Vincenzo Nizzardo as Frollo

For the 10th anniversary cast of the Italian Notre Dame de Paris, Vicenzo Nizzardo was casted and at the time he was roughly 25, so he is a good solid ten years younger than book Frollo. At the time was I off-put by this choice towards a younger Frollo but recently I have asked myself, Can we have a young Frollo?

Lemud Illustration of Frollo picture image

Lemud Illustration of Frollo

Frollo in the book is in his mid 30’s which for the 1400’s is considered old but more than that, he looks old. If I remember the book correctly, Frollo always looked older even when he in the height of youth.

Richard Harris as Frollo, 1997 The Hunchback picture image

Richard Harris as Frollo

Traditionally in films versions Frollo is played but an older man. Here is a list of the guys who have played Frollo and their ages when they played the role, (in the 23 and 39 version case I’m counting Jehan as the Frollo and I’m not counting cartoons versions.)

Walter Law (1917) – 41
Annesley Healy (1922) -N/A couldn’t find a birthday year
Brandon Hurst (1923) – 57
Sir Cedric Hardwicke (1939) – 46
Alan Cuny (1956) – 48
Kenneth Haigh (1977) – 46
Derek Jacobi (1982) -44
Richard Harris (1997) -67
Richard Berry (1999 parody) – 50

Jehan Frollo (Sir Cedric Hardwicke) 1939 Hunchback of Notre Dame picture image

Jehan Frollo, Sir Cedric Hardwicke 1939 Hunchback of Notre Dame

Movie Frollos have an estimated average age of 49 with a mean of 46 and a range of 41 to 67. That means, if I remember correctly and Frollo is about 36 years old that is 13 year differences between his book age and the average.

Richard Berry as Frollo 1999 Quasimodo d'El Paris picture image

Richard Berry as Frollo

Hollywood and movie typically cast actors who are older than their roles, I mean Quasimodo is typically played but 40 years old when in the book he says he about 25 year, I should do a post of that someday because that is more irritating.

Derek Jacobi as Frollo, 1982 Hunchback of Notre Dame picture imahe

Derek Jacobi as Frollo, 1982 Hunchback of Notre Dame

So back to our original question, Can we have a young Frollo? I would say ideally it should be the best actor for the role but that doesn’t always work. Frollo should at the very least read older than the rest of the cast, especially Quasimodo and Esmeralda. So an actor who is at least in his upper twenties through his 40’s is perfect. What is really should come down to is the actor has a hard austere look. Having a Frollo with softer features robs the intensity from the character and if that means casting an actor who is younger so be it. I could forgive a movie that makes a Frollo that has ten year old difference with Quasimodo, as long as they make it clear he is the care giver and he has the right look.

Alan Rickman picture image

Alan Rickman

Benedict Cumberbatch picture image

Benedict Cumberbatch

Charles Dance picture image

Charles Dance







Does this mean I think an actor who is older wouldn’t work for the role? No, I still maintain that Alan Rickman and Charles Dance would make great Frollos, though if they cast Benedict Cumberbatch that would be great too. Should find a  Non-Britsh actor for a recommendation for Frollo, geezes

What do you guys think? Would you be okay with a younger actor playing Frollo? Quite honestly I would just be happy with another film version.

This was too much math for one post, @@.

Confessions of an Ugly Stepsister picture image

Confessions of an Ugly Stepsister

The first Live action movie we’re going to look is the 2002 TV movie Confessions of an Ugly Stepsister. It’s a retelling of Cinderella This was an interesting movie, first off notice how it’s ugly and not wicked, this is because the main is one of the step sister and not so much Cinderella.

Azura Skye as Iris with Matthew Goode as Casper Confessions of an Ugly Stepsister picture image

Azura Skye as Iris with Matthew Goode as Casper

The step sisters, Iris and Ruth flee England with their mother, Margarethe to Holland. They are poor  so they start living with an artist. The artist uses Iris as a model and his apprentice, Caper takes a liking to Iris. They get in with a wealthy merchant who has a lovely daughter named Clara who is scared to leave her house as she was kidnaped when she was child.

