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
Monsterpal		#81	[-]
Feb 25 10 1:16 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I agree, Ateneolol, somehow Quasimodo living through all that and seeing Esmeralda happily going off with Gringoire makes his final comment quite emotionally wrenching.
Aupperle		#82	[-]
Feb 25 10 1:34 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Monsterpal wrote: I agree, Ateneolol, somehow Quasimodo living through all that and seeing Esmeralda happily going off with Gringoire makes his final comment quite emotionally wrenching. Perfect ending to a great film... Last Edited By: Aupperle Feb 25 10 9:42 PM. Edited 3 times.
Kongu is Kingu		#83	[-]
Feb 25 10 2:56 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	atenolol wrote: todmichel wrote: In spite of the satinized Hollywoodian ending, it remains one of the best screen adaptations of a Victor Hugo novel, ex-aequo with the best version of "Les misérables", the 1934 three-parts movie directed by Raymond Bernard and starring Harry Baur. And - as written above - who could resist Maureen O'Hara ? certainly not me ! I saw this incredibly beautiful and talentuous Irish girl for the first time in 1952 or 1953 when THE QUIET MAN was released in France, and she became instantaneously my favorite actress - and still is, in fact. I have read the novel and I must say that, while the 1939 movie version might be "sanitized" at least in regards to Esmeralda, the final scene I found more moving than the one in the novel. I prefer the ending of this film and the 1928 Man Who Laughs to their novel counterparts. Hugo's insistence on killing everyone off gets rather contrived - in Hunchback, it relys on everyone apart from Quasimodo being unpeakably cruel or unspeakably stupid.
todmichel		#84	[-]
Feb 25 10 3:52 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I don't deny that the Hollywoodian ending is moving, I just think that Hugo's ending is more logical and realistic, being given the sad periods he describes. And "contrived", speaking of an ending, is a Hollywoodian word by essence.
Rick		#85	[-]
Feb 25 10 10:07 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Hugo's ending--the very end of the book-- is quite moving in its own right, once you get past all the death. But I actually think the Anthony Quinn HUNCHBACK, which is overall not very good, used Hugo's fadeout, while actually (forgive me, Victor) improving on it. Certainly for a film, the ending of the '39 is sheer perfection. You get a happy ending and heartbreak all in one package. It's just a beautiful movie all around.
Monsterpal		#86	[-]
Mar 1 10 3:43 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Although Dieterle and his screenwriters may not have intended it that way, I think their ending is much sadder than the book's denouement. Hugo let Quasimodo be with Esmeralda in death. In the movie, the poor fellow is left with nothing after all he's done for Esmeralda.
verneaux		#87	[-]
Jan 28 11 1:02 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I watched this movie last night as part of my "history of horror" project - I'm up to 1939. I found it less enjoyable than I remembered. I do appreciate Laughton, Hardwick, O'Hara, Zucco, and Davenport but at times they seem to be in a different movie than everybody else. Thomas Mitchell, Edmond O'Brien & the pack of beggars seem to be part of a road show operetta. They break into jubilation and even song at the drop of a hat. And I'm not talking "Faro-li, Faro-la" territory here - this is bordering on "Crick Crick Crick goes the Cricket"! When the beggars go from hanging O'Brien to escorting him (musically) to the bridal chamber (which I guess they keep ready at all times) I wish the guy with eyepatch would have got his way. At times, the whole city seems imbecillic. The "king of fools" festival is excrutiating outside of Laughton's participation. When Laughton is on the pillory and O'Hara brings him water, not only does no one try to stop her or even get in her way but a hush falls over the entire jeering mob... I mean come on! And then the beggars converge on Notre Dame in a sort of flying 'V' pattern...
Kingkongkessler		#88	[-]
Jan 30 11 8:04 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I watched 4 of "The Hunchback of Notre Dame" movies this past week (In order of best to worst) 1. 1939 version with Charles Laughton, I thought it had the best acting, the best looking Esmeralda and the coolest looking Quasimodo, the story is the second best one in MHO 2. 1957 version with Anthony Quinn, this one had the best story, the second best Esmeralda (sexy) but the worst Quasimodo (walked too upright too much and talked too much) unfortunately. This story kept closest to the book 3. 1982 version with Anthony Hopkins, this had my second favorite Quasimodo (my only problem with him was his laugh, used way too much) and my 3rd favorite Esmeralda, but the story was very slow (this was made for TV) 4. 1923 version with Lon Chaney, Chaney does a nice job and supposedly did all his own stunts with a 60 lb hunch on his back, still he was a little to gruesome looking and I never felt sorry for his Quasimodo like I did for Laughton's, and the Esmeralda in this version definitely wasn't worthy of getting yourself killed over BTW, the Disney version is my second favorite but I didn't watch it during this week Kess
pringly		#89	[-]
