Salma Hayek as Esmeralda,
The 1997 version of The Hunchback
Next Hunchback version; The Enchanted tales Version, oh this one, this is going to be PAINFUL!
Melody and Quasimodo
Belle and Beast’s argument
People think Belle from Beauty and the Beast has stockholm syndrome because they think they’re smart and in scheme of things Belle does not. Stockholm Syndrome
“is a psychological phenomenon in which hostages express empathy and sympathy and have positive feelings toward their captors, sometimes to the point of defending and identifying with them.”
Stockholm Syndrome affects 8% of hostages so it’s pretty rare. A note, I’m not a psychologist, take what I say with a grain a of salt but it makes more sense than the people who will convince you that Belle does have stockholm syndrome.
For Belle to have gotten stockholm syndrome she would have needed to bond to the Beast for her survival. Beast never threatened Belle’s life, he was just an immature jerk. However one could say that in Beast giving Belle her own room and access to castle it was an act of kindness that could have triggered the syndrome. However Belle then blatantly rejects the Beast’s dinner offer, she and his servants disobey his edict that she can’t eat and then she disobey’s him again by going into his off-limit area before effortfully leaving the castle. Does she get stockholm syndrome when she is no longer a prisoner? The fact that Belle left without much trouble points that she can’t have stockholm syndrome as it hardly seems like she is a prisoner in the place.
People also think that Belle gets it after the Beast saves her from the wolves and she brought him back to the castle and treated him. During that scene she is still standing up for herself and makes better points about how he should have kept his temper. Belle then thanks him for saving her life. She is not in fear of him and she is speaking to him as equal.
Actually the one act of kindness people connect the Belle’s supposed stockholm syndrome to is Beast giving her the library. Ok no, the act of kindness is that is associated with stockholm syndrome is the victim thinking that the captor is keeping them alive is the act of kindness. When Beast gives her the library it’s a thank you he her saving him and not a ploy to bond to his hostage.
Clearly, I’m rambling. If you want a well written argument agianst Belle having stockholm syndrome, I highly recommend reading Triple Nerd Score: The Truth About A Beauty, A Beast, And Stockholm Syndrome. They explain it far better than I.
But Belle does not have Stockhom Syndrome, if I see one more idoitic website thinking they are smart by suggesting it, I will scream.
Follow thehunchblog
Brother Bear 2
When I first started watching Brother Bear 2, I was annoyed to learned that much like the Hunchback sequel, this sequel was the main character from the first film getting a love interest.
That model is better than the children of the former main characters learning the same lesson. However the Brother Bear sequel is more entertaining than the hunchback sequel so it makes this story type passable.
Kenai and Nita
Plot is Kenai’s childhood friend Nita is about to get married but the sprits stop her wedding because Kenai gave her an amulet that bonds them together. She is told she needs to burn it at the place where he gave it to her on the Equinox with Kenai. She is given powers so she can talk to him as it apparently very common knowledge that he’s a bear.
She finds him in record time and convinces him to help her. Stuff ensues and we learn that she is afraid of water and Koda is contrived annoying drama. Kenai and Nita along the way rekindle their budding romance. They get to the place where Kenai gave her the amulet, Hokani Falls, and Nita burns it.
After she burns the amulet Nita parts ways with Kenai and Koda. Koda however wants Kenai to be happy and goes to get Nita from her village. Kenai goes after Koda and gets into a fight with Nita’s fiancee. In the end Nita transforms into a bear so that they all can be with each other, hooray.
Nita and Koda
In someways I found this movie less annoying than the original. The Original had this great beginning and ok ending but the middle was annoying. The sequel should have been more annoying since it’s the middle of story characters are the focus but somehow it was less annoying.
Maybe it’s because Koda wasn’t AS annoying since there was Nita to balance out Koda and Kenai. Or Maybe it’s because the goofy tone is throughout the film so you don’t have another tone to distract you.
