Quite a memorable adaptation of Victor Hugo's novel, written more than century before. I've seen it quite a few times over the years. Hugo's main purpose in writing this novel, which he titled simply "Notre Dame de Paris", was to promote preservation of surviving Gothic architecture, such as the Cathedral of Notre Dame, in and around which is the site of action in this film. Some changes were made in the details of the main characters and the plot: most notably the survival of the two main characters: Esmeralda: the beautiful gypsy girl about which all the drama centers, and the grossly deformed Quasimodo, whose very hunched back was but one of several physical deformities, making him generally regarded as a monster, to be shunned. In the book, Esmeralda is hanged as a presumed witch and murderer, and the grief-stricken Quasimodo commits to death at her gravesite. Presumably, this was thought too tragic an ending for a general film audience. Thus, the parting scenes have Esmeralda being carried off, in triumph, along with her poet husband Gringoire, while Quasimodo remains perched on the edge of his bell tower, uttering the line "Why wasn't I made of stone, like thee", talking to a grotesque figurine on the bell tower rim. Of course, he is lamenting his human desire for female companionship, specifically with Esmeralda.The main characters are nearly all members of one of two groups residing within Paris: the political and clerical elite, or various virtual outcasts, including Quasimodo, the gypsy Esmeralda, residents of the 'Court of Miracles', and the reform-minded poet Gringoire, who forms a loose association with the 'Court of Miracles' and Esmeralda, as possible accomplices in engineering reform. the 'Court of Miracles' was an actual large slum area in the Paris of the 15th century: the lawless abode of beggars, thieves, prostitutes and some students. It was so named because of the many residents who went to other parts of Paris, faking disabilities, returning home daily to discard their 'disability'. Thomas Mitchell plays their unofficial leader: rather like a pirate captain. These two general groups do not always act antagonistically in unison. For example, at one point, a group from the 'Court of Miracles' is preparing to hang Gringoire, saved only by Esmeralda's reluctant agreement to marry him, although she didn't then love him. By the end of the film, she claimed to love him as her husband. In the meanwhile, two members of the power elite have found themselves lusting after her: Captain Phoebus, who saved her from the clutches of the abducting Quasimodo, and Jehan Frollo, the sinister Archdeacon of Notre Dame. She fancies she's in love with the dashing Phoebus, who is already betrothed to the beautiful and wealthy Fleur-de-Lys de Gondelaurier. Presumably, his idea is that Esmeralda will be his secrete mistress. However, Jehan soon murders him from jealousy, then spitefully accuses Esmeralda of this deed, as well as being a witch in causing himself to lust for her. She is sentenced to be hung.Now comes a series of quite implausible actions by Quasimodo, trying to save Esmeralda from being killed. First, he swings down, Tarzan-like, on a rope from a scaffolding outside the Cathedral(a bell rope, in the book!), to grab Esmeralda off her hangman's scaffolding, and swing back up to the higher scaffolding! They then climb up to the bell tower for safety. However, Jehan has the sanctuary right of the Cathedral nullified. Thus, a crowd of 'citizens of Paris', apparently composed of artisans and merchants, gather outside the cathedral to protest the sanctuary nullification. But they are soon overwhelmed by a much larger mob from the 'Court of Miracles', who say they doubt the intentions of the first group. According to an excerpt from the book, this rabble was probably more interested in stealing valuables from within the Cathedral, should they succeed in breaking in. Unfortunately, Quasimodo gets the mistaken impression that the mob has come to hang Esmeralda. Thus, he maneuvers a series of loose stone beams or other heavy stone objects to the edge of the bell tower, to be dropped on the mob(Why were these loose stone objects present?). Then he tips a huge cauldron of boiling liquid(soup?), which runs out the mouths of the grotesque gargoyles, onto the crowd, scalding some to death.(Why was this cauldron present, and how did he heat it so??). Meanwhile, the mob is using one of the dropped beams as a battering ram to punch through the cathedral door, while Jehan is chasing Esmeralda around the bell tower, with the presumed intention of raping her, then taking her to be hanged. Quasimodo now joins this chase, as the king's soldiers arrive to disperse the mob. He catches Jehan and hurls him to the plaza. Gringoire now arrives with the news that the king has pardoned Esmeralda as innocent of crimes, and has decreed the end of gypsy persecution throughout France(with contemporary relevance to the persecution of Jews and gypsies by the Nazis and other groups in Europe).Charles Laughton is superb in eliciting a combination of repulsion and pity in the audience. Ironically, Quasimodo's lifelong guardian, Jehan, is a psychological monster, in some respects, complementing Quasimodo's physical monstrosities. The film doesn't bring out the fact that, in the book, Quasimodo was an abandoned gypsy, while Esmeralda was stolen by gypsies as an infant, thus explaining her non-gypsy appearance.

