On the other side of the Disney branding spectrum, we have the darker and less well known line of products called the Villain line. Unlike the Princess Line which doesn’t feature heroines based on a “royal” title this line is said to encompass all the villains but really only focuses on a few. Those being; The Evil Queen from Snow White, Maleficent from Sleeping Beauty, The Queen of Hearts from Alice in Wonderland, Cruella from 101 Dalmatian, Captain Hook from Peter Pan, Ursula from The Little Mermaid, Jafar from Aladdin and recently Mother Gothel from Tangled. Other villains like Scar, Gaston, Dr.Facilier, Hades and the Cheshire Cat filter in on products occasionally. Though I would argue that the Cheshire Cat is not villain but a Chaotic Neutral.
So here is the big question, Where is Frollo? He is considered to be one of the great Disney villains because of his complexity. As far as I can tell he might be hiding in the products like in the Disney Vile Villains Playing Cards or in the Disney Legendary Villains Personal Checks
, I do know he was in the Disney’s Mix and Match Villains Book
, I owned it as a child. But as far as him being an advertised villain, he is not and he doesn’t have many his own featured products.
But why isn’t Frollo a key villain in this line? Is it because Hunchback was super unpopular? Well that doesn’t help but it’s not like Hades was attach to a popular movie and was Pater Pan that popular that Hook gets a major spotlight? On the Disney Villain Monopoly there are three unknown Disney villains featured, Pete who was antagonist in the Micky Mouse universe, the Big Bad Wolf who was another antagonist from the older Disney shorts and Kaa from Jungle book who wasn’t even the major villain, Shere Khan holds that roles.
I don’t think it so much that Frollo is from an unpopular movie, I think it’s because as a villain he is not fun. Don’t get me wrong he’s a great villain, he just never revels in his evil schemes the same way the others do, in fact he’s thinks he the good pure one. So he is not the logical choice as the one of line’s front runners who love and enjoy their machinations. And if this is indeed the case, it doesn’t really bother me that Frollo isn’t prominent, he just not the funny goofy charming villain that this line seems to love. And that’s ok.
So what products does villain line offer? Well, in many ways it’s not very different from the Princess Line. It has with games like Monopoly, fashion dolls and makeup, lots of make-up. You can get make-up kits for Maleficent
, Evil Queen
, Ursula,
and Cruella De Ville. It’s just aimed for older girls
And like the Princess line, the villains have their fair share of weird products like a Cruella stapler and yes even a Disney Villains Cupcake Kit
.
In many ways the Villain line is just like the princess line except the products are black, red and purple instead pastels and pinks and it carter to older more jaded girls who are not quite ready Hot Topic.
Watches are great gift to give as holiday present as they are fun, fashionable and useful. But What watches reflect the Hunchback characters sense of style? I went through the watches to find the best watches that fit the characters. I found an option for both men and women watches. So either buy one for someone in your life who fits the style of a character or ask for one as gift (be sure to the person buying it for to click the link on the Hunchblog ^_~), and above all else, have fun looking.
ESMERALDA
Esmeralda’s style is youthful, charming and exuberant.
For the Ladies
Invicta Women’s Pro Diver Collection 18k Gold-Plated Watch
For the Guys
Lucien Piccard Men’s Excalibur Black Textured Dial Gold Ion-Plated Stainless Steel Watch
QUASIMODO
Quasimodo’s style is down to earth, humble, and unique.
For the Ladies
Anne Klein Women’s Gold-Tone Tortoise Shell Plastic Bracelet
For the Guys
Bulova Men’s Automatic Mechanical Brown Leather Strap Dial Watch
FROLLO
Frollo’s style is dark and refined with an edge.
For the Ladies

Lucien Piccard Women’s Veleta Black Mother-Of-Pearl Dial Swarovski Crystal Accents Black Leather Strap Watch
For the Guys
Bulova Men’s Precisionist Leather Strap Watch
PHOEBUS
Phoebus’s style is bright, simple and militaristic
For the Ladies
Timex Women’s Ameritus Gold-Tone Stainless Steel Mesh Bracelet Dress Watch
For the Guys
Bulova Men’s Dress Classic Goldtone Watch
GRINGOIRE
Gringoire’s style is bold with a flair for the dramatics.
