Let’s talk about Tone!
Tone is how a movie feels. Is it serious? Funny? Scary? Or sappy as hell? Typically a film should establish its tone in the first 5 minutes or so.
Disney’s Hunchback of Notre Dame gets a lot of criticism for having a confused tone. It does have fart jokes mixed into a story that features Lust, Murder, Corruption and Genocide. But is the tone actually confused? No, the film presents the tone in the first five minutes, it’s an animated drama with bursts of levity mixed with darker elements.
In the first five minutes we’re are introduced to Clopin, who while singing “The Bells of Notre Dame” is performing a puppet show and making jokes to children. So while Bells of Notre Dame does have some dark imagery, the humor was already established in the core narrative before the darker notes were introduced.
Also, it’s is important to think about the gradation of tone throughout the film. The film doesn’t go from farts joke to Frollo’s insane lust. The movie allows the tone build up to either a dark place or silly tone and then back again.
For example, Frollo goes into his more severe method for hunting Esmeralda following Hellfire, this includes his burning the miller’s house and the attempt to kill Phoebus. These scenes with their darker tone shift when the film moves back to Quasimodo and the gargoyles.
If the tone was confused the gargoyles would have make fart-like jokes following this shift in focuses of characters but instead they worry about Esmeralda and from there the jokes get progressively lighter and sillier, up till “a guy like you” ends. This shows the film has a handle of the different tones in its narrative.
Perhaps my years of watching Bollywood and anime has allowed me to see that multiple tones can coexist in a drama-driven story as long of the tone has gradations to its tonal shifts.
Disney Esmeralda is a great choice for a Halloween costume for few Good Reasons;
1) As a Disney Character, she is very recognizable!
2) It’s made of 4 pieces of clothing which are easy to buy VS some of the other Disney ladies who wear a single garment.
3) It’s sexy without being vulgar.
4) It looks of most body types.
5) Pending where you live, it’s good for fall weather.
6) It’s Fun and Flirty!
and
7) Esmeralda Rocks!!!!!!!!!
If you planning on Dressing up as Esmeralda you can go here to start your costume
And if you are dressing up as Esmeralda please send your photos and I will post them!
Which Disney Princess Matches Your Zodiac Sign? If you’re a Scorpio,rejoice you’re Esmeralda according to ChaCha.com. here is the write up;
“Scorpio is known as The Fascinator, a secretive sign, like Esmerelda from ‘The Hunchback of Notre Dame.’ You are passionate, emotional, loyal and determined, and you love solving puzzles! Silvermist from ‘Tinker Bell’ would also be a Scorpio.”
You can find your Disney Princess Zodiac here;
Which Disney Princess Matches your Zodiac Sign
Which one Princess is your Zodiac? I got Cinderella
Question; Why does Esmeralda only wear one earring?
An Esmeralda that wears one earring clearly indicates the Disney Esmeralda.
This question was answered in the commentary. According to commentary, Esmeralda wears one earring because Djali wears the other one in the set. This links them in together. It’s unclear if this reason was invented after Esmeralda and Djali were designed it probably was the case.
I was watching Screen Junkies Hottest Animated characters (watch here) and the first group they discussed were Disney Princesses and this picture came out
My first thought was “Is Esmeralda a Princess now?” But the Host, Hal Rudnick picked her, so shrugs on that one. they also didn’t quite get Esmeralda character down. But where is that picture come from? I would venture it’s photoshopped.
But I think it’s high time Esmeralda, Megara and Kida joined the ranks or Disney should create a brand for older girls. I mean come on Disney, you’re wasting a demographic opportunity here.
I grew up Disney, hell most of us have. But few of us remember when Disney wasn’t not the huge power house it was in the 1990s. Prior 1990 Disney was going through a slump, The Black Caldron was a major failure and lead animator, Don Bluth left to form a rival animation company that made such great animated films as The Secret of NiMH, An American Tale, and my personal favorite The Land Before Time . And then everything changed with the success of Roger Rabbit. From then, Disney went into a Golden Age making such gems as The Little Mermaid, Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin, and The Lion King. After The Lion King, Disney slipped a little. The films after Lion King did not do as well. And then Pixar walked into Disney’s life and pretty much saved Disney. Since Pixar’s success, Disney’s focus has shifted from the 2-d hand-drawn animated movies to 3-D animated movies. Disney in addition to producing Pixar movies also have made a few 3-D movies on their own. The only recent 2-d animated movie they did was the 2009 The Princess and the Frog
which returned to the princess formula. It wasn’t a bad movie, though why they got Randy Newman and not Alan Menken is beyond me. They also made in 2011, Winnie the Pooh. However, neither The Princess and Frog or 2011’s Winnie the Pooh were a huge commercial success and Disney has no plans to make any more hand-drawn movies at present.
