Salma Hayek as Esmeralda, 1997 Hunchback of Notre Dame, picture image

Salma Hayek as Esmeralda, 1997 Hunchback of Notre Dame

The costumes in the 1997 version of the Hunchback were done by John Bloomfield. Bloomfield’s credits include Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves and Waterworld, two movies not known for their costumes. Of the two movies, Robin Hood is more similar in style and design to Hunchback’s costume and two costumes show this more than others.

Edward Atterton as Gringoire, 1997 The Hunchback picture image

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, 1997 The Hunchback picture image

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, 1997 The Hunchback picture image

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

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, 1997 Hunchback of Notre Dame picture image

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 picture image

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, 1997 The Hunchback picture image

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 is like a guilty pleasure of mine, I loved this movie as kid.

Next time; Sets

Sets 1997 Hunchback of Notre Dame picture image

Notre Dame Set in teh 1997 version of Hunchback

Richard Harris as Frollo, 1997 The Hunchback picture harris

Richard Harris as Frollo, yells No!

The 1997 Hunchback was directed Peter Medak. Medak is no stranger to TV movie directing and TV directing in general. The directing in this adaptation is mixture of weird angle frames and total utilitarian shot-verse-shots.

Salma Hayek as Esmeralda, 1997 The Hunchback picture image

Salma Hayek as Esmeralda,

The competing style of the artistic angled frames and the shot-verse-shots makes for an interesting visual style and by that I mean silly. It’s almost like Medak didn’t know what he wanted when composing the frames and the shots. He shot conversational scenes very utilitarian for efficacy and then he got bored and decided to tilt the camera for visual interest. But the weird competing approaches to directing style just make this version look very awkward. I suppose the awkward directing style is a compliment to the awkward writing choices, so at least it’s consistent.

Next Time – Costumes

Salma Hayek as Esmeralda, 1997 Hunchback of Notre Dame, picture image

Salma Hayek as Esmeralda, 1997 Hunchback of Notre Dame

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!

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

Jim Dale as Clopin , 1997 The Hunchback picture image

Jim Dale as Clopin

The Clopin in the 1997 version of The Hunchback is very reminiscent of the Disney version. He is pragmatic and slightly cruel in his ruling approach but he is fun.

 

Jim Dale as Clopin , 1997 The Hunchback picture image

Jim Dale as Clopin

 

This Clopin is fairly standard as far of what is asked of Clopin. He is leader of the Court of Miracles and is cruel to outsiders except for Quasimodo. He uses Esmeralda for distractions but he also enjoy her dancing  over listening to Gringoire. Overall he is one of the more jovial Clopins.

 

Jim Dale as Clopin , 1997 The Hunchback picture image

Jim Dale as Clopin

Unlike other Clopins he doesn’t lead the attack to save Esmeralda. This is because the climax was changed and the assault of Notre Dame follows Quasimodo saving Esmeralda in the middle of the film.   Because he is not involved in attack on Notre Dame, he lives. He and Gringoire do lead a fairly peaceful protest to save Esmeralda and he gives a speech to Nobel’s king in her defense. Other than that he is pretty by the book

 

Jim Dale as Clopin , 1997 The Hunchback picture image

Jim Dale as Clopin

 

Is this a great memorable Clopin? No, can’t say he is.  Is it an identifiable and characteristic Clopin? Yes and that is really all one can really ask for in  an a Hunchback movie version.

Next time – Phoebus….. wait he’s not this movie…is he?

Benedick Blythe as Phoebus, 1997 The Hunchback picture image

Benedick Blythe as Phoebus

Edward Atterton as Gringoire, 1997 The Hunchback picture image

Edward Atterton as Gringoire

Like so many, many other Gringoires, the 1997 version of The Hunchback falls into the romantic guy category. However, unlike other Gringoires he doesn’t do anything, he’s kind of  just there to be Esmeralda’s love interest.

