When Walt Disney Feature Animation debuted The Hunchback of Notre Dame on June 21, 1996, Entertainment Weekly’s film critic Owen Gleiberman awarded the film an “A” and praised it as a “Towering Achievement.”
That sentiment is true not only because Disney’s The Hunchback of Notre Dame is a compelling, beautifully crafted, and entertaining film, but also because adapting Victor Hugo’s Gothic 1831 novel into animation was a tremendous task.
The film is narrated by Clopin (voiced by Paul Kandel), the energetic Gypsy, who unravels the story of Quasimodo (Tom Hulce), the misunderstood and misshapen bellringer of Notre Dame Cathedral. Quasimodo has been sheltered in the tower by his guardian, the evil Judge Claude Frollo (Tony Jay), who forbids Quasimodo ever to leave the Cathedral. The hunchback’s only “escape” is through conversations he has with his three imaginary friends, the Gargoyles Victor, Hugo, and Laverne (Charles Kimbrough, Jason Alexander, and Mary Wickes, respectively. Jane Withers provided remaining dialogue after Wickes passed away during production). They affectionately refer to him as “Quasi.”
One day, Quasimodo finds the courage to join the “Feast of Fools,” a festival in the city below, where he encounters Esmerelda, the beautiful gypsy dancer (Demi Moore), and Phoebus, the Captain of the Guard (Kevin Kline). The crowd soon recognizes Quasi as the mysterious bellringer from Notre Dame and begins attacking him. Kindly Esmerelda comes to his rescue, and the two then take sanctuary inside the Cathedral. Quasimodo is so taken with Esmerelda’s compassion that he helps her escape from Frollo, who soon becomes obsessed with finding her. Quasimodo, assisted by Phoebus, helps save Esmerelda from Frollo in a dynamic action sequence in and around Notre Dame Cathedral at the film’s climax.
This month marks the 30th anniversary of Disney’s The Hunchback of Notre Dame, which was produced by Don Hahn, and co-directed by Kirk Wise and Gary Trousdale. The script was written by Tab Murphy, Irene Mecchi, Bob Tzudiker, Noni White, and Jonathan Roberts. The film’s songs are from Alan Menken and Stephen Schwartz (including the infectious showstopper, “Topsy Turvy,” and the beautiful ballad, “God Help the Outcasts”).
To celebrate the film’s milestone, what follows are insights from producer Hahn and co-directors Wise and Trousdale, drawn from interviews conducted just prior to the release of The Hunchback of Notre Dame.
When discussing why Disney Feature Animation chose The Hunchback of Notre Dame as a project, Hahn said, “In the past, certainly in Hollywood, there have been a lot of ‘monster movies’ about Quasimodo – this terrible guy that people view as half-human/half-animal – and we didn’t want to tell that story. We felt that there’s a great deal of humanity in Quasimodo.” He added, “What appealed to us was the characters of the piece and the opportunity to tell a story about a character who was an outcast. There was plenty of opportunity for color, pageantry, and even humor.”
The directors discussed their version of the main character, Quasimodo, with co-director Trousdale noting, “One thing we wanted to do was make him different, make him our own. Another thing is a balancing act of making him somebody who, when the population of Paris says, ‘My God, he’s the ugliest person in France,’ you have to believe it, but he also has to have something about him that you can see inside; this loving quality, this appeal that’s within.”
“The one thing that we knew from the outset was that we didn’t want to go the route where we took Quasimodo and abstracted him to the point that he became like another one of the Seven Dwarfs. You know – Happy, Dopey, Sleepy, and Quasi,” said Wise, with a laugh.
Of the addition of the Gargoyles as characters, Hahn said, “Hugo talks about this lonely guy living literally between heaven and hell – heaven above him and the hellish streets of Paris below – as a recluse. That notion of this character all by himself, with no companions except the Gargoyles, wasn’t too big a leap to say, ‘Well, great, let’s give him these characters that live with him in almost a Calvin and Hobbes or Harvey the Rabbit way.’ If you or I were to walk into the bell tower, they wouldn’t be there, but for him, they’re his companions, coaches, cheerleaders, and confidants.”
Discussing the film’s darker villain, Frollo, Hahn said, “In the past, we have had villains who have wanted power, or money, like Ratcliffe in Pocahontas. But here’s a guy who has all those things, he has power, he has money, but he’s almost tormented because the one thing he wants is to get rid of the gypsies in Paris, but then he has tremendous feelings towards this one gypsy, Esmerelda. So, you have a character probably more complex than we’ve ever done.”
Additionally, The Hunchback of Notre Dame included an enigmatic narrator in Clopin. “We almost saw him a little bit like Joel Grey’s character in Cabaret,” said Wise, adding, “In the same way that character puts a frame around that story, we used Clopin to put a frame around our story.”
Early in production, the Hunchback team embarked on a research trip to Paris, where they spent 8 hours in the city with a Parisian history scholar and toured every nook and cranny of Notre Dame Cathedral. Wise noted, “It’s so rare on an animated film, where you can actually visit the location that the story is supposed to take place in.”