For the Ladies
Swatch Women’s Quartz Rainbow Dial Plastic Watch
(This watch looks Gringoire’s pants in Notre Dame de Paris )
For the Guys

Stuhrling Original Men’s Classic Cuvette SD 23k Yellow Gold-Plated Stainless Steel and Brown Leather Strap Watch
CLOPIN
Clopin’s style is bold and edgy
For the Ladies (this is unisex)
ESQ Movado Unisex Round Stainless Steel Watch
For the Guys
Kenneth Cole New York Men’s Classic Grey Dial Roman Numeral Detail Strap Watch
FLEUR DE LYS
Fleur de Lys’ style is classic, delicate and elegant.
For the Ladies
Anne Klein Women’s Swarovski Crystal Elements Silver-Tone Bangle Watch
For the Guys
Citizen Men’s A Eco-Drive Axiom Watch
DJALI
Djali’s style is fun and bold
For the Ladies
Invicta Women’s Angel Collection Multi-Function Rose Gold Plated White Rubber Watch
For the Guys
Bulova Men’s Classic Two-Tone Tank Watch
SISTER GUDULE
Sister Gudule’s style is humble and simple
For the Ladies
Michael Kors Runway Slim Rose Vachetta Women’s Watch
For the Guys
Citizen Men’s “Eco-Drive” Gold-Tone Stainless Steel and Leather Strap Watch
JEHAN
Jehan’s style is bold, youthful and carefree.
For the Ladies
MULCO Women’s Analog Chronograph Swiss Watch
For the Guys
Stuhrling Original Men’s Triumph Classic Swiss Quartz Multifunction Gold Tone Watch
Tomorrow is Halloween. A day of candy, costumes and feeling mildly scared in a fun way. But what would our dear Hunchback characters wear as their costumes?
Quasimodo – Phantom of the Opera (Another deformed French but considered sexy by many)
Frollo – Darth Vader (he love wearing black and has a flair for dramatics)
Esmeralda – Flapper
Phoebus – Chick Magnet
Gringoire – Edgar Allan Poe
Clopin – Captain Jack Sparrow
Fleur de Lys – A Wicked Queen
Jehan – Beer Keg
Sister Gudule – Kangaroo (she wants to keep her baby close to her)
Djali – Lady Gaga (would need to be modified for a Goat)
This is a painting by Francisco Goya. It’s called “Two Old Men Eating Soup.” It’s one of Goya’s “Black Paintings” which is a series of paintings Goya painted between 1819 and 1823 while he lived at Quinta del Sordo (The House of the Deaf Man). It was originally painted on an interior wall of the house.
It’s a very unsettling painting but doesn’t it kind of remind you of Frollo and Quasimodo. Like Frollo is teaching Quasimodo about soup. I doubt that this painting and novel have any connection to each other, it’s just that figure on the right looks like it could be a dead-ringer for Quasimodo and with a second old man that means Frollo.
It’s a creepy painting isn’t it?
While the prospect of an English movie version of Notre Dame de Paris is probably the last thing Hollywood would ever do, it’s still fun to contemplate who should be cast in a role for it. Obviously for a musical you need actors who can sing and act. So who would make a good Frollo?
I think David Bowie would make a great Frollo. First off, he can sing and he has a lot of theatrically to his voice which is necessary for Frollo. Second, he can act.
Bowie is most well known for his role as Jareth the Goblin King in Jim Henson’s Labyrinth. Jareth on the surface isn’t the most complex role but there is a lot shades of complexity which Bowie communicates very well.
He did play a more dramatic and complex role in Merry Christmas Mr. Lawrence . In that he plays Maj. Jack ‘Strafer’ Celliers. The film is about the relationship between four men in a Japanese prisoner of war camp during World War II. Bowie’s character is rebellious and he harbors a secret that torments him (fun hint, it involves a Hunchback).
David Bowie also has a good angler look for Frollo. He just seems to be an all round great choice for the role.
The 1982 version is a really good depiction of Frollo but it’s lacking in a few areas of his characters. This is one of the few film versions where Frollo is a priest however he doesn’t practice alchemy at all. Instead he’s a pretty by the book religious sort, spouting God when ever he can. But he starts off well, he adopts Quasimodo as an act of charity and he seems godly and pious which is great counter-point to his downfall later (not much later mind you ^_~ ).
However, the way this movie handles his relationship with Esmeralda is weird. First off, Frollo never sees Esmeralda dancing. I’m going to repeat that, Frollo never sees Esmeralda dancing. That is a HUGE oversight. Her free-spirited dancing and radiance is what captured him. Instead he sees her being arrested for dancing and is enchanted. It’s not too far-off but it’s just wrong for both characters. Although I will get more into Esmeralda and her “dancing” when we get to her.