 

Edward Atterton as Gringoire, 1997 The Hunchback picture image

Edward Atterton as Gringoire

 

Other Gringoires try and help save Esmeralda by means of the written word or a speech. In this version Quasimodo does the leg work and Gringoire just helps out in passing out Quasimodo’s pamphlet, leading the riot and getting the noose of Esmeralda’s neck.

 

Edward as Gringoire, 1997 The Hunchback picture image

Edward as Gringoire

One could argue that Gringoire doesn’t do that much in the book but he does have a personality here is doesn’t really.

 

Edward Atterton as Gringoire, 1997 The Hunchback picture image

Edward Atterton as Gringoire

I think he is sincere in his affections for Esmeralda but this Gringoire isn’t really allowed to do much except be nice and  follow Quasimodo’s plan.

 

Next time – Clopin

Jim Dale as Clopin , 1997 The Hunchback picture image

Jim Dale as Clopin

 

Richard Harris as Frollo, 1997 The Hunchback  picture image

Richard Harris as Frollo

 

The Frollo in the 1997 version of Hunchback is odd to say the least. He is a weird mash of the 1939 version’s obsession with fear of the modernity and vampire-monk. Really it’s hard to get over the look of him but that is the least of his problems.

Richard Harris as Frollo, 1997 The Hunchback  picture image

Richard Harris as Frollo

 

Let’s start with the root of Frollo, his obsession and this is the bad part of this depiction. Frollo in this version is struggling with getting rid of printing presses to keep the ease of access on acquiring knowledge down. Frollo is accused of trying to suppress knowledge but he loves knowledge. His feeling is that if knowledge is easy to get it, it cheapens it, so down with printed books. The one he is struggling against is the king’s minister whom Frollo kills instead of Phoebus.  Frollo’s obsession for Esmeralda seem to  spawn from his inability to get the king of his side about the printing press.

Richard Harris as Frollo, 1997 The Hunchback  picture image

Richard Harris as Frollo

 

Frollo’s obsession is split and this and this is the problem. Frollo in this version is way more into the printing press than getting Esmeralda. He only seem to press the issue with Esmeralda because his resolve is being tested and he  is weak. This robs everything from Frollo’s drama.  It not interesting to watch this split obsession, Frollo obsession should be all consuming. Perhaps weakness begets weakness but Frollo’s character suffers a lot for it. His obsession for Esmeralda feels like an afterthought  than a major plot point.

 

Richard Harris as Frollo, 1997 The Hunchback  picture image

Richard Harris as Frollo

 

I think Richard Harris does a fair job with the material but any passion or energy he could have given to Frollo is not there. It’s not like not there but the most I show was him taking baout knowledge. I think i idea was to keep Frollo repressed with Esmeralda but when he says he was mad and crazy for for her but we never seem those emotion it cheapens the performance, the dialogue and the story.

 

Richard Harris as Frollo, 1997 The Hunchback  picture image

Richard Harris as Frollo

 

Then we have his looks. This Frollo is very different, he looks like Nosferatu. It’s very austere even for Frollo. The look  is really distracting because he is suppose to look old, he is not suppose to look like a vampire from 1922.

Richard Harris as Frollo, 1997 The Hunchback  picture image

Richard Harris as Frollo

 

I know Richard Harris was a good actor and Frollo should be a great character to play but this depiction of Frollo has passion for the wrong aspect and the character is a confused mess.

Next Time Gringoire

Edward Atterton as Gringoire, 1997 The Hunchback picture image

Edward Atterton as Gringoire

Mandy Patinkin as Quasimodo, 1997 The Hunchback picture image

Mandy Patinkin as Quasimodo

The 1997 version of Quasimodo is very much a throwback to Charles Laughton’s depiction in the 1939 version. There are some differences to the character but the focus of this Quasimodo is very much sympathetic and heavy on the pathos.