For many, The Hunchback of Notre Dame delivers an always timely message that still resonates thirty years later. As Don Hahn stated, Disney’s interpretation of Hugo’s classic tells us, “Don’t discard the outcasts in life or people because they’re different, because there is great worth in those people.”
Michael Lyons is a freelance writer, specializing in film, television, and pop culture. He is the author of the book, Drawn to Greatness: Disney’s Animation Renaissance, which chronicles the amazing growth at the Disney animation studio in the 1990s. In addition to Animation Scoop and Cartoon Research, he has contributed to Remind Magazine, Cinefantastique, Animation World Network and Disney Magazine. He also writes a blog, Screen Saver: A Retro Review of TV Shows and Movies of Yesteryear and his interviews with a number of animation legends have been featured in several volumes of the books, Walt’s People. You can visit Michael’s web site Words From Lyons at: 
I refused to watch this movie. When it was coming out in 1996, I was excited for it and so I read the book for the first time. I was enthralled AND appalled. How could Disney make a family movie out of THIS?
After reading your post, I think I will have to give it a watch.
During this era of the 90’s, Disney seemed to be taking steps toward darker, more adult themes and adaptations of classics that probed the depths of the human soul. Thus, “Hunchback” is not a simple, easy film, nor is it entirely aimed at children–even though many young parents I knew at the time were taking their children to see it. As an example of how “different” a feature it was, one of the pieces of tie-in merchandising that I still have today is a copy of Victor Hugo’s original book (translated from the French, of course) with inserted illustrations derived from the movie.
As a child, I owned a copy of the Classics Illustrated adaptation, and even this left me with an uneasy feeling, especially the “Feast of Fools” section, which incorporated humorous looking characters that came off as slightly creepy. I don’t know if it’s ever been verified but I suspected when I first viewed Disney’s Hunchback. that there might have been some influence from the CI version in its grotesquerie.
The film does convey a sort of mixed message in uniting Esmeralda with Phoebus at the end, implying that Quasimodo’s looks prohibit him from any normal human sexual relationship, that it somehow makes him a being who ultimately is “other” than human. In this regard, the direct to video sequel provided a remedy in at last giving Quasimodo a love interest of his own. But in fairness to those who may identify with Quasimodo it might have been better to have incorporated that part into the first film. As it stands, it’s a major contradiction in values. It seems to be saying that while we must be tolerant and understanding toward those whose appearance is less than pleasing, the experience of true love is only possible for those who are reasonably good-looking. But then, Hollywood has been sending this message for years.
I didn’t find out until it was released on home video that Belle makes a cameo appearance in the streets of Paris, a very nice nod to Beauty and the Beast, although this places her in a different time frame.
I heard that Jeffrey Katzenberg pushed for Disney to make those kinds of epic, emotional musicals in hopes of repeating the incredible critical success of BEAUTY AND THE BEAST, namely its historic Oscar nomination for Best Picture. During his last few years at Disney, Katzenberg was pushing for Disney in general to move toward more older-skewing fare, resulting in, among other things, the “edgier” TOY STORY draft that resulted in the infamous “Black Friday” reel, and RUNAWAY BRAIN, a short that he championed but had all the other execs appealed over what it was doing to Mickey Mouse. It wasn’t until Katzenberg co-founded DreamWorks and produced THE PRINCE OF EGYPT and ANTZ he finally got to make the stuff he wanted without being burdened by a 70-year-old company’s reputation.
“implying that Quasimodo’s looks prohibit him from any normal human sexual relationship, that it somehow makes him a being who ultimately is “other” than human. ”
The second claim need not stem from the first. I think it was a glum acknowlegement that, while as deserving of love as anyone else, a deformed outcast is extremely unlikely to land the most beautiful woman in town. Sort of “it sucks, but that’s how it is”. I thought it was a brave bit of pragmatism and a fresh alternative to what some might call a “love conquers all Disney ending.” And besides, they’d already done Beauty and the Beast.
Acording to Tab Murphy orginaly Disney wanted was in fact a Quasimodo/Esmeralda love story. It was Murphy who change it while working on first draft, fearing making Quasimodo’s main goal “geting the girl” something hard not to sell as akward and so his set his goal as wanting to be acepted by the people of Paris and his main need as standing out to Frollo. Once this became the main emotional arc, whatever the two endup together. After all if Quasimodo’s main goal is simply to “have some friends who treat him like human” this could take away from the ending they wanted, which felt much more powerful to the crew (being embrace by the crowd). And as many pointed out – what is better way to show the difrence between the monster and a man, then to have one lust over a woman, while other learn to let it go and saves her despite knowing she is in love with another man.
It should be noted however that apperently Disney was worried that the ending did in fact send a mix message and people will walk out on a donwer note (they where apperently more nervous about this then any of the “dark” moments), so the creators had to rewrite the script several times to make sure their intentions are clear. For example the early drafts had Esmeralda and Phoebus fall in love after their FIRST meeting on the town, but it was change so she don’t trust him at first and they get into a fight, just to show she don’t care he is the dashing, good looking captain and only falls in love wth him once she see just like her he is a man fighthing against injustice. They also make sure that once Esmeralda befriends Quasimodo she actualy finds him cute (scene where she kiss him on the cheek) just so it’s clear looks wasn’t the factor for her. Quasimodo’s crush was also played down so it feels more like the gargoyles egg him on and his feelings where more platonic. Frankly, if you read the book Esmeralda/Quasimodo relationship is much more patological (one chapter say it was impossible for her to look at his face directly as he was “to ugly”) so they already dail it down a lot. And no, there is no love story in that one.