Jan 30 11 10:10 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	>>>>I do appreciate Laughton, Hardwick, O'Hara, Zucco, and Davenport but at times they seem to be in a different movie than everybody else.<<<< I don't know what you exactly mean by that. Hugo's works always had side storys which seem to converge, sometime miraculasly, into the main story. That these side stories should have different tones from each other doesn't surprise or take anything away from the film for me. >>>>At times, the whole city seems imbecillic. The "king of fools" festival is excrutiating<<<< You should come to Philly on new years day and watch the mummers parade. >>>>When Laughton is on the pillory and O'Hara brings him water, not only does no one try to stop her or even get in her way but a hush falls over the entire jeering mob... I mean come on!<<<< I sort of agree with you there, but I thought when I first saw it, naively, that they crowd and the guards had known that he had committed a crime against her; the crowd hushed and the guards let her approach to see what she would do to him. Still, even if the scene is implausible, it has great power and still effects me emotionally. Thats great movie making believable or not. Last Edited By: pringly Jan 30 11 10:13 PM. Edited 1 times.
Wich2		#90	[-]
Jan 31 11 12:00 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Kess- >Chaney does a nice job and supposedly did all his own stunts< Joe Bonomo did some; and maybe someone else, on the trip down the rope in front of the church? >with a 60 lb hunch on his back< Michael Blake can speak better on this; but I'm pretty sure that's PR flackery, and it was nowhere near that heavy. -Craig
verneaux		#91	[-]
Jan 31 11 8:11 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	pringly wrote: >>>>I do appreciate Laughton, Hardwick, O'Hara, Zucco, and Davenport but at times they seem to be in a different movie than everybody else.<<<< I don't know what you exactly mean by that. Hugo's works always had side storys which seem to converge, sometime miraculasly, into the main story. That these side stories should have different tones from each other doesn't surprise or take anything away from the film for me. The plot and storyline are not the problem. The acting style is what strikes me as incongruous. The actors I mentioned seem to be in an historical or at least literary melodrama while O'Brien, Mitchell and their merry band of beggar/cutthroats seem to be in a comic operetta. I watch other movies from the thirties - A Tale of Two Cities, The Scarlet Pimpernel, Tower of London and do not see this problem - so I don't look at it as common to films of the time but as problem with this particular film. Robin Hood is closer in spirit but the entire file plays that way.
Kingkongkessler		#92	[-]
Jan 31 11 8:18 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Wich2 wrote: Kess- >Chaney does a nice job and supposedly did all his own stunts< Joe Bonomo did some; and maybe someone else, on the trip down the rope in front of the church? >with a 60 lb hunch on his back< Michael Blake can speak better on this; but I'm pretty sure that's PR flackery, and it was nowhere near that heavy. -Craig thanks Craig, BTW-how do you rate the films? Kess
Wich2		#93	[-]
Jan 31 11 10:48 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Laughton's is really good; but also, the last time I saw Chaney's, I found it a better film overall than I had before. It's a solid Silent Epic, in the Griffith mode.
Andrew Kidd		#94	[-]
Feb 2 11 11:30 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Aupperle wrote: Monsterpal wrote: I agree, Ateneolol, somehow Quasimodo living through all that and seeing Esmeralda happily going off with Gringoire makes his final comment quite emotionally wrenching. Perfect ending to a great film... All three of Dieterle's fantasy film classics-THE DEVIL AND DANIEL WEBSTER, THE PORTRAIT OF JENNY and THE HUNCHBACK OF NOTRE DAME are marked by great, visually splendid, perfect endings which really resonate with an audience. Hamilton Ontario's Channel 11 has been playing classic RKO movies every Saturday afternoon since the fall and they played HUNCHBACK about two weeks ago. It was amazing how such an immense spectacle could be so touching. Last Edited By: Andrew Kidd Feb 3 11 12:03 AM. Edited 1 times.
Wich2		#95	[-]
Feb 2 11 11:58 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Agreed, Andrew - DEVIL deserves an even greater (or at least, wider) rep than it has. The climax - and especially, H.B. Warner's performance in it - is indeed gripping and touching.
hermanthegerm		#96	[-]
May 11 11 9:23 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Saw this again. A Classic. "There is a lot of money tied up in this film and people expect to hear a boom when something blows up, so I'll give them a boom." George Lucas as quoted by Harlan Ellison's WATCHING
kookster	a palate of colors......	#97	[-]
May 20 11 5:06 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	i think it's a wonderful film..........that would have been better in techicolor!!! "K"
TomWeaver999		#98	[-]
Apr 23 12 12:15 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Guillermo del Toro (sp?) does a great job with the 1939 HUNCHBACK trailer on today's TRAILERS FROM HELL.
jamesenstein31		#99	[-]
Apr 23 12 12:21 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I knew Del Toro would love this one.
Dick		#100	[-]
Jan 1 13 10:28 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Rick wrote: Hugo's ending--the very end of the book-- is quite moving in its own right, once you get past all the death. But I actually think the Anthony Quinn HUNCHBACK, which is overall not very good, used Hugo's fadeout, while actually (forgive me, Victor) improving on it. Certainly for a film, the ending of the '39 is sheer perfection. You get a happy ending and heartbreak all in one package. It's just a beautiful movie all around. The ending is further consummated by that incredible choral arrangement that crescendos just before the end cast list. Alfred Newman's full score is available (re-recorded in stereo) by Naxos and is still available for a song (no pun intended).

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Add Reply

Yuku free message boards

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