Get More:
Movie Trailers, Movies Blog
MTV’s Movie Blog back in May had an interview with Josh Brolin regarding the the rumors around the new Hunchback movie. According to Brolin, he woke up one fine day and decided he wanted to make a Hunchback movie. He also says that Tim Burton will be involved in some form and the script is brilliant. Though what actor would diss their own vanity project by saying the script is a piece of crap? And this is a vanity project for Brolin since he is putting himself in the role of Quasimodo, a role that fine actors have been playing since the 20s.
Now from the book’s perspective Brolin, who is in his 40s is way too old to play Quasimodo but from a film history perspective he is not. Of the actors who have played Quasimodo in films since 1923 the average age of the them is 42. So while I can’t really disparage Brolin for playing a character 20 year younger than himself, I do blame the film industry as a whole for this warp-ness especially when actress playing Esmeralda that have less of an age gap are deem too old.
Another issue I have is that Brolin mentions a few times (in the space of a minute and a half) how fun the movie will be. Hunchback has a connotation for being dark and depressing and while it’s true that most of the character die in the book the films are never as bleak. The way Brolin makes it known that this movie will be “jazzy” makes it seem like he feels that all the movies are depressing and never fun. However the last two major movie versions have been a Disney movie and a modern-retelling that was a parody. The world doesn’t really need a another fun version of Hunchback. Making it fun is a marketing ploy to get people to watch the movie since people in general don’t like sad movies. So making the Hunchback of Notre Dame (a book people know very little about other than it’s “depressing”) fun is a way to make money off of the book. Hollywood doesn’t have the balls to make a version of the movie that keeps in line with the book.
This movie is also going to focus on Gringoire, so it’s like the 1939 version and the 1997 version where Gringoire is Esmeralda’s major love interest. While I it find this interesting I also think it’s a major cop-out out. He is a safe character to follow as he not controversial or deep .
All that being said the prospect of new Hunchback movie is exciting and I can’t wait to see how it the film takes shape but my exceptions are low.
Additional nites.
Ages of Actors who have played Quasimodo in films (ages may not be exact)
Chaney born 1883 – 40 in 1923
Laughton born 1899 – 40 in 1939
Quinn born 1915 – 41 in 1956
Hopkins born in 1937 – 45 in 1982
Hulce born in 1953- 43 in 1996
Patinkin born in 1952 – 45 in 1997
Timsit born in 1959 – 40 in 1999
Brolin born 1968 – will be 45 in 2013
The average age is 42 and the character is 20 that a 22 year different between the actors and the actual character.
Follow thehunchblogA Fan Music Video using Disney’s Hunchback with the Italian version of Belle (Bella) from Notre Dame de Paris. Singers (in order) Giò Di Tonno (Quasimodo), Vittorio Matteucci (Frollo), Grazino Galatone (Febo/Phoebus)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y3AiK1vLJ3o
Follow thehunchblogHe maybe ugly as sin but remember ladies, Quasimodo is a Frenchmen so looks don’t matter. Not when he’s armed with that Beret, that Mustache, those Baguettes and that Red Wine. No woman can resist the charms of a Frenchmen even the ugly ones.
Follow thehunchblogToday’s Fan-art is by Pelycosaur24. It’s very silly and very true, the sequel is pure late medieval torture.
http://pelycosaur24.deviantart.com/#/d5abttw
Follow thehunchblogPaw is a reviewer for musicals on That Guy with the Glasses. The show is called Music Movies. Disney’s The Hunchback of Notre Dame has been on the Dartboard (his method of selection) for a while and he finally got to it so let’s take a look at his review.
Right off bat Paw calls into question what Disney was thinking in making the movie. He then makes a joke about how much architecture is a theme in the book. I think that he is poking fun at the chapter in Hunchback that goes through long description of Notre Dame but that chapter is nothing compare to the long chapter that just about Paris.
