THe 1997 version of Hunchback; Good Casting but bad version

by

The 1997 version of the Hunchback confounds me a lot. You pretty have the right actors for the characters and they do a fairly competent job with material they are given but the material given to them is so wrong for a Hunchback adaptation. It’s clear that this movie was emulating the 1939 Laughton version with the printing press and a very sympathetic Quasimodo but it fails to measure up became the execution is miserable.

It’s like if you have all the ingredients to make a simple chocolate cake but half through you decide that you want to make it your own except you have no concept of cooking so you just start throwing whatever you want in there like Bacon, Walnuts, Cherries, whatever. Then you’re surprise when it doesn’t cook right and no one likes it.

Mandy Patinkin as Quasimodo, 1997 The Hunchback picture image

Mandy Patinkin as Quasimodo

Quasimodo and Esmeralda are the least offensively bad but to be fair these types of versions of the characters that they are portraying are common. Humanize and sympathetic Quasimodos are the norm with film adaptions because the audience has to like Quasimodo despite his looks.

Salma Hayek as Esmeralda, 1997 The Hunchback picture image

Salma Hayek as Esmeralda

Same goes for Esmeralda. Having a shallow immature girl is not the way to win over an audience. Having a strong confidence yet kind beautiful women works perfectly. Both of these character choices reflects an easy out. A Quasimodo and Esmeralda with a character arc would be hard to write. On could argue that Quasimodo’s arc would be realizing Frollo is a mean jerk face but since he is a villain that’s easy. THe real issue is with Esmeralda is that she doesn’t do anything in this movie outside of looking attractive . She gives Quasimodo water for feelings of guilt but that it. Her importance is just being there for Quasimodo and Frollo to react to and not doing anything.

Richard Harris as Frollo, 1997 The Hunchback picture image

Richard Harris as Frollo

Then there is colossal fail that is Frollo in this movie. The biggest issue with Frollo in this movie is that is obsession for Esmeralda is the result of feeling weak with regard to the king’s attitude on the printing press. His lust for Esmeralda feels like an afterthought and that shouldn’t be. The plot revolves around that. Once that decision was made other integral parts of the plot suffered like why would Esmeralda get the blame for the minster’s murder? Who saw the knife and knew it was her’s when it’s only in one scene? No Phoebus and Gringoire does nothing.

The 1997 Hunchback fails as Hunchback adaptation because Frollo’s lust set the story in motion. A failure to understand what drives the story is the reason why this version even with good castings fails.

Next time the Direction

Richard Harris as Frollo, 1997 The Hunchback picture harris

Richard Harris as Frollo, yells No!

What in a Name? Sister Gudule

by
Illustration Sister Gudule and Esmeralda by Luc Oliver Merson picture image

Illustration Sister Gudule and Esmeralda by Luc Oliver Merson

Sister Gudule has an impressive array of names and nicknames.

Let’s start with Sister Gudule. The Sister indicates she is a nun. Gudule is an ceratin type of nun called anchoress. Very simply, an Anchoress is one who retires from the world and prays. These nuns are also called Sachette. I think the name comes from the rags they wear. The name Gudule is French name that seems to be derived from the name Gudula which is derived from Gothic for either guths meaning God or from gôds meaning good. This reflects Gudule’s devotion to praying to god to answer she only prayer which is to have her daughter returned to her

Her name however is Paquette Guybertaut. It’s a little unclear what Paquette means as a first name, one source said Ruddy-cheeked and another indicated it’s pet-form of Pacquet which is “a bundle of kindling” Given her character in her youth and her father was a minstrel, Ruddy-cheeked makes more sense. Her true last name is Guybertaut. Guybertaut on its own does not to seem to be a real surname. Guybertaut can be broken down to Guy and Bertaut. Guy as a last name indicates coming from district of Guise in France. Bertaut is a real surname but I can’t find any hint as its meaning. It doesn’t really matter as Gudule does not remember this name, she only remembers the nickname she was given when she was eighteen.