Margarethe is a greedy women who wants to be rich so she uses her knowledge of potions, which is why she left England, to win the affections of Clara’s father and marries him. The merchant loses his fortune. Margarethe hears that there is a ball where the Prince will pick a wife and and is determined that Clara should win his attention with her superior beauty. Clara says she won’t do it and become the kitchen maid so she be alone and coins Cinderella as her name. Margarethe then decides that Iris is her best bet. However Clara then decides she will go to the ball as Iris loves Casper and she wants Iris to be happy. Margarethe however forbids it and burns Clara’s gown.

Clara goes to the ball with the help of her Godmother which was a woman that stalked her and scared her. She tell Clara that there is a dress in attic and she turns a rat into her slippers.

At the ball Iris does managed to charm the Prince with talk of art but the Prince falls for Clara’s beauty. And the next day he comes to their house with the slipper. Before Clara tries the slipper on Margarethe asks her to take care of Iris and Ruth but in the end Clara says that she will look after Margarethe too and yay happy ever after.

Jenna Harrison as Clara Confessions of an Ugly Stepsister picture image

Jenna Harrison as Clara

My biggest issue with this movie is that there is great sense of realism that gets muddled towards the end. Like the slipper is made from magic but there is no other magic in the movie. It just doesn’t fit. Also the prince and Iris had great scene where they discuss art. It gave the impression that the Princes was interesting but when he saw Clara all that went out the window and he just based his love of looks but before that there was a set-up that he was above that. They should have just had a scene where Clara and the prince find a commonality but they really didn’t.

Azura Skye as Iris Confessions of an Ugly Stepsister picture image

Azura Skye as Iris

I did find the characters interesting. Margarethe was greedy but she valued courage which is why she doesn’t like Clara. Clara is sheltered, scared and introverted which isn’t something you see a lot of in stories especially for a character is that pegged as a nice beauty. Iris, the main character has the whole beauty on the inside though the actress playing her is quiet pretty so it a hard sell that people called her ugly or at least not that pretty. Though she meant to be talented, smart and witty whereas Clara isn’t as much. Which is sort of an interesting counterpoint. The rest of the character are likable.

Jenna Harrison as Clara Confessions of an Ugly Stepsister picture image

Jenna Harrison as Clara

The technical are meh but it’s a TV movie. The costumes are alright but I do appreciate that they did get the Holland fashion at the time, black with white lace look. But it was just meh.

 Azura Skye as Iris Confessions of an Ugly Stepsister picture image

Azura Skye as Iris

Confessions of an Ugly Stepsister is okay. It an interesting take on the classic Cinderella story but I found the plot kind of overly complexed and I wish they kept it more real as that was its intent. But I bet this it could have been worse.

The Book version

The Hunchback of Notre Dame is a story that has inspires some other great work of cinema. Some movie makers opt to take this story and adaption from its original novel and transform it into a movie, it’s boring path, anyone can adapt a book to a movie. Some other people however take this story use its core essence make a movie. Most of the movies however aren’t worth the resources they wasted, they mock the glory of the Hunchback tale but there is one movie. There is one movie that takes the story of Hunchback and makes it shine through the celluloid, a movie that truly understand, a genius movie.

It’s a story about a group of people whose way of life is being threaten and they much work together to brave the storm and silence those who would judge them. The heart of this movie lies in the relationship of a ugly social recluse who wants both to be loved and to earn the respect of a beautiful young lady who is being lusted after by a shady guy.

What glorious movie is this? Can you guess? Or Click here to reveal this masterpiece’s identify.

At its core the Hunchback of Notre Dame is a drama but that  hasn’t stop people from making it into a  happy children story about an ugly ducking, social commentary, a comedy and it was almost was a jazzy action-adventure (prove me wrong Brolin and make it).

But what other genres could a Hunchback version be and how would the story have to change to satisfy the genre tropes.

Moodiness Esmeralda (Maureen O'Hara) 1939 Hunchback of Notre Dame picture image

Moodiness Esmeralda (Maureen O’Hara) 1939 Hunchback of Notre Dame

Horror– This one is so easy, I’m more than surprise no one has bother to make a more horror-y or at least creepy version since the hallmark film is a “monster’ movie.

