This movie was so-so. It had it's moments, but wasn't the greatest.
... View MoreIf you're interested in the topic at hand, you should just watch it and judge yourself because the reviews have gone very biased by people that didn't even watch it and just hate (or love) the creator. I liked it, it was well written, narrated, and directed and it was about a topic that interests me.
... View MoreThere are moments in this movie where the great movie it could've been peek out... They're fleeting, here, but they're worth savoring, and they happen often enough to make it worth your while.
... View MoreOne of the film's great tricks is that, for a time, you think it will go down a rabbit hole of unrealistic glorification.
... View MoreThere is a darkness to Victor Hugo's novel, and while there were quite a few changes in this film version, it captures a good part of it, and is very well made. Set in the late 15th century, cruelty, torture, misogyny, ignorance, and superstition are the order of the day, and director William Dieterle does a great job of presenting it in an unflinching yet balanced way. The film is entertaining and has elements of romance and humor. It also many beautiful shots, such as those at the 'festival of fools', and those highlighting an impressive studio version of Notre Dame and its gargoyles. Laughton is brilliant as Quasimodo, and the rest of the cast is strong as well, including Maureen O'Hara as Esmerelda, the gypsy woman who will end up having four men fall for her. I have to say, though, Harry Davenport is not regal enough in his role as King Louis XI. I won't spoil anything, but as the film sets a perfect mood and is spot on in so many scenes, I think it would have been even better had it been more faithful to the novel.
... View MoreSet in 15th Century France, the people of Paris are bound by ignorance and superstition. They fear what they don't understand and react in anger towards those who are different than them. "Esmeralda" (Maureen O'Hara) is a beautiful Gypsy who yearns for justice for her people. "Quasimodo" (Charles Laughton) is a hideously deformed, dim-witted and deaf bell-ringer who resides in the Cathedral of Notre Dame and seldom ventures outside. When both of them are wrongfully accused of crimes it causes a stir among the Parisians. On the one side is the Chief Justice named "Frollo" (Cedric Hardwicke) whose cowardice for not protecting Quasimodo is exceeded only by his lust for Esmeralda. So he uses his office and his person to destroy that which he cannot have. Anyway, this film is both deep and intricate and involves issues of injustice, cruelty and class warfare. It was nominated for 2 Academy Awards and should appeal to those who enjoy good classic movies of this kind.
... View MoreAlthough many actors including Lon Chaney, Anthony Quinn and Anthony Hopkins have strapped on the hunch over the years, none have come close to equalling let alone surpassing Charles Laughton's performance as Quasimodo in the 1939 version. Along with impressive sets, moody black and white photography and a powerful Alfred Newman score, this film remains a formidable artistic achievement.Despite Laughton's makeup delivering plenty of shock value, his character retains sympathy. The audience is denied the comfort of seeing Quasimodo as a creature that could not exist in real life. He is neither a supernatural being nor a creation of a mad scientist. Laughton's Quasimodo is an afflicted but real human being - a kindred spirit of the true-life Elephant Man. Laughton is barely recognisable - those who know his work may recognise him by the mole on his left cheek. Irish actress Maureen O'Hara in her Hollywood debut plays the other key figure in the story, Esmeralda. She fairly glows in this film, and has an effect on men not unlike the effect Cameron Diaz's character has on them in "Something About Mary". Males of all ages, hunchbacked or otherwise, are attracted to her. Many scenes stay in the memory. When Quasimodo is caught watching Esmeralda dancing during the Festival of Fools, his head is pushed through a hole on a stage to be evaluated by the crowd. Although great advances have been made in makeup and special effects since 1939, the first sight of Laughton's Quasimodo still has the power to shock. In the film's most disturbing sequence, Quasimodo is whipped for attempting to abduct Esmeralda on the orders of his guardian. After his tunic is ripped away to expose his hump, he receives 50 lashes in a scene that is still brutal despite 70 intervening years of cinematic excess. The brutality is only relieved when Esmeralda steps forward to give him water. When Quasimodo attempts to hide his ugliness from Esmeralda in the bell tower of Notre Dame, it illustrates Laughton's ability to project a character through pounds of makeup. He also projected onto his character the way he felt about his own lack of physical attractiveness.Laughton searched within painful life experiences to inform his roles. He didn't have to look far for pain in this demanding film. Apparently the hours spent applying his makeup put a strain on Laughton's relationship with his makeup artists, and at some point, they humiliated Laughton by pinning him down and squirting soda water in his face. Laughton drew on such experiences to help him plumb the depths of Quasimodo's despair. In my opinion, through Laughton's inspired performance and superb production values, the 1939 film eclipses all the other versions. Despite many remakes, this remains the definitive film version.
... View MoreNow THIS is a MOVIE! Don't over-analyze, just revel in it. The texture of this film is incredibly deep, showing exactly how effective black and white could be. I always feel like I'm time-traveling when I watch this movie. Charles Laughton, of course, is spectacular - he was a gifted actor with a singular vision. Maureen O'Hara -stunning. Edmond O'Brien (who I adore) - at 24 he's as beautiful as she is! Together they are breathtaking. Not a Thomas Mitchell fan, but I have to admit he's perfect here. The last shot is truly amazing. Never again in the history of movies has the stable of character actors been so rich as it was in 1939. To paraphrase Norma Desmond, they made movies then! Enjoy enjoy enjoy!
... View More