She was more commonly referred to as Paquette la Chantefleurie. Chantefleurie means “The Flower Song”. It symbolizes her winsome youthful nature which is a kin to Esmeralda’s personality.

Her names reflect her capricious youth and her harsh adulthood as a recluse yearning for lost child.

Next Version is ……

by

I asked in a poll what that next version of Hunchback to be review should be between two very bad cartoon version, Secret of the Hunchback or The Enchanted Tales Version. Both versions are terrible in different ways and very stupid. The Winner however was The Enchanted Tale Version.

Melody, a.k.a Not Esmeralda,Enchanted Tales, Hunchback of Notre Dame picture image

Melody, a.k.a Not Esmeralda, Enchanted Tales, Hunchback of Notre Dame

Review Series of this starting soon.

Help Me!

Lilo & Stitch 2: Stitch Has A Glitch; I want to see the Mummy Hula!

by
Lilo & Stitch 2: Stitch Has A Glitch picture image

Lilo & Stitch 2: Stitch Has A Glitch

Lilo & Stitch 2: Stitch Has A Glitch was okay. That’s it, I’m done!

Glitchy Stitch, Lilo & Stitch 2: Stitch Has A Glitch picture image

Glitchy Stitch

Good Night Everybody!

Lilo & Stitch 2: Stitch Has A Glitch picture image

Lilo and Stitch

Really, that is all I can say on it, it’s ok. Considering most the Disney sequels, that’s high praise but in honestly the original Lilo and Stitch never did much for me. I saw it and it was ok but it never connected with me.

Lilo & Stitch 2: Stitch Has A Glitch picture image

Lilo and Stitch

The basic plot of this sequel is Stitch is malfunctioning due to his energy never being fully charged and he reverting to evil. In the mean time, Lilo is trying to win a hula contest so her late mother will be proud of her while David is trying to make Nani jealous and Nani trying to keep it all together.

Mostly it’s sub-plots. The climax of the movie is Stitch dies and the power of love, I shit you not, saves him. I do like how they don’t use magic Disney Science to explain it, they just don’t care and neither do I.

Lilo, Stitch, Nani, David, Pleakley, & Jumba Lilo & Stitch 2: Stitch Has A Glitch

Lilo, Stitch, Nani, David, Pleakley, & Jumba.

One thing that worked in this movie is that the family is awesome moral made sense. Though it was rampant in the first one, so it was a rehash and the film would have failed if it couldn’t pull that off.

Lilo & Stitch 2: Stitch Has A Glitch picture image

Stitch

Lilo & Stitch 2: Stitch Has A Glitch for all it is, is meh. However Meh equals Ok on the Disney Sequel spectrum of fuckery. It didn’t make me want to destroy humanity the way Atlantis II did nor did it make me question my sanity the way Little Mermaid II did. It wasn’t painful and therefore it’s ok. Although maybe it’s only ok because I have no strong feelings towards the original.

Mertle Lilo & Stitch 2: Stitch Has A Glitch picture image

Mertle and Lilo

Mertle is also a Grade-A Bitch.

You are Tearing me apart, Quasimodo!

by
The Disaster Artist picture image

The Disaster Artist

Recently, I read The Disaster Artist which is an inside look at the making of The Room, which is called the Citizen Kane of bad films. If you haven’t seen it, see it! The Disaster Artist is also a very compelling read.

Tommy Wiseau the Room picture image

Tommy Wiseau

Fairly early in the book authors Greg Sestero and Tom Bissell liken The Room’s mastermind Tommy Wiseau to Quaismodo saying that Wiseau looks like “the Hunchback of Notre Dame following corrective surgery.” This is allegory is almost too true. Could you imagine Tommy Wiseau playing Quasimodo? That would amazing!

What’s in a Name? Jehan Frollo

by
Illustration of Jehan Frollo picture image

Illustration of Jehan Frollo

Jehan is an old French from of Iohannes or John. Iohannes is Latin form of the Greek name Ioannes. Ioannese is derived from the Hebrew name Yochanan which means Yahweh is gracious.

