THE HUNCHBACK OF NOTRE DAME 1939: A Masterpiece For All Time in Golden Age Horror Forum

Forum Jump

THE HUNCHBACK OF NOTRE DAME 1939: A Masterpiece For All Time

Author	Comment
Rapfred	Re: THE HUNCHBACK OF NOTRE DAME 1939	#21	[-]
Jun 30 06 4:46 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	>>KISS OF DEATH>> ... does not use "Street Scene" under the opening credits, opting instead for a rip-snorting original piece by the underrated David Buttolph.
	Remove this ad
Bill Warren	Re: THE HUNCHBACK OF NOTRE DAME 1939	#22	[-]
Jun 30 06 5:50 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Predictable
Rapfred	Re: THE HUNCHBACK OF NOTRE DAME 1939	#23	[-]
Jul 1 06 11:41 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	>>Predictable >> Not really. While Henry Hathaway's New York-based THE HOUSE ON 92nd STREET was "Street Scene" free, his 1946 Big Apple noir THE DARK CORNER featured the ubiquitous tune under the main credits. Mysterious were the ways of the Fox music department.
Imhoteps Ashes	Re: THE HUNCHBACK OF NOTRE DAME 1939	#24	[-]
Jul 3 06 3:18 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	*Quote:* None of the film versions of HUNCHBACK follows Victor Hugo's novel, which always compromised their quality, in my opinion. The real problem is that Hugo's mammoth novel would be a monster to properly adapt. It's so long, rambling, and maddeningly dense, with hundreds of different characters popping in and out of the story, and thousands of small vignettes and character moments impossible to translate to a film under ten hours long. A live action TV series would be the only way to stay faithful to the letter of the book - and even then it could get dull. I know you're talking primarily about the ending, but I'm irritated at all these devout fans of the novel who harp on about how different versions don't stick to the book. These people don't know the first thing about movie making. Same holds true for the HARRY POTTER films, I suppose. And THE PHANTOM OF THE OPERA... Guess it's back to the IMDb for me...! "Hideous Half-Man, Half-Beast Who Terrorized Millions!" - Tagline, WEREWOLF OF LONDON (1935)
rogueevolent		#25	[-]
May 1 08 3:32 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	And even the acting of Aristotle the goat is top notch They were going to hang him too remember.
professor liebstrum		#26	[-]
May 1 08 4:46 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I'm a great admirer of Laughton and the scenes with Esmeralda in the Bell tower [" I'm as shapeless as the man in the moon"] get me every time. I went up the bell tower in Notre Dame once and saw the bells, very similar to the ones in the film and I know its just a story with no historical basis but it was still incredibly moving.
Livius1		#27	[-]
May 2 08 3:11 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I haven't seen this for many years but reading through the thread has reawakened my interest. Can anyone comment on the quality of the DVD? http://livius1.wordpress.com/
captainmarvel1957		#28	[-]
May 2 08 3:42 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I've had this on dvd for about eight years, Livius1, and I don't recall that there was anything wrong with the quality. If there had been I think I'd remember it. It is a great picture! And Imhotep is right about adapting Hugo to the screen. The same is true of The Man Who Laughs, or By Order of the King. It goes off on tangents for miles and you can tell that Hugo was writing a political statement that was important to him more than anything else.
Livius1		#29	[-]
May 2 08 4:09 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Thanks captainmarvel. http://livius1.wordpress.com/
rogueevolent		#30	[-]
May 2 08 8:02 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Livius, I watched the Turner/WB DVD just the other night and thought the video image was pretty crisp and clear; well worth (I guess a "must have") owning.
	Remove this ad
todmichel		#31	[-]
May 2 08 8:36 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Quote: "I know you're talking primarily about the ending, but I'm irritated at all these devout fans of the novel who harp on about how different versions don't stick to the book. These people don't know the first thing about movie making." You probably mean: HOLLYWOOD movie making. Don't get me wrong, I love the movie, and Laughton, O'Hara and the others; but outside of Hollywood at the time, the movie COULD have been faithful to the book's tragic end. A LOT of European movies with tragic ends were produced in the 1930s and 1940s. When some of the stories were later "adapted" in Hollywood, they became like fairy tales.
Koukol 5		#32	[-]
May 2 08 3:41 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	The DVD quality is OUTSTANDING!
Livius1		#33	[-]
