I hate to break it to all of you nostalgic die-hards, but The Walt Disney company, like all other companies, is fraught with less-than-scrupulous behavior. I have absolutely no documented proof of this, as I’m sure the PR people at Disney do a great job of keeping that stuff out of the public eye. Still, the fact of the matter is you cannot have that huge of a corporation without their being some dirty laundry tucked away in some well-concealed corner. And yes, it is a corporation, with the amassing of assets and company value being priority number one – and what a corporation it is. Most people don’t recognize this, but The Walt Disney Corporation is a media conglomerate with a lot of smaller companies under its wing. I was originally going to list a few of them, but I think this might give you a better idea: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_assets_owned_by_Disney
But, you know what? I’m okay with this. I can accept the money-making drive behind The Happiest Place on Earth and still sing “Zippidy-Doo-Dah” on Splash Mountain. What I cannot forgive Disney for is the lengths it goes to try and hide behind a facade of being the saints of the modern world: it’s almost like they’re trying to convince the families of America and elsewhere that the films and media are produced by children themselves, and not adults who have all gone through puberty and were once irresponsible college students. The culmination of this hypocrisy, for me, came from the studio in 1996 with its 34th animated feature. Yes, we’re going to talk about The Hunchback of Notre Dame.
If you own or have access to a copy of this film, I invite you to take a trip down memory lane for the first 7 or so minutes of the film. I’d post a Youtube clip, but unfortunately I couldn’t find one that goes as far as the point I’m trying to make. So either use your incredible memory recall skills, or go find a copy and watch up to where the tiny bird flies away out of Quasimodo’s hand.
I mean now.
Okay, got it? How beautiful is this opening scene? First of all, the musical motif of Hunchback established by the song “Bells of Notre Dame” is one of the best of all their animated films. From the beginning, the animation is on par with the greats like Beauty and the Beast and The Lion King. As if these two technical aspects alone were enough, let’s talk subject matter shall we? Within five minutes we’re being presented with themes like religious tyranny, racism, ethnic bigotry, faith vs. fear, and of course, the definition of a monster.
Even beyond this, the film contains what I believe to be one of the darkest, if not the darkest moment in a Disney film. A lot of people point to Scar’s murder/Mufasa’s death in The Lion King as the pinnacle of Disney’s descent into the underworld of humanity, but I contend this one beats it out. In Lion King, we never actually see Mufasa die, and he’s killed by a jealous brother who is clearly in the wrong. In Hunchback, not only do we see Quasimodo’s mother die (complete with bloodstain on the stone steps) but Frollo then proceeds to attempt to drown an infant in a well…all in the name of God and justice. The difference between Scar and Frollo is their concept of morality. Scar is somewhat a sociopath; he has no conception of the moral principles of right and wrong, and even if he does, he doesn’t care. Whereas Frollo is constantly struggling to define what right and wrong mean, much like Javert in Les Miserables (Victor Hugo was particularly skilled at these kinds of characters). Frollo is therefore more like a normal human being, and thus his actions cannot be as easily dismissed as something a normal person wouldn’t do, hence his actions are far more frightening.
So we have this horribly dark moment, cap-stoned by the major dramatic question of the entire narrative – “who is the monster and who is the man?” – followed by what might be the most beautiful note I’ve ever heard sung by a male voice…yeah, that one, right as the title screen appears in front of the ringing bells (I’m telling you, just watch this opening again). The animation continues to be spectacular, with the CGI-rendered bells blending seamlessly with the hand-drawn Quasimodo. Then, the story tellers proceed to establish Quaismodo as the most amazing human being on the face of the planet. I give major kudos to the casting of Tom Hulce as the hunchback; seriously, if by the end of that scene of him talking to the bird about trying to fly you are not completely smitten by Quasimodo’s humility and sweetness, then you do not have a human heart.
Then it goes to hell.
And how did the Disney animators manage to take such an amazing opening, highlighted by both a disturbingly dark moment juxatoposed with such a lovable protagonist, and destroy it? One word:
Gargoyles.
The instant the gargoyle Hugo spits out the bird’s nest and Jason Alexander’s nasal voice starts making noise, the film’s impact is shot dead to the ground…it’s incredible how fast it happened. And thus we see the problem with Hunchback. For whatever reason, Disney seemed determined to make an adult film and a kid film at the same time. Do not misunderstand, this isn’t the same as Pixar making an adult film (Up, WALL-E) with enough kids stuff thrown in to make it marketable. Nor is it a kids film (How to Train Your Dragon) given a dash of adult sensibility and themes. Hunchback is two movies at war with each other. Best example? How about after Frollo sings a song about needing to kill Esmeralda because if he doesn’t he’ll be consumed by his sexual lust for her and fears his immortal soul because of it (remember this lyric? “It’s not my fault, if in God’s plan, he made the devil so much stronger than a man”), we get to hear the annoying gargoyles sing to Quasimodo about how Esmeralda would totally go for for a guy like him (“When she wants oo-la-la, then she wants you-la-la”…yes, that’s in the song).
The gargoyles are not the only problem, but they’re probably the best example to tack on the almost bipolar nature of this film. Why did we need talking inanimate objects? We were having great interactions with the non-verbal bird! Couldn’t we have just pulled a Sleeping Beauty and had Quasimodo interact with the birds and rats that certainly inhabit the bell tower of Notre Dame without them speaking? Hence, my problem with Disney. It’s evident they wanted to make a darker, more mature film, but chickened out, most likely from fear that an animated Disney film with too much innuendo or dark material wouldn’t attract enough audiences.
My response to that?
GREAT! Show the American people that animation isn’t always juvenile! Catch up with Japan and the rest of civilization! Forget about how you’re going to use this film in the next Disney World parade and take a risk on something that could potentially be awesome!
Alas, such is not the case, and The Hunchback of Notre Dame remains, as it probably always will for me, the most disappointing entry in the Disney filmography, if only because it had such great potential and squandered it.
I do not forgive you, Disney, for you have sinned.
-Blake
[Awkward Pause] 