Nita in her wedding gown
I liked that Nita wasn’t against her arranged marriage at the start of the movie. I’m not like pro-arrange marriage but I think it created an interested character arc that she wasn’t hang up on marring for love only to fall in love. She could have just as easily been against the marriage from the start but she wasn’t. On subject of Nita was anyone else distracted by Rapunzel’s voice?
Nita and Kenai
Though on the subject of voice actors, Patrick Dempsey plays Kenai because Joaquin Phoenix did not reprise his role. With Dempsey in the role it makes Kenai feel like a different character. He seems more long-suffering and mature. Not sure if the character was written that way but he is less grumpy and brash than in the first one.
Nita as a Bear with Kenai and Koda
I disliked the ending, it was very contrived. First off you know it’s coming. Kenai won’t leave Koda because Koda is a codependent who needs someone and nor will they entertain the option of turning Koda into a human since bears and the animals are closer to the spirits, I guess or something.
A Disney sequel would never set up a couple only to having them go their separate ways, or Disney for that matter. The bear wedding this was beyond stupid too. Just a silly stupid dumb ending.
Nita with Siqiniq and Taqqiq
All and All, Brother Bear 2
These are the two posters from the Stage production of the Disney version of the Hunchback of Notre Dame. A note, the poster for La Jolla is used on their website and it may not be the official poster.
One is from the German version Der Glöckner von Notre Dame and the other is the poster from the upcoming La Jolla English language version.
Both posters are quite different. While both do have bells imagery Glöckner’s only hints at one while La Jolla’s makes it a focal point.
Der Glockner von notre Dame German Musical of Disney Hunchback of Notre Dame
Glöckner’s simplified Quasimodo gives the illusion that the show could have an upbeat tone but its lack of color does add a flavor of melancholy. I reviewed the show but I have not seen it but the show is bright and colorful but does have a sad ending. The square and vertical text work echos Notre Dame in a way. Otherall the poster is simple yet interesting.
La Jolla Hunchback Poster
Where the Glöckner’s poster used a cool purple and black gradient for it overall color, La Jolla is the opposite, opting for a warm yellow tone. While the color yellow is typically cheery and bright this poster seems to have a shade of sadness. It’s a bell on a wooden bean with the logo on the bell. Behind is a setting sun. Setting suns usually indicate death. Moreover the lines on the bell and the wood make it look old and broken. There is no characters on it just the bell.
I like both posters in different ways. I like the singular bell of the La Jolla poster and I like the sad little Quasimodo figure. Both are very simple and that is their strength. If I had say what I dislike about them I would I say I don’t really like the shadow on Glöckner’s and I think the glow on the sun is too strong and white on the La Jolla poster.
Which poster do you like better, Glöckner or La Jolla?
Follow thehunchblogThe very first time I watched 1997 version of The Hunchback
Quasimodo in “Notre Dame” Interior Set
The set used for the sanctuary of Notre Dame is pretty but Notre Dame it is not. Oh, it has similar aspects of Notre Dame as it’s a gothic church but it’s not Notre Dame.
Frollo inside “Notre Dame” with King and Minister
This church has a soft earthly glow to it that Notre Dame not have. Notre Dame is dark inside so that the light from the rose windows pours inside. This light in the movie could have been the result of lighting a set for filming but post production could have corrected that. But I don’t think so. The layout and the look of it are just different. The stones seems more brown in tone and not grey like in Notre Dame. The columns totally different. Notre Dame’s columns are bigger with more complex capitals, the tops of columns. The ones in The Hunchback have like a stacking clustering details. It’s very telling that you don’t get an establishing shot of the sanctuary of the cathedral like in the 1939 version and the Disney version.