May 2 08 5:31 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Thanks a lot guys. I hadn't seen any reviews of it anywhere and wanted to check - will be ordering this pronto. http://livius1.wordpress.com/
VarneyVampire		#34	[-]
May 4 08 1:51 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Yep, Laughton's 1939 version is my pick as the superior one as well. Laughton should be considered the first 'method' actor, not Brando. The quality of his art is sublime. Also, Maureen O'hara as Esmerelda gets my vote for the most beautiful woman in a moving picture of all time. & Hardwick: I don't think it was in his capacity to play a good person at all! I love Chaney's film but have always found that damn deformed eye a let-down! & re: the movie vs. the book debate, I've never weighed in on it but I must say that after I read that book I was almost weary for days out of the sheer emotion & horror of it. The whole injustice of the actions of the powerful & the pathetic character of Quasimodo & some of the others, & that damn ending!
Bill Warren		#35	[-]
May 4 08 2:07 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Laughton should be considered the first 'method' actor, not Brando That's a very surprising comment. Laughton definitely was NOT a Method Actor; he was of the old school in that he approached his characterizations by external means, not by accessing emotions he'd felt in real life, one of the basics of the Method school. Method acting was naturalistic and understated; neither of those adjectives could be applied to Laughton, really. The same is true of John Barrymore. Last Edited By: Bill Warren May 4 08 2:12 PM. Edited 1 times.
VarneyVampire		#36	[-]
May 4 08 3:11 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Sorry, let me rephrase or qualify that statement . . . Of course you're right, I was thinking more of the quality of method-acting than the, well, method. Laughton, like Brando after him, had, I find, a degree of execution that was particularly 'realistic' for want of a better term. He was able to inject mannerisms & the minutae of say a full-formed personality much more than many actors of his generation . . . & you're right I would include John Barrymore & William Powell into that category as well. When I first saw Laughton (& Brando) act I was immediately struck by the richness & depth of his/their portrayals. So yes, certainly not a method-actor in method but, for me, very much in execution, if that makes any sense. Or maybe I'm just trying to say they're both damn good thespians!
Wich2		#37	[-]
May 4 08 3:28 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Varney- If we're just talking about acting "That Good; that Rich," I'd have to say that I've seen it before Laughton. In some of Lon Chaney Sr., & much of Lillian Gish (BROKEN BLOSSOMS, THE WIND, etc.), just to mention two. And actually, Jack Barrymore had his moments in that stratosphere (cf., DINNER AT EIGHT). See also, brother Lionel's supremely touching "Krigelein" in GRAND HOTEL. Best, -Craig W.
Bill Warren		#38	[-]
May 4 08 3:37 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	maybe I'm just trying to say they're both damn good thespians! I'll buy that. At their best, nobody can touch them. True of Barrymore, too--like in TWENTIETH CENTURY.
VarneyVampire		#39	[-]
May 4 08 4:41 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	See also, brother Lionel's supremely touching "Krigelein" in GRAND HOTEL I actually had John in 'Grand Hotel' in mind when I was writing that last post. I like Lionel very much as 'Krigelein' but John steals the show for me. His easy conversation with Joan Crawford, his self-deprecation & how he buddies up to Kriegelein is just so natural & he's such a likeable guy . . . probably we're talking about qualities beyond those strictly of the actor at this point too. To put it poorly, John was probably just a real cool cat, comfortable in himself & how he related to others. I never got that from Lionel, personally. You're absolutely right about Chaney. I'd like to see more of the man's work . . . I have not seen the movies you've mentioned Craig but would very much like to. Sorry, this is supposed to be a Hunchback of Notre Dame thread!
professor liebstrum		#40	[-]
May 4 08 5:02 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Bill Warren said he was of the old school in that he approached his characterizations by external means, not by accessing emotions he'd felt in real life, I'm in no way qualified to discuss "The Method" but, I have heard that when making the abandoned "I, Claudius", Laughton had a very rough time finding his characterisation and didn't hit on it until he heard King Edward VIII's abdication speeech. Last Edited By: professor liebstrum May 4 08 5:05 PM. Edited 1 times.
	Remove this ad

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Add Reply

Yuku free message boards

THE HUNCHBACK OF NOTRE DAME 1939: A Masterpiece For All Time