Why have I waited so long between movies when not on vacation? Well, mainly, I've kinda painted myself into a corner by insisting on Halloween-type movies every October. Now that Netflix has ceased disc delivery, I find their streaming horror and pseudo-horror options lacking. Disney+ is no better for that. In desperation, I resorted to a faintly gothic offering.
In medieval Paris, Minister of Justice Claude Frollo (Tony Jay) regularly assumes the worst about the Roma, consistently called by the slur "Gypsies" in this picture. He kills one at the Notre Dame Cathedral, only to find that she was carrying not contraband but a deformed baby. The archdeacon (David Ogden Stiers) tells him to raise the child as penance. Frollo keeps the boy in the cathedral bell tower, dubbing him Quasimodo and self-identifying as his master. After 20 years, Quasimodo (now voiced by Tom Hulce) finally ventures below during the Feast of Fools, when lots of people try to look freaky anyway. There he meets Esmeralda (Demi Moore), a Roma dancer who's not nearly as bad as he was led to believe. Quasimodo isn't the only one to fall for her, but Frollo has a twisted way to show it....
I hesitated to add the "fantasy" label. Despite Frollo's claims of Romani witchcraft, the only impossible aspect concerns the living gargoyles (Jason Alexander, Charles Kimbrough, and Mary Wickes), and their entire contributions besides comic relief are to try to talk confidence into Quasimodo and help him defend the cathedral at the climax. No other human hears their voices or acknowledges their movement, so I'm not entirely sure they live outside of his imagination. They certainly weren't part of the Victor Hugo novel or either prior adaptation I've seen (1923 and 1939).
A friend of mine said he'd never forgive Disney for butchering the novel so much, not least for turning Captain Phoebus (Kevin Kline) into a good guy. In fairness, this is pretty much par for the course. I'd say it's only so much further off than the '39 version. At any rate, the original story would not do for a family feature.
It amuses me that the upper left corner on Disney+ warns only of brief smoking, since that pipe is the least of my concerns. This level of violence would not garner a G anymore. Frollo may be the most destructive Disney animated villain this side of Shan Yu, and he aptly gets one of the most horrific fates. He also ensures more uses of "hell" and "damnation" than in any other Disney animation. And an older woman I know was disturbed at the sexiness of Esmeralda, more for her moves (not innocent enough for a "princess") than skin exposure. I'm inclined to give that last part a pass, because it explains all her admirers, not to mention Frollo's fear for his own soul.
Nowadays, Disney would probably be most embarrassed by the overt Christian elements, more prevalent than in Fantasia or Robin Hood. Lest you think that Frollo's self-righteous cruelty makes the church look bad (he's the archdeacon in the novel), all the other religious folk have a decent conscience. Esmeralda even sings a prayerful number.
What about political incorrectness, you ask? Well, putting the slurs aside, the Roma certainly earn our sympathy. I'm a little concerned that Quasimodo, presumably one of them, is fair-skinned and red-haired. Of course, the marketing execs wouldn't let him be too terribly ugly, so he gets a far more handsome voice, especially for singing, than Charles Laughton gave him. I might as well tell you that Esmeralda prefers Phoebus in the end, however shallow their romantic journey, which limits the effect of the anti-prejudice message. But trust me: This is the happiest ending Quasimodo ever gets.
If I have a favorite character, it's Frollo. He's quick to ascribe evil to others but rarely notices it in himself, and when he does, he denies culpability and is just as likely to do worse as better. No doubt you can think of people like that, but few do so thorough a job of showing just how rotten you can get as a result. To me, this makes a more compelling villain than the usual power grabbers.
I'd hardly call the gestalt out of place in the Disney canon. The theme of an abusive parental figure persuading the protagonist never to leave the tower set the stage for Tangled, and Quasimodo's brawn and agility in climbing, jumping, and swinging probably paved the way for the 1999 Tarzan. More importantly, there's a lot of the high quality we had come to expect in graphics, music, cinematography, and general emotions. Oh, and there's a cute goat following Esmeralda around.
Only in the second half did I see a compelling reason for THoND to be treated as something of a misfire. The humor was always hit and miss, but it feels especially wrong in the context of the darkest period. The gargoyles don't seem to realize that buildings on fire are serious business. Guess that comes of their stone composition. Another friend of mine did touch on that when he called the film Disney's biggest waste of potential.
I'm glad I watched, but I'm also kind of glad I waited. This movie is almost great. I'm not sure what could have been done to push it the rest of the way.
No comments:
Post a Comment