John and the Jehan form are commons names but it seems that Jehan’s name is meant with irony. This  is because he is a good-for-nothing  mooch. However he does have Frollo’s favor at the beginning of the novel but he loses it when Frollo loses patience for his life style.

For the meaning of Frollo, please see my post on Claude Frollo’s name meaning

Considering the two Frollos are both killed by Quasimodo, does that make Quasimodo an allegorical King Arthur?

There another compontent of his name, Jehan Frollo du Moulin, which means “of the Windmill.” Jehan was raised at a windmill

Tarzan II Review: Because the world needs more Phil Collins

by
Tarzan II picture image

Tarzan II

The first time I saw the original Tarzan, I didn’t like it very much but since it had been a very long time since my viewing of Tarzan, I decided to watch it before watching Tarzan II. On a Second viewing, I didn’t hate it as much as the first time. As it turns out Tarzan II is a midquel so there might have been more drama and tension if I hadn’t seen the original.

Tarzan and Zugor Tarzan II picture image

Tarzan and Zugor

Tarzan II takes place when Tarzan is a young wee bit of a thing, trying his hardest to be the best ape he can. Tarzan feels he and the family would be better off is his wasn’t there but his ape momma, Kala, assures him that family is awesome at the 8 minute mark.

Tarzan, however, gets separated from his family and decides to run way when he overhears some gorillas saying that they will be better off without him. He runs into a family of bitter Gorillas who live in a rocky rift and can’t leave because of a monster called the Zugor. The Zugor turns out to be an old Gorilla named Zugor who is scaring animals so they will leave him alone. Tarzan bargains with him to teach him stuff in return for keeping his secret. Tarzan wants to know what he is and what his talents are. It’s at this point he starts horning his human brian which impresses Zugor.

Terk and Tantor go to look for Tarzan after Tantor hears Tarzan yelling. Terk and Tantor run into the bitter Gorilla family. To save them, Tarzan spills the beans about Zugor and Kala and three baby Gorillas get in the fray. Tarzan uses a vine to swing and to save Kala and the babies and Zugor find his place with the formerly bitter Gorilla family. Tarzan learns that no matter what he is, he a part of a family.

Tarzan II picture image

Tarzan

It’s pretty obvious that Tarzan II takes place during that growing up montage. As far as midquels go, Tarzan makes sense to have one, unlike Beauty and the Beast but just because it made a little sense to shoehorn another story in the original, midquels are stupid. Because we have seen Tarzan we know that nothing bad can happen in this story.

We also know that all the character development in the midquel happen in like 4 minutes in the original. Midquels are therefore boring and dull to watch and by their very nature they can’t add anything to the original story.

Lion King 1 1/2 could have made the sequel make a little sense by showing the Scar loyalist leaving Pride Rock but on a whole Midquel can’t have any tension or drama.

Tantor, Tarzan and Terk Tarzan II picture image

Tantor, Tarzan and Terk

As it is Tarzan II despite not having any sense of drama or original character development is not wholly bad. The fact that it is a midquel does make it boring but for hour story it’s fairly not that bad but it has some issues.

A Rhino and a Bird Tarzan II picture image

A Rhino and a Bird

First annoying little issue, and this was an issue I had in the first movie, if the gorillas and Tarzan can talk to Tantor why can’t they talk to the other animals? This is just annoying and I don’t get it.

Tarzan and a baby Warthog Tarzan II picture image Tarzan II

Tarzan and a baby Warthog

Second annoying issue, where the hell is this? I mean I know it’s in the Jungles of somewhere in Africa but where? Africa is a big continent so where is the place with Elephants, Gorillas, Rhinoceros, Hippos, Warthogs, Leopards (or one) and if I count the first movie Lemurs, Baboons and Taisers. Lemurs only live in Madagascar but none of the other animals do so I gotta say F U Disney.

What is Disney’s issue with  pan-menagerie of animals especially when  they had a dumb throw away line about piranhas being native to South America? I could tone out this issue in the original movie but in the midquel it was annoying.