There is a movie called the Hunchback of the Morgue which has elements in common with Hunchback and Frankenstein but I haven’t  seen it as of yet.  It sounds terrible,  also I’m fan of gory films.


Phoebus Rallies the People Disney Hunchback of Notre Dame picture image

Phoebus Rallies the People Disney Hunchback of Notre Dame

Action-Adventure– I know I mention this one already, but it could work I think. The plot would have to changed a lot though. I think the only method to make this genre work is some kind of treasure hidden in Notre Dame which kind of was done but not really. Notre Dame’s treasure that was Frollo’s motivation in the Secret of the Hunchback but it wasn’t an action-adventure movie, it hardly a movie.

But Hunchback isn’t devoid of action so they could just amp that up and looting the cathedral was part of allure of the attack of it by the Court of Miracles. So it could really work.

Danielle Dumont as Fleur de Lys, 1956 Hunchback of Notre dame picture image

Danielle Dumont as Fleur de Lys, 1956 Hunchback of Notre dame

Romanic Comedy– Groans. Hunchback as a chick flick might be a tough sell but  maybe. I dunno. It would have be very light hearted and almost  parody. Maybe Hunchback should stay clear of this one.

Garou as Quasimodo Notre Dame de Paris picture image

Garou as Quasimodo from Notre Dame de Paris

Musical – Well there have been musical versions but not one from a stage show. I personally love the idea of a Notre Dame de Paris film version but I’m sure it would get messed up.

Maybe they could Jukebox musical, those are easy and people like them enough. Can’t you just see Quasimodo singing “I would do anything for love,” the thing writes itself.

Melody, a.k.a Not Esmeralda in Jail awaiting death, Enchanted Tales, Hunchback of Notre Dame picture image

Melody, a.k.a Not Esmeralda in Jail awaiting death

Fantasy – Just add magic and stilted dialogue, easy.

Phoebus and Esmeralda get comfortable (Maureen O'Hara, Alan Marshal) 1939 Hunchback of Notre Dame picture image

Phoebus and Esmeralda, Maureen O’Hara, Alan Marshal 1939 Hunchback of Notre Dame

Film Noir– Everyone seem to want to overly sexualize Esmeralda anyway so just go for it and make her a full-on Femme Fatal, you know you want to Hollywood.

Quasimodo singing Heaven's Light Disney Hunchback of Notre Dame picture image

Quasimodo singing Heaven’s Light Disney Hunchback of Notre Dame

Kaiju– No, No, No but the image of 100 foot Quasimodo destroying Tokyo is very silly probably too silly.


Do you have any suggestions for different genres for Hunchback? Leave it in the comments along with how to change Hunchback to fit the genre.

Among the more famous versions of Hunchback, each version has a lot of movie posters. For this post, we’re going to look at the top seven best Hunchback movie posters. These are not in a specific order and they are all available on Amazon.

#1 All the characters, the Disney version

Disney Hunchback of Notre Dame Poster picture image

Disney Hunchback of Notre Dame Poster

This poster has a lot of energy. You get a sense of the personality of all the characters. I like how Clopin and is front and center and I like how Frollo looms over everyone from on high. I don’t really like how central the gargoyles are but that is a nitpick.

2# All the characters Chaney version

 1923 Hunchback of Notre Dame Poster picture image

1923 Hunchback of Notre Dame Poster

I really like how front and center Esmeralda is in this poster. All the other character are pretty much there in the crowd and their personality come through. I also like the color palette on this one which is ironic seen this was a tinted movie.

#3 Pseudo-Monster Movie, 1939 Version

1939 Hunchback of Notre Dame Poster picture image

1939 Hunchback of Notre Dame Poster

I debated whether or not to included this one since it kind of plays with the audience’s expectation of a monster and Laughton is one of the least monstrous hunchbacks but that’s its strength. It has the signifier that says it’s a hunchback movie but makes it feel different and I like that it hides Quasimodo‘ looks. I also like the red tone

There is a similar 1939 poster with a Quasimodo in silhouette against Notre Dame and pillory but it just not a dynamic.