Mandy Patinkin as Quasimodo, 1997 The Hunchback picture image

Mandy Patinkin as Quasimodo

Quasimodo in this version is softer and sweeter than in the past versions. There is no darkness to him, even Disney Quasimodo was darker than this version. He is the only Quasimodo not to be a part of the kidnap attempt instead was trying to help. He is also the only Quasimodo to be an intellectual, having read every book in the Notre Dame’s library. His sad sweetness mingled with his intelligence makes him likable.

Mandy Patinkin as Quasimodo, 1997 The Hunchback picture image

Mandy Patinkin as Quasimodo

Mandy Patinkin also does a great job at portraying Quasimodo. He gives a great physical performance as well as an emotional one. In particular I love his walk.

Mandy Patinkin as Quasimodo, 1997 The Hunchback picture image

Mandy Patinkin as Quasimodo

Despite his likeability, he’s little boring. He’s too generically nice. If he had an edge or had arc it would have made him interesting but in taking way him kidnapping Esmeralda it ruins the pillory scene and robs Quasimodo of his arc of trusting Frollo 100%.

Mandy Patinkin as Quasimodo, 1997 The Hunchback picture image

Mandy Patinkin as Quasimodo,

This Quasimodo could have been great, the performance was great but the interest of the character was made void but him being too nice and sweet.

Next time; Frollo

Richard Harris as Frollo, 1997 The Hunchback picture image

Richard Harris as Frollo

Salma Hayek as Esmeralda, 1997 The Hunchback picture image

Salma Hayek as Esmeralda,

I do not hate Salma Hayek, I loved her in Frida, and I think she is a decent to good actress. The problem with Hayek is she is often typecast as the feisty independent women and because of that it’s very hard to separate Hayek from her depiction of Esmeralda.

Salma Hayek as Esmeralda and Edward Atterton as Gringoire, 1997 The Hunchback picture image

Salma Hayek as Esmeralda and Edward Atterton as Gringoire

Esmeralda in the 1997 version is dull. She is nice, sexy, caring and likes her independence but there is not a lot to her. Generally, most Esmeraldas have little to work with other than being kind and beautiful.

Salma Hayek as Esmeralda, 1997 The Hunchback picture image

Salma Hayek as Esmeralda

Hayek’s Esmeralda does get a bit of social justice but it comes from guilt over Quasimodo getting punished because of her, which is a bit of an issue. In this version, Esmeralda is only briefly put off by Quasimodo’s looks and Quasimodo does not try to kidnap her, in fact he tries to help and Esmeralda know this. When Esmeralda tries to help Quasimodo by appealing to the king for his release, her giving him water is like a consolation to make it up to him. It’s not that she was moved by a whim. It lacks the sweetness that has in other versions where Esmeralda is clearly the one who the wrong was done to.

Salma Hayek as Esmeralda, 1997 The Hunchback picture image

Salma Hayek as Esmeralda

By all counts Hayek is a really good casting choice. Hayek has really good exotic look which for an Esmeralda who is a full-Romani is really good. She was on the upper edge of being a little too old to play Esmeralda but the film doesn’t really talk about her youth or naivety too much so it’s not a big issue.

Salma Hayek as Esmeralda, 1997 The Hunchback picture image

Salma Hayek as Esmeralda,

Really, she should have been the perfect Esmeralda. her performance is not her fault as she had little to work with. She has no arc and has nothing to do outside of being nice and dancing suggestively.

Next Time Quasimodo

Mandy Patinkin as Quasimodo, The Hunchback 1997 picture image

Mandy Patinkin as Quasimodo

Salma Hayek as Esmeralda, 1997 The Hunchback picture image

Salma Hayek as Esmeralda,

The 1997 version of The Hunchback is in someways is very faithful to the book but in more ways it diverges so much. Overall, it has a great mood that feels like the original book. It knows when to be bright and knows when to be somber. But in what ways does the plot massively diverge, oh let me count the ways.

