Perfectly adorable

n my opinion it was a great movie with some interesting elements, even though having some plot holes and the ending probably was just too messy and crammed together, but still fun to watch and not your casual movie that is similar to all other ones.

This movie tries so hard to be funny, yet it falls flat every time. Just another example of recycled ideas repackaged with women in an attempt to appeal to a certain audience.

Strong acting helps the film overcome an uncertain premise and create characters that hold our attention absolutely.

OK, I really don't get what everyone's problem is. This movie is what Disney is all about: cuteness, innocence, and teaching us that our dreams can come true! The first one was so scary, what with Hellfire and that scene where Frollo traps that family in their house and sets it on fire, so this time, now that Frollo has been destroyed, everyone is happy, and Quasimodo is an icon in Paris! And this time, he finds true love, Madellaine, and that certainly lightens the mood after that one part in part one. All in all, it may not have been the superior film like Terminator 2 Judgement Day was, but it's well worth your time if you need cheering up!

The Walt Disney Animation Japanese team takes again (so it seems but I haven't seen Part I) the main characters of the famous dramatic novel by Victor Hugo of the same title and adds some other characters to it namely a circus magician who is also a big thief and also a beauty named Madelleine who is under the domination of Sarousch the magician who owns the circus and practically enslaved by him. Madelleine and Quasimodo, the hunchback start then a romance which is another but much poorer version of the old story of the Beauty and the Beast passing us the message that ugly can be beautiful. The story is far from brilliant and lacks invention and imagination. What saves the movie of being a disaster is the technical part I mean the animation which is done with the usual mastery by the Japanese team but even in that aspect I have seen better. Most surely this is not one of the best movies made at Walt Disney studios.

HUNCHBACK OF NOTRE DAME WAS AMAZING however, the sequel? ehh. It actually wasn't all that bad, I'm surprised at the ratings that basically compare it to horse poop. I'd say its about the same level as the sequel to aladdin. It certainly wasn't as abysmal as the little mermaid 2. That was awful. Anyways, the sequel is cute, the songs are okay leaning more towards bad, but the plot is actually original, seeing as that most Disney sequel plots a 5year old could create. Its more like a long TV episode, i agree. It isn't bad, it should keep your kids entertained. It has some nice moments. Madelaine is fine. Esmerelda kind of pisses you off. You don't gain any sympathies towards Zephyr, their child. ITs not a dramatic or dark movie like the first. its very happy and light. It actually has more jokes then the first one and the gargoyles actually fit in to this movie, whereas in the first one they were the one thing that brought the movie down in scenes they were in. The only thing that is absolutely horrible is the animation. The first movies animation was probably the most beautiful I have seen, it was so great there were some scenes where I thought it was a photograph and not a drawing. This movie had such horrible animation. I'd say if you have spare time, go ahead and rent it. Its not a waste, but more like a time filler, I guess.

Leave it to Disney to remind us how stupendously well-animated their theatrical films have been by creating sub-par direct-to-video silliness such as this. The difference in animation quality, color (and color consistency), depth, backgrounds...everything is far too obviously dumbed down to low budget and possibly low talent levels.Characterization and tone of story have also taken their own serious hits, and largely being inconsistent with the 1996 feature film. Phoebus has been turned into a goof-ball buffoon as opposed to the smart-aleck but intelligent and competent soldier he was. And Esmeralda has lost her spark both in character and visually, morphing in scenes through various shades of ash (and often too dark).There is one relative high-point with Jennifer Love Hewitt as Madellaine. She sounded honestly excited to be doing the part, and the character itself had an every-girl cuteness to her.Overall, worthy only of a cheap rent (not Blockbuster, more like $2 at the local supermarket) for fans of the 1996 classic who must satiate their curiosity and see how this new character Madellaine works out.Then forget it and return to the true majesty of The Hunchback of Notre Dame I.