Jim on Film
Page 5 of 5

(c) Disney

Phoebus, who was masterfully lead by animator Russ Edmonds, holds his own as a character against the courageous and scrappy Esmeralda. Phoebus has a great sense of humor about things, such as when Djali butts him in the stomach, and he says to Esmeralda, “I didn’t know you had a kid.�? He’s also of high moral character, making him everything Frollo wants to be but never will be. His refusal to follow Frollo’s orders to burn the miller’s house, which he knows will cost him his life, is a very difficult decision. Even earlier, when he doesn’t arrest Esmeralda and lies, saying that she has claimed sanctuary, Phoebus is proving his true colors. But what is more important to note is while he is vying for the woman the hero loves, there is never any animosity toward him. Just as the audience has fallen for Quasimodo, they have also fallen for Phoebus because he’s such a rich character.

Lastly, a word must be said about Clopin, the narrator and master of ceremonies. Under the lead of animator Michael Surrey, Clopin is a fun and charming character whom, despite his limited role, the audience welcomes back throughout the course of the film. The introduction to his character on the streets of Notre Dame, which shows him to be a fun but insightful character, establishes him as an endearing sort. Even during The Court of Miracles, where he torments Quasimodo and Phoebus to the point of nearly executing them, one cannot hold too much of a grudge against such a jolly fellow.

It’s also important to note that, despite several significant changes from Victor Hugo’s original novel, which includes adding characters, altering characters, and making for a happy ending, this film adaptation is, at its heart, very much Victor Hugo. In college, after reading an abridged edition of his novel Les Miserables, it was very apparent that Hugo’s mark is strongly pressed into the film in his concern for moral corruption and evil, his strong depiction of characters, for his Christian overtones, and his gritty portrayal of the oppressed classes.

The Hunchback of Notre Dame is a masterpiece at every level, from its strong thematic structure, to its music, visuals, and characters. While Hollywood analysts once called the film unsuccessful, it must be remembered that it did receive largely positive reviews on its release. Furthermore, it was interesting to see that upon its DVD reissue, critics were already beginning to see the film for the masterpiece it is, as the critic for USA Today noted that it didn’t get the recognition that was worthy of in its first release, just as critics later said about Fantasia, Bambi, Sleeping Beauty, and others.

No, The Hunchback of Notre Dame probably isn’t for the smallest of Disney fans, but taking into consideration its depth, richness, and beauty, that isn’t a bad thing. In its construction, it is intended for the smartest of Disney fans. And its maturity is not found in its content but in its creation. As a result of this, it is probably more mature and complex than most films intended for adults.

And for that, we thank the filmmakers.

Discuss It!

• Discuss this article on the LaughingPlace discussion board

Related Links

• List of all Jim On Film columns

-- Jim Miles

-- Posted June 19, 2003