 

Richard Harris as Frollo and the Printing Press, 1997 The Hunchback  picture image

Richard Harris as Frollo and the Printing Press

First, the big one, The Printing Press. The Printing  Press was briefly discussed in the novel and was a major subplot in the 1939 version but the in 1997 version, it’s a big part of the plot, in fact it’s the first thing Frollo does. In the opening scene, Frollo commandeers a Printing Press and then find baby Quasimodo.

 

Salma Hayek as Esmeralda, 1997 The Hunchback picture image

Salma Hayek as Esmeralda,

The Printing Press is also a big part in Esmeralda’s trial. Since Phoebus is not in this, he can’t get stab instead Frollo is at odds with a minster who wants to legalizes the printing press. Frollo isn’t against knowledge, he is against keeping it from being easy because if it easy to attain it’s worthless. So Frollo is at odds with this minster and his obsession for Esmeralda. After his run in with minster and getting turned down by the King, Frollo seeks out Esmeralda and confesses his obsession to her. She runs off but drops her knife which Frollo then uses to kill the minister and Esmeralda is blamed.

Mandy Patinkin as Quasimodo and Salma Hayek as Esmeralda, 1997 The Hunchback

Mandy Patinkin as Quasimodo and Salma Hayek as Esmeralda, 1997 The Hunchback

Quasimodo also uses the old commandeer Printing Press to make a pamphlet to help free Esmeralda which he gives to Gringoire to distribute. On the some note Quasimodo in this version love learning and books.

 

Salma Hayek as Esmeralda and Edward as Gringoire, 1997 The Hunchback picture image

Salma Hayek as Esmeralda and Edward Atterton as Gringoire

Speaking of Gringoire and Esmeralda, unlike other versions where if the fall in love it’s over time usually at the point where Esmeralda gets in trouble. In this version it’s pretty quick.  She kisses him the scene after they get married. Not a big change just worth a mention.

 

Mandy Patinkin as Quasimodo and Richard harris as Frollo, 1997 The Hunchback picture image

Mandy Patinkin as Quasimodo and Richard Harris as Frollo

A big change  that is worth mentioning is the attack on Notre Dame and and the climax. Much like the Disney movie the attack on Notre Dame occurs right after Quasimodo saves Esmeralda. Unlike the Disney movie it’s not at the end but like novel in the middle. So the climax is Quasimodo goes to the court of Miracles to give Gringoire the pamphlets and to get Djali for Esmeralda. He returns and finds Esmeralda gone. It turns out Frollo handed her back to executioner and she is going to be hanged. Frollo tells Quasimodo everything and as Esmeralda is about to be hanged the Court of Miracle show up and saves her. Quasimodo threaten to throw Frollo off Notre Dame until he confess before all of Paris that he is murder. As Frollo and Quasimodo walk off, Esmeralda runs into the Cathedral, Frollo in a rage tries to stab her but stabs Quasimodo by accident. In their fight they go over the edge of Notre Dame and Frollo dies. Quasimodo hangs on and Esmeralda and Gringoire save him from the ledge but dies of his wounds under his bells.

 

Richard Harris as Frollo hiring thugs, 1997 The Hunchback picture images

Richard Harris as Frollo hiring thugs

Another big change is Frollo doesn’t send Quasimodo to capture Esmeralda. Frollo hires some thugs and Quasimodo follows and tries to help but gets arrested.

A Gargoyle with molten Lead,1997 The Hunchback picture image

A Gargoyle with molten Lead

 

I won’t pretend that these big changes are not weird. It was practically jarring to see the attack on Notre Dame scene in the middle of the story. It really loses the drama. And Quasimodo not trying to capture Frollo lacks a punch too. The version makes up for these it other areas but still it’s a weird.

 

Next time Esmeralda

Salma Hayek as Esmeralda, 1997 The Hunchback picture image

Salma Hayek as Esmeralda