#4 Stark Simplicity, 1923 Version

1923 Hunchback of Notre Dame Poster picture image

1923 Hunchback of Notre Dame Poster

This one made simple but it captures the imagination of what this movie could be like. And I find the design bold and graphic.

#5 Trio, 1939 Version

1939 Hunchback of Notre Dame Poster picture image

1939 Hunchback of Notre Dame Poster

I like this one as I really like the rendering of Maureen O’Hara. It just has a good composition to it though I can’t really tell if that is Jehan or Gringoire but I would it’s Jehan.

#6 Captivatingly Overprice, 1956 Version

1956 Hunchback of Notre Dame  Poster picture image

1956 Hunchback of Notre Dame Poster

I really like the picture vignettes in this and Gina Lollobridga looks lovely in this. Somehow this poster just makes the movie seem more like an epic.

#7 Pillory Scene, 1923 Version

1923 Hunchback of Notre Dame  Poster picture image

1923 Hunchback of Notre Dame Poster

I debated between this one and another 1939 poster. I went with this one because I really like the way Esmeralda is depicted. It is also interesting to showcase the pillory scene in a movie poster.



The Sea Prince and the Fire Child

The Sea Prince and the Fire Child

The Sea Prince and the Fire Child a.k.a The Legend of Sirius is a 1981 anime movie made by Sanrio. I watched it in the English dubbed. Watching things that are not in their native language can add some issues. I think over the years dubbing has gotten better but I think some of the issues I had with this movie are the result of the dubbing. A note, I’m going with the English names for this review.

Sirius and Malta with the Holy Flame The Sea Prince and the Fire Child Picture image

Sirius and Malta with the Holy Flame

The plot is very much Romeo and Juliet but with the Ocean God and the Fire Goddess being pissed off at each other. The story is Fire and Water used to exist in the same body and were one but also brother and sister. The Wind God, Algorac, grew jealous and told lies about the Ocean God and the Fire Goddess about the other. So pissed were they, that they started a war. Ultimately, Algorac was defeated and lost his power eye and was imprisoned in the Forbidden Zone of the sea. The Ocean God, Oceanus, was given the Algorac’s eye. The Fire Goddess, Hyperia, created the Holy Flame so that the sea will be calm. And thus Water children and Fire children are kept apart.

One day, the Prince of the Sea, Siruis, goes into the Forbidden Zone and meet the Fire child, Princess Malta, who guards the Holy Flame every night. The two fall in love with each other. Sirius tells her that he must leave before dawn as the sun kills children of the water as the water kills children of the fire. They then decide to meet every night at the Holy Flame.

Oceanus gives the Eye of Algorac to Sirius making him the King of the Sea. And some salamander thing wants to be king and causes conflict. Hyperia tells Malta that when the solar ellipse occurs, Malta will be the new Queen of Fire and her duty guarding the Holy Flame will be over thus ending her time with Sirius. Sirius and Malta then learn from a wise sea turtle that during the ellipse a special flowers will bloom for a moment and when they do the blossoms will rises up to a star where Fire and Water live as one. They plan to go there so they can be together.

However a lot of things go down and Malta makes it to the hill but Sirius is too late and the sun kills him. Malta in her grief returns him to the water and dies. Oceanus then retrieves their bodies and lifts them up to the star where they can be  one.

Malta and Piale The Sea Prince and the Fire Child Picture image

Malta and Piale

I left a lot of plot out the synopsis. Sirius and Malta both have loyal friends who die so they can be together. Siruis has Bibble and Malta has Piale. Bibble, I will just say, is annoying but he does a desperate move for Sirius and loses his life so he redeems himself a little.

After Malta and Sirius learn about the hill and the flowers, the Holy Flame goes and Piale urges them to go and Piale become a replacement for the Holy Flame which kills her. While I find both characters annoying, in their deaths they display more depths than our leads.