Disney is still going on the princess angle though with its 3-D movies. In 2010 Disney made Tangled which was based on the Fairy Tale Rapunzel. Tangled was meh-ish at best. It had a nice story, some decent songs but the character never captured me except the horse and the lizard. Now Disney is set to release Frozen. Frozen is very very very loosely based off the Hans Christian Andersen story “The Snow Queen.”
Here is my point, when I saw concept art for Tangled and Frozen I thought “Wow cool.” Tangled was said to take an art style from the Rocco painting “The Swing.” I kind of imagined the film would emulate that painting more. But Nope, Tangled looks fairly genetic 3-D movie. I really only seen the influence in the leaves.
And now that feeling of genericness is justified in Frozen. The concept art I saw was really cool, it has an unearthly look to the Snow Queen. Now she just looks more like the blue fairy.
But the main thing is Rapunzel and Anna (Frozen’s Heroine ) look alike. The animators can the changes colors all they want, the viewing public is not that stupid. They have the same eye shape, lips, nose, cheeks, hell they even both have freckles. Really, they could be characters in the same movie. Lush leaves and snow do not constitute a distinct style and feel for a movie. But then again made they are meant to take place in the same world. However if Disney continues with this style it going to get boring. Oh Wait, it’s already boring!
The great thing about Disney’s hand-drawn films is that they had different styles to complement the story. The Little Mermaid doesn’t look like Mulan. Even Beauty and the Beast and The Hunchback of Notre Dame which take place in the same Country and were done by the same directors look stylistically different. (Fun Fact – when Frozen was being development, at one point Hunchback and Beauty and Beast Directors Kirk Wise and Gary Trousdale were recruited to direct the film but the project was put on hold.)
You have to wonder is the ease of computers robbing Disney of its style when it comes to the look and feel of its films? Given Tangled and Frozen, I would say yes. Most of the 3-D fair movie look plastic and devoid of personality. But perhaps Disney can pioneer the 3-D art to have give it a whole new look. Or better yet GO BACK TO THE HAND-DRAWN FILMS!!!!!!!!!!
Question; Why does Disney act like Hunchback of Notre Dame never happened?
To be fair, there is another Disney film Disney ignores more famously than The Hunchback of Notre Dame and that would be The Black Cauldron. This is because The Black Cauldron was a failure at the box-office and therefore didn’t money for the company. It also received mixed reviews, one being ” It lacked the dark elements of the book.” (sounds like a criticism for another Disney Film)
The Hunchback of Notre Dame received mostly positive reviews from critics and actually was a box-office success as its budget was $100 million and its gross revenue was $325.5 million, although it did barely only broke-even domestically. So with this info why does Disney ignore The Hunchback of Notre Dame? The Hunchback doesn’t have the levels of products as a lot of the other films in the Disney pantheon and looking at Disney’s presence on Zazzle, they don’t have a single Hunchback product but they do have stuff for Treasure Planet, which bombed at the box-office. Then you have the blu-ray of Hunchback which had no extras on it. Whereas Pocahonatas’ blu-ray
does have quite a few extras and Pocahontas was not only offensive and historical very very very inaccurate but wasn’t received as well. However it appeals to children which pushed Pocahonatas in to the secondary tier of the Princess line of toys, which mean Pocahonatas makes money for the company.
I would theorize that the reason why Disney ignores the Hunchback stems from they don’t know who to market this movie to. The film didn’t really appeal to children which is Disney’s primary demographic. The film’s darker tones and the more heavy subject matter more likely distances children for it. If the film has done better with their key demographic we would more than likely see Esmeralda* in the Disney Princess Brand and her face would grace the likes of blenders, bed sheets, bikes, shoes, baby dolls, chairs, ect. (They make a lot stuff for that brand). *Before you say Esmerald can’t be part of the Princess Brand as she is not a Princess, Mulan is not a Princess nor does she marry a Prince and yet she is part of the Brand, here is a Muan Baby Doll )
As a company Disney is not going to put money in developing products for a film that didn’t appeal to its core demographic after its initial release. As Hunchback is part of the Disney family it did get it’s entitled blu-ray treatment but Disney did extended any extra effort into the extras which would have cost them. More then likely when Hercules‘ blu-ray comes out it will get extras because had more appeal to children. Plus it would seem that Hunchback’s popular is recent so if starts to gain a big enough following Disney will start showing it love. But It’s a two-street, Disney may think the Hunchback blu-ray failed because people dislike the movie and not because there no real incentive to buy it when the DVD has extras and blu ray doesn’t.
I think the question is why doesn’t the Hunchback of Notre Dame really appeal as much to children and who is does this movie appeal to? Maybe if Disney has a demographic to target they would show Hunchback a little more love.




