The Church of Saint Ouen in Rouen
Clearly they are passing another Church off as Notre Dame instead of a building set or shoting at Notre Dame. The Church they are passing off as Notre Dame is The Church of Saint Ouen in Rouen. Shame of you movie, Saint Ouen is gorgeous is its own right. In truth it does not matter which Church it is, it’s not Notre Dame. It’s disrespectful to the buildings and the audience when movies pass off one landmark for another. I get that movies typically pass off Toronto for New York because it’s cheaper but somehow this switch reminds of this Bollywood movie called Hum Dil De Chuke Sanam
The rest of the sets are ok, nothing really to say, they are like the rest of this movie meh…..
Next Time -Final Thoughts of the 1997 Version of The Hunchback.
Salma Hayek as Esmeralda,
Today’s prophecy comes for the Hunchback Disney Script.
“You’re telling me! I’m losing to a Bird!”
It is futile to chose an avian as an opponent today.
Follow thehunchblog
Bambi II
I want to review Bambi II, really I do but it’s beyond reproach as Patrick Stewart is it and anything with Patrick Stewart is clearly awesome.
Alright, I’ll try and review it!
Bambi and The Great Prince
Bambi II is a midquel. It takes place during the time after Bambi’s mother dies and he is being raised by his dad, the Great Prince of the Forest. Basically the movie is about the Great Prince coming to terms with raising Bambi and Bambi trying to win his dad’s respect.
This story actually works and is pretty ok. It suffers from the typical issues of little drama when death or near-death is used. Though at one point a doe is trouble and that could have had some drama but they diffused the tension in favor of Bambi being chased by hounds and you know he going to be fine. Otherwise it not that bad but there are some issues.
Bambi watching The Great Prince fight off Hounds
First off this movie takes some influence from The Land Before Time
Bambi, Ronno, and Faline
Speaking of Ronno, what an annoying character. Ronno is a bully who is momma-boy. It seems like he is the rival stag in the original because of his motions towards Faline but not sure. I guess he is an antagonist and a foil to Bambi but he is annoying.
Bambi
Bambi himself has little personality but he didn’t really in the first so whatever.
The Great Prince
Bambi II does a fair job at keeping the atmosphere of the original. The original had these moments of dramatic and almost abstract lighting. Like the hounds in the grass is a pretty cool shot.
Bambi and The Great Prince
Bambi II
These are the least popular Hunchback items that I have created for Zazzle. They are pretty bad I confess. I don’t know what I was thinking on some of these.
#1 Esmeralda Textile Mousepad
Esmeralda Textile Mousepad by Hunchstore
#2 Esmeralda Tote
Esmeralda Illustrated Tote Bag by Hunchstore
#3 Quasi-No-Go Bumper Sticker
Quasi-No-Go Bumper Sticker by Hunchstore
#4 Frollo’s Dream Date
Frollo’s Perfect Date Magnets by Hunchstore
#5 Esmeralda Textile Necklace
Esmeralda Textile Necklace
Salma Hayek as Esmeralda, 1997 Hunchback of Notre Dame
The costumes in the 1997 version of the Hunchback
Edward Atterton as Gringoire
Speaking in favor of costumes as a whole they do look old. So many times in film and TV, the costumes look new and pristine. For a film like Hunchback this should not be the case, the clothes should look old and worn. This is something that was seen in Robin Hood. But are the costumes good? Meh, they’re average. Nothing is wrong but nothing is really is amazing.
Mandy Patinkin as Quasimodo
Let’s just get Quasimodo and Frollo out the way. Quasimodo’s look is pretty much stolen from 1939 version. It’s a good Quasimodo look compared to the 1956 version but the Chaney version set a standard for how Quasimodo should look and the 1939 version exceed it, so most versions try to match the 1939 version. This version did and didn’t add anything.
Richard Harris as Frollo
Frollo’s costume……..well…………it’s probably the most interesting costume in the whole adaptation. I don’t mean interesting as good thing though. Frollo’s look in the novel was meant to be severe and austere but this version’s Frollo amps it up. He wears a black cowl robe which is what he wears in the novel but the total baldness just makes him look silly. In my 1997 Frollo post I said he looks like Nosferatu from the 1922 movie and he does. It’s too austere of look to take it seriously.