Kago, Gunda and Uto Tarzan II picture image

Kago, Gunda and Uto

Then we have the new characters, Zugor, Uto, Kago, and Mama Gunda. At least the have contrived yet distinct personalities, Zugor is a lovable grump, Uto is dense, Kago is violent and Mama Gunda is overbearing.

Uto, Kago and Gunda are considered the antagonist but they are weak ones and they hardly count. However as weak as they are, they are miles more entertaining than Ursula’s crazy sister or the Tim Curry organ.

Kala and Tarzan Tarzan II picture image

Kala and Tarzan

It says something if before the ten minute mark the viewer knows the core lesson, Family is awesome. To be fair most of these sequels is about family or friends being awesome. On some occasion it’s love that is awesome but that is rarer.

Tarzan II is so blatant with its message that I felt I could have turned it off after 8 minutes. It did make for a nice little bookend with beginning and the end but you know Tarzan is still with his family because of the original so having it blatant in the narrative indicates that the movie thinks its audience is stupid. Then again these sequels are used as babysitting tool to get kids sleep, so touche movie.

 

Tarzan II picture image

Tarzan

Tarzan II as a whole thing isn’t that bad but it being a midquel is offer very little. If you need to kill an hour or have to entertain a child there is worse stuff to watch.

Disney’s Mix and Match Villains Book

by

I mentioned Disney’s Mix and Match Villains Book in a post about the villain line but since then I have found my copy of it. Oh the fun of this thing.

The book is a game where you flip segments of a pictures and words to form absurdities.

Frollo's page Disney's Mix and Match Villains Book pictureimage

Frollo’s page

So for example the Hunchback page features Frollo holding a book with Quasimodo and Hugo off to the side and the text reads “Frollo sneered, I’m very disappointed in you Quasimodo.

With a few flips I can change it to this.

Ursula demands that only love's first kiss will awaken Quasimodo Disney's Mix and Match Villains Book picture image

Ursula demands that only love’s first kiss will awaken Quasimodo

Oh such fun. Though I confessed as child I loved using Alice’s Head in the mix.

Frollo wants to marry Alice's Head Disney's Mix and Match Villains Book picture image

Frollo wants to marry Alice’s Head

(sorry for the bad pictures)

1997 Phoebus: You know that Blond Guard

by
Benedick Blythe as Phoebus, 1997 The Hunchback picture image

Benedick Blythe as Phoebus with Edward Atterton as Gringoire

Phoebus is not a character in the 1997 version of The Hunchback. He is a featured extra who has a few lines but has no importance to the plot. So what does it mean for the story with Phoebus not present in the narrative?

First, it means that there is no noble presence in the characters. Nobles played a bit of a role in the book and in some of the movies. The Film gets around this a little by making the King a slightly bigger character. Not  as big as the 1939 version but he gets few lines. There is also the King’s minster who is the Frollo kills.

It also means Frollo anger isn’t targeted in regards to his lust for Esmeralda. Instead Frollo is being challenged by the minister who is all for the Printing Press. with his resolved weaken Frollo yearns for Esmeralda and when he can’t get her, he kills the minster. And because Frollo used Esmeralda dagger she gets the blame.

This weakens the core of the story as Esmeralda has no reason to kill the minster, unless you count the one line he says dismissing Gypsies as not real people. But the movie doesn’t make bring that up in her trial, so their interaction is nonexistence. It also robs the intensity from Frollo’s lust.

Not having Phoebus also changes Esmeralda’s character. With no other love interest, Esmeralda doesn’t not come off a childish and flighty which suit a standard strong-independent Hayek role well.

 

Can a Hunchback story take place without Phoebus? I suppose it can but I would say that the 1997 version is not a model for how to do it. The killing the minster plot is a weak and sloppy.

Next time – A little by more on the characters

Salma Hayek as Esmeralda, 1997 The Hunchback picture image

Salma Hayek as Esmeralda