Frollo is also more forceful towards her. When Frollo is a judge this force makes a level of sense but as Priest the approach-avoid conflict should be part of this dynamic with Esmeralda. In this version he lets her off-the-hook for dancing, which is apparently a no-no. And the when she is arrested again she is brought to him for his consent to take her to Bastille (I don’t know why this would happen). However he offers her sanctuary and she goes along with it. He brings her to a room where he makes attempt for sex. She runs off and Quasimodo tries to bring her back. So in the course of a few hours Frollo goes though all the moments that in the books took him months of suffering to reach.
Also he tries to buy Esmeralda from Gringoire for 40 gold crowns. I’m not sure how much that would be today because to my understanding a crown is an English silver coin. But it probably was a sizable amount. However Frollo offering to buy is quite silly but at least the scene is alluded to again when Gringoire is trying to get Frollo to help him save Esmeralda so I overlook the absurdity of then scene.
Let’s talk about his looks. Derek Jacobi makes a great Frollo but that wig, that wig makes him look like a dork. Jacobi’s Frollo may have the most hair of any Frollo, which considering the character is bald with tuffs of hair isn’t a good thing. It’s just 100% dork salad bowl cut. Also he doesn’t have that angular austere look that Frollo should have.
However, despite all that this version tweaks and weirdness, there is jail scene where Frollo bares his soul to her. Is it perfect? No, the scene has its flaws and is not as powerful as the book. But its there and that is more than most of the other versions have.
All in all the 82 version of Frollo is commendable. It didn’t get all the facets of his complex character but it tries and does fine job communicating it. I think the credit has to given to Jacobi for his portrayal because he really works to sell this Frollo. So it’s an almost a fantastic depiction but not quite.
Next 1982 Review Post; Esmeralda
Pretty much the 1982 version follows the 1939 model of how to tell this story. However the 1982 version doesn’t dive into social commentary the same way. The blight of Gypsies is not an issue and Esmeralda doesn’t concern herself social inequality. Esmeralda’s main concerns are not getting arrested, marrying Phoebus and keeping Frollo off of her.
Frollo is also different than his 1939 incarnation. For one thing, in the 1982 version he is a priest and has no younger brother. Also he is a little more forward, instead of staring at her he basically tries to get with Esmeralda in the first 20 minutes. He went right to lust. But this version has a decent jail scene so point in its favor. Although I would point out that having Frollo bring Esmeralda into Notre Dame after she gets arrested for dancing and then trying to seduce her robs a bit from the jail scene when Esmeralda asks why he hates her. Esmeralda in the book was scared of Frollo and Frollo’s interaction with her was very limited to no existent. In this movie he is not really acting hateful toward Esmeralda. He acting confused and desperate but he was acting fairly nice toward till he tried touch her and she ran off. So Esmerald questioning him was tad on the unnecessary side.
Since the social concerns are not presence in this movie Gringoire has little else to do but moon over Esmeralda, although like in 1939 version he and Esmeralda do fall in love and leave together at the end.
Speaking of the end, Quasimodo kills Frollo in self- defense by impaling him on a nail. This…..this ……is not cool movie. While I get that the self-defense angle, impaling Frollo on a nail is A) stupid and anti-climactic and B) having Frollo fall from Notre Dame is a powerful metaphor. My guess the reason why Frollo dies in this manner is the budget but still shame.
Quasimodo is pretty much the same from 1939 version, Hopkins plays him very sympathetic but it works.
Clopin is not fun in this version, He is very conniving. He is not to concern about anything other than survival.
Phoebus is depicted as huge womanizing jerk who is married in this version. Another strange addition to this version is Frollo offering to buy Esmeralda from Gringoire.
This version plays the story out pretty conventionally. It doesn’t make too many big annoying changes to the plot. The changes they make are small and mostly the impact the characters.
So let’s dive deeper into those characters, let’s start with the heart and soul of the movie; Frollo
The 1982 version of The Hunchback of Notre Dame was a US made for TV movie. It was made 4 years after the 1977 version was released the US in 1978. It’s part of the Hallmark Hall of Fame series. It starred Anthony Hopkins and Derek Jacobi as Quasimodo and Frollo. Most of the cast is made up of British actors.
Pretty much this movie plays out like the 1939 version but without King Louis and the modernity angle and the blight the Gypsies in Paris. And it follows the book a bit more than the 1939 version but there a lot differences from.
So, is this good version, an adequate version, or terrible awful version? Let’s Jump in, shall we?
Next 1982 Post – Let’s look at that plot