Salma Hayek as Esmeralda, 1997 Hunchback of Notre Dame
Then we come to Esmeralda’s main costume. It’s a conventional medieval get-up. She wears a chemise with ties at the sleeves to reveal more arms, a corset and a skirt. The color is mostly shades of red tones however their is multiple colors mixed in the skirt and corset. The skirt itself looks like multiple scarfs that were fused to form a skirt. However the skirt is dyed in a vertical pattern and it seems to be a very light fabric. Though this costume is very inauthentic the different colors does help make it not as boring as it could have been.
Salma Hayek as Esmeralda and Edward Atterton as Gringoire
Unfortunately, this costume is made a little silly by the slave bracelet and the shoes. The shoes are forgivable on a practical sense but Esmeralda should be barefoot and somehow I think this costume would have been better sans the footwear. The Slave bracelet however is just silly. Slave Bracelets are bracelets that attract to a ring by a chain. They are based on Indian jewelry. My guess is the idea of her wearing one was to help push her an exotic beauty but the addition of it looks cheap.
Lady Marian in Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves
Esmeraldas’ costume and the one wore by the Phoebus-like guard are very reminiscent of Robin Hood costumes. Esmeralda’s costume with it scarf like skirt is similar to costume wore by Lady Marian. Once I learned that Bloomfeild did both movie my head link these two costumes together. Phoebus-like guard has the same heavy layered and studded armor that was used in Robin Hood and it’s black so you know he bad. However the loose layers in very similar in both films.
Salma Hayek as Esmeralda and Edward Atterton as Gringoire
The costumes could have been boring but some decisions there were made either made them look good or silly. at best these costume are average to ok nothing more or less.
I just want to say, Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves 
Next time; Sets
Notre Dame Set in teh 1997 version of Hunchback
Ariel and Erin on the Beach, The Little Mermaid
People like to think that The Little Mermaid , Ariel, was more than likely traumatized by her wedding night and the goings on of human sex opposed to her “fishy” ways. Well, for those people who think they are oh so clever, I’m going to say that she more than likely was not. I’m not a scientist but I do enjoy studying evolution and Ariel has several features that indicate that Mermaids are mammals and would give birth and have sex and not lay a clutch of eggs.
People claim that mermaids reproduce like fish, in that females lay a clutch of eggs and males fertilized them. However, let’s just look at some traits of Ariel’s that show they are not related to fish and they for wouldn’t reproduces this way. Three traits and two are stupid obvious so we’ll start with the one that people would not think of; Ariel’s fins.
Ariel’s Fin, The Little Mermaid
Ariel’s fins, like all mermaids’s are horizontal much like dolphin’s and whale’s fins. Fish fins are vertical. But what does this mean? This reflects the evolutionary locomotion of the animal. Fish evolved from creatures that moved from side to side and the vertical tail allows for that motion or what is called lateral undulation. Dolphins and whales evolved from land mammals and they adapted an up and down locomotion or dorsoventral undulation. This means that for mermaids to have these fins they would have to evolved from land creatures.
Ariel Disney The Little Mermaid
Then we have the two traits that make it very, very clear, that mermaids are mammals; Mermaids has breasts and Bellybuttons. These two traits make it so clear that Mermaids give birth to live young that I’m not sure where the Fish egg idea came from, probably from that Futurama episode. However belly buttons, or navel, are where the umbilical cord is attached. All placental mammals have a navels. Breasts are mammary glands found on the upper torso of primates. The purpose of which is to feed milk to offspring. This means that Mermaids are mammals who nurse their young and navels indicate that they would get pregnant.
Ariel making icky face
I think the only thing Ariel might have been weirded out by would that Eric doesn’t keep his genitalia inside his body like marine mammals.
Follow thehunchblog