Overall I think they did a good job, especialy they wanted avoid making this “Beauty and the Beast 2”, which if you read the orginal book is easy to do. I’m just glad it was never matter of “He is to ugly for her” and more of them wanted to tell best story possible.
It’s a shame that this film came out after the disappointing reception of Pocahontas and the popularity starting to wane for the Renaissance era. Had the movie come out after Lion King, I think it would’ve fared better.
What was worse that this and “Beavis and Butt-Head Do America” were both nominated for Razzies (the former for “Worst Written Film Grossing Over $100 Million”) and this was a first for these lampoon awards.
The Academy Award’s “Best Animated Feature Film” category just couldn’t come soon enough!
The claim that it was one of the worst box-office hits of the year is the type of ludicrous attention-grabbing nomination that the Razzies are infamous for, and I say that as someone with rather mixed feelings about the film.
I remember it feeling a little compromised with the big “A Guy Like You” number, full of anachronistic Aladdin-type gags. But otherwise it was (and is) amazing, especially in the other musical sequences.
Hollywood usually tries to separate the villain from any criticism of the church. The Charles Laughton version also tried to avoid any “subversive” approval of rebellion. If memory serves, the spectacular final battle pitted the beggars against the middle class, and BOTH sides were there to protect Esmeralda from arrest. They were literally fighting over a point of law rather than making common cause against the King’s soldiers.
I think ultimately viewers found this movie to be rather off-putting ( judging by all the Hunchback merch that had to be placed on clearance at the local Wally World where I worked at the time ) due to its inconsistent tone—The filmmakers wanted a serious retelling AND a musical AND a boisterous comedy, and all those disparate elements just never seemed to gel. As with Bluth’s Anastasia, I feel a straightforward adaption would have better suited the material, rather than hedging bets with unnecessary “comedy relief” characters and Broadway-styled songs.
After working hard to get audience sympathy for “Quasi”, the directors have a ridiculous Aladdin-type number that makes fun of him and his appearance (not to mention filled with anachronisms) and just tossed all that goodwill out the window. I remember watching this sequence with the same expression as the “Springtime for Hitler” audience. What were they thinking?
It’s too bad—Frollo is truly an outstanding Disney villain (maybe the best one), and he certainly warranted a better animated feature than this.
Well, what did you expect? Ron co-directed “Aladdin” (1992).
I recall a few years ago, me and my parents went to a school production of Disney’s short-lived Broadway adaptation of “Hunchback” which was more serious (the gargoyles and “A Guy Like You” number were dropped) and more accurate of the book (with the orginal trajected ending). My folks were disappointed with the play as it lacked humor which might be a reason why the Broadway show wasn’t successful. To quote Donald at the end of “Fire Chief” (1940), “You can’t win… You just can’t win.”
i was there, in New O, at the (Superdome) World Premiere. It was, easily, one of the highlights of my entire 72 years of life!!
Esmeralda’s singing voice was provided by one Heidi Mollenhauer, whom Gary Trousdale and Kirk Wise happened to hear performing in a piano bar and hired on the spot. To date, “Hunchback” remains her one and only film credit. Demi Moore had previously sung in an animated movie — at least, there’s some animation in it — namely “One Crazy Summer” (1986), directed by “Eek! The Cat” creator Savage Steve Holland; but I think it was for the best that they went with a professional singer for “God Bless the Outcasts”.
Too bad you didn’t have a chance to interview the story artist and character designer credited as “Gee Fwee Boedoe,” which I suspect is a pseudonym, but then I thought the same about “Ub Iwerks” for a long time. Whoever he is, I hope he enjoyed the inspirational trip to Paris with the other artists. In French he’d be known as “Guy Feuille, Beau d’Eau!”
Geefwee Boedoe was born Jeffrey Border, and if his pseudonym leads you to guess he’s rather unconventional and colorful, you would be correct.
One of Disneys most sophisticated and unique films. I have always loved this when I watched Alan Mankin in concert he said that this was one of his favourite productions he’s been involved in.
Interesting post it must of been a blast being a journalist in the 90s for these amazing Disney films
Promotional material made a big deal about how they made a CG 3D model of the cathedral, so I was surprised when it was barely used (I recall only spotting it once). Which is fine, I love traditional backgrounds, but the promotion department really oversold it.
Similarly, they made a bunch of CG cityfolk for backgrounds, which makes sense, but they should have only been used in the DEEP background. There were scenes where they were immediately behind traditionally animated characters, and that just did not work.
I found the cartoony gargoyle sidekicks tonally out of place, but overall I was impressed with the film, especially Mollo’s song about, well, lust. It’s been a long time, I’ll have to revisit it.