Review-wise Paw doesn’t really add anything new. He loves Hellfire, Bells of Notre dame and the overall score. He hates the gargoyles and their song. So no surprises there. He also brings up the issue of tone.
This is the third review I have looked that remarks on the changing tone of the film. This is making me question why I don’t have an issue with it. I mean if we look at the novel the scene where Phoebus gets stab a lot of humor leading up to it but judging this movie on it’s own merits I personally don’t see the big deal. I mean this movie isn’t really that dark and nor is the book. Yes, for a Disney movie, yes it is but Disney movies have anyways had shifting tones. Perhaps I’m desensitized to changing tones as result of years of watching anime and Bollywood movies where tones change often.
My biggest issue with Paw’s review is the lack of fact-checking just to set up a few jokes. The first one he makes wasn’t for a joke set-up. He mentions that there have been two musical versions of Hunchback but only were performed in Europe. I’m guessing he means Notre Dame de Paris and Der Glockner von Notre Dame. However if he did mean those two or at least Notre Dame de Paris than he is wrong about Notre Dame de Paris has only been performed in Europe. Notre Dame de Paris was performed in Las Vegas and Canada in 1999 a year before the London cast and two years before the Italian version.
Another fact he didn’t check was claiming that Someday was meant to be an upbeat Pop song from its’ conception. This means that he didn’t look at the demo reel of Heidi Mollenhaur singing. Now I can forgive him not looking at this as it’s not in the film but I mean Disney taking a song from the film and making into a cheesy Pop song for the credits is nothing new but for him to make the assumption that Someday was conceived as a Pop song is an oversight.
Now it seems that he read the book at some point or at least read a summary but there one little quip he makes that bugs me. He said that at the point in the film during the first part of Out There i.e. Frollo’s part, that at the same point in the “book proper” Hugo was still describing Notre Dame. Well first since this scene doesn’t exist in the book that a stupid joke but let’s give this joke more a chance. Since he correlates this part to the “book proper” let’s do that too. Since this scene is before the Feast of Fool that would mean Hugo had to make his description of Notre Dame prior to that in order for Paw’s accretion to be correct. In the “book proper” the core of the descriptions of Notre Dame occur after Feast of Fools. So this quip about the book’s preoccupation with architecture doesn’t work.
I do give Paw credit, the review is entertaining and well-thought albeit his fact checking is not the greatest. I also give him props for counting how many times the Hellfire motif was used in the film. The correct answer is 14 times.
Click here to watch Paw’s review.
Follow thehunchblogFor today’s Horoscope we’re going to consultant the all knowing score from the Disney movie. And the horoscope is “To reveal what you’ve found.” How profound indeed, so beware what you find today.
Follow thehunchblogBesides Quaismodo’s make-up and Lon Chaney is there anything else that this movie has going for it? Yes, yes there is, the Sets. The sets are well done.
The sets for the 1923 version of the Hunchback were built on the back-lot of universal. To create the cathedral they built the set up to the row of statues. The upper portions of Notre Dame in the long shots were the results of a floating miniature. A floating miniature means that they would hang the model in front on the camera to force the miniature to match up with the set to look like a whole. It’s a trick of the camera that isn’t used to much these days. But the result look seamless.
The production also used age old film tricks like matte painting to give the sets more depth. In the picture above, everything beyond the chest is a painting
Also strategic positioning of extras helped to give the sets more scale.
According to the DVD commentary, the Notre Dame set was used at the end of Chaney’s Phantom of the Opera. Notice how you don’t seen the upper portion of the church that was filled in bu the floating miniature
So the set are great but does that couple by Chaney, his make-up and one of my favorite Esmerladas make this a Good movie?
Find out Next time
Follow thehunchblogA New Product from the Hunchstore. Now you can get stamps with your favorite deformed bell-ringing Hunchback; Quasimodo.
Follow thehunchblogThis delightful video was made by Amanda G. and it’s a summary of the novel in 4 minutes. Enjoy
Thanks to Amanda G. for letting me post this
Follow thehunchblog