Sirius and Malta The Sea Prince and the Fire Child Picture image

Sirius and Malta

Sirius and Malta are flat characters. They don’t have much personality. They love each other and that is it. I will say that I do think they truly love each other but it’s kind like “your attractive and forbidden that makes you cute” kind of love. If love is forbidden then that makes the audience care for the couple even if there is no depth. But it’s fine simplicity isn’t bad. Their love is effective for the story.

Fire Goddess Hyperia The Sea Prince and the Fire Child Picture image

Fire Goddess Hyperia

I think the main issue with this movie is that something were not explained very well, or at all. Like the water god and the fire goddess were one but the wind god turned them against each other. How does that work? How did the wind god turn them against each other so easily if they were part of each other? What did they look like when they were one? Are Sirius and Malta cousin? Who is Malta’s father and Sirius’ mother?  Why doesn’t the Forbidden Zone have any guards but Oceanus’ chamber has two? Who guards the Holy Flame by day or does it just need attending at night? Why can’t Malta and Sirius just live in a dark cave?

 Sirius seeing Malta for the first time  The Sea Prince and the Fire Child Picture image

Sirius seeing Malta for the first time

The biggest head starcher is why does Malta look more water-like and Sirius looks more fire-like? I have to assume it was intentional to show that Fire and Water were once one but looking at the characters it’s a little confusing.

It’s still weird that Malta is the only fire child with green hair. At least Bibble has red hair. The character designs are also a little weird, Malta’s in nude but the tail-like things are even stranger.

Sirius and Bibble The Sea Prince and the Fire  Child Picture image

Sirius and Bibble

Despite the bad dubbing, the annoying Bibble, the lack of depth of main characters, slow pacing and the general confusing-ness, I liked The Sea Prince and the Fire Child. It’s a classic tale with some great animation and I admit, I do love forbidden love stories every  once and awhile.



I was on a hunt for information on the upcoming Josh Brolin version of Hunchback and I found a 2007 version that had a cast and script attached. I’m a little unsure if the movie is in preproduction or in development hell or finished or what. It’s seems to be called, The Hunchback, real original.

It seems to be lead by actor Max Ryan and seems to be another vanity project. According to, Monica Cruz plays Esmeralda and John Rhys-Davies plays Frollo. Both actors are listed under “in negotiations.” It’s a little funny because Hazel D’Jan, who has a good look and is fairly age appropriate for Esmeralda is casted in the film as “Figment,” whatever that means. Since this movie seems up in the air and may not happen or did not happen or did, I can’t find lot information on this, I will hold off judgement on Cruz and Rhys-Davis, though methinks casting posts are in order.

However, the Script did win Best Screenplay at the Queen International Film Festival in 2007 and that is what I want to discuss. You can read a synopsis  RIGHT HERE 
I may seem like a book purist but I’m a fan of good adaptations. This movie might be great but based on the little info I have on the plot, I dunno how good this version is or will be. Here are 5 WTF things from the plot summary.

– Quasimodo parents loved him and Clopin killed his parents to sell him but Quasimodo escaped. Shame on you movie for making Clopin evil.

– Frollo is guilted into caring for Quasimodo. Disney did the same thing but this Frollo seems less gray than Disney Frollo, this Frollo is a Grade-A jerk-face.

– Quasimodo lives in “the cave” of Notre Dame. Not sure that that means but they elude to it being in the high grounds. Shrugs

– Quasimodo saves Esmeralda when she attacked by wolves. What? Huh? Kidnapping is not evil enough for you movie? Oh, that would imply Frollo and Quasimodo have a relationship where Quasimodo loves Frollo and would do anything for him and in this version they hate each other. It’s new, I give it that but it’s dumb. It also seem like Frollo involvment with Esmeralda comes from Quasimodo’s first involvement and not the other way around.

– Frollo kills the guy who guilted him into raising Quasimodo and frames Esmeralda. Semi ripping of the 1997 version here, huh?

It strikes me that this plot took too many liberties with the original and made some dumb choices. But who know maybe it’s better than the little PDF makes it out to be.

What are your thoughts on this plot? And if you have or find any more info on the this version let me know.