Truly beautiful, compelling and enchanting interpretation of Victor Hugo's classic tale, arguably even the greatest film-version of the story that is available! This is a masterpiece of cinema thanks to several elements forming a flawless wholesome, including mesmerizing acting performances from the ensemble cast, the impressive German expressionist influences in cinematography and several astoundingly staged sequences with large crowds of people. I'm a big admirer of Lon Chaney Sr. and have a lot of respect for his 1923 silent version of the story (especially since he performed quite a bit of dangerous acrobatics) but this film simply is more accessible, absorbing and attractive. This version truly brings the France of the 15th Century back to life; with all its progressive inventions (like the art of book printing) and the slow development of scientific wisdom (the Earth actually could be round instead of flat!). What I loved most about William Dieterle's "The Hunchback of the Notre Dame" is the magnificent cast of characters. With his incredibly performance and the stunning physical transformation he underwent, Charles Laughton's Quasimodo is definitely one of the most fascinating icons in cinematic history, but the film is chock-full of other fascinating characters as well. The genuinely gold-hearted gypsy girl Esmeralda, for example, who marries an untalented poet to prevent him from getting executed and who brings water to the publicly scandalized Quasimodo even though he abducted her. Another great character is King Louis XI. As depicted by Harry Davenport, he surely is the most appealing royal character I ever saw in a movie. King Louis is human, compassionate, upright and quite avant-garde considering his age! But the most fascinating character – apart from Quasimodo the bell ringer, of course – is , inevitable, the villain of the story. Sir Cedric Hardwicke masterfully depicts Frollo; the chief of justice and loyal counselor of the King. But Frollo falls madly in love with the gypsy woman Esmeralda and commands Quasimodo, the bell-ringer of the beautiful Notre Dame cathedral, to kidnap her. Quasimodo fails and Esmeralda is saved by the chief of guards Phoebus, with whom she falls in love, much against the will of numerous men in Paris. During a nightly encounter, Frollo stabs Phoebus to death and frames Esmeralda for the murder. She is soon sentenced to torture and death by hanging, but then several men come into action to save her. Quasimodo spectacularly rescues her from the noose and gives her sanctuary high up in the Notre Dame. Meanwhile, the king of the gypsies Clopin organizes a large-scaled mob manifestation to free Esmeralda and her poet husband Gringoire uses the new printing techniques to persuade King Louis to release her. "The Hunchback of the Notre Dame" is a visually as well as emotionally engaging experience and it is truly one of the greatest Hollywood movies ever accomplished (albeit directed by a German expressionist genius). The film was nominated for two Oscars, but should have won all of them. I guess that wasn't an option in the same year with landmarks like "The Wizard of Oz", "Gone with the Wind" and "Stagecoach" as fellow contenders. Even though this certainly doesn't qualify as a horror movie, it must be said that the make-up effects on Charles Laughton are breathtaking, and genre fans should still keep an eye open for horror veterans George Zucco and Rondo Hatton that appear in smaller supportive roles.

A beautiful movie! Having not yet read Hugo's novel, but being aware, of course, of the well- known story, I was very captivated by Dieterle's version. The performances are very fine: Charles Laughton in the title role is supported by a very able cast - the never-less-than-beautiful Maureen O'Hara, a very young (and, quite surprisingly, good-looking) Ed O'Brien in his film debut, Harry Davenport, the ubiquitous Thomas Mitchell, and Cedric Hardwicke, whose performance I found to be the most impressive. The black and white-cinematography by Joseph H. August is very adequate, capturing the atmosphere one might have of the time and age beautifully (at least, the one in my mind), and so is Alfred Newman's score, which, unlike many other scores of that era, did not drown the film in a constant and often annoying soundscape. In fact, there are quite a number of scenes that might well have worked in a silent movie - the scene where Gringoire, the O'Brien-character, gets harassed by beggars comes to mind, for example. Running close to two hours, the movie nevertheless never loses steam; the multitude of interesting characters and the fine execution (of the novel, not the characters) made me put the novel up on my wish list for the next birthday presents. Very recommended!

Although many actors including Lon Chaney, Anthony Quinn and Anthony Hopkins have strapped on the hunch over the years, none have come close to equalling let alone surpassing Charles Laughton's performance as Quasimodo in the 1939 version. Along with impressive sets, moody black and white photography and a powerful Alfred Newman score, this film remains a formidable artistic achievement.Despite Laughton's makeup delivering plenty of shock value, his character retains sympathy. The audience is denied the comfort of seeing Quasimodo as a creature that could not exist in real life. He is neither a supernatural being nor a creation of a mad scientist. Laughton's Quasimodo is an afflicted but real human being - a kindred spirit of the true-life Elephant Man. Laughton is barely recognisable - those who know his work may recognise him by the mole on his left cheek. Irish actress Maureen O'Hara in her Hollywood debut plays the other key figure in the story, Esmeralda. She fairly glows in this film, and has an effect on men not unlike the effect Cameron Diaz's character has on them in "Something About Mary". Males of all ages, hunchbacked or otherwise, are attracted to her. Many scenes stay in the memory. When Quasimodo is caught watching Esmeralda dancing during the Festival of Fools, his head is pushed through a hole on a stage to be evaluated by the crowd. Although great advances have been made in makeup and special effects since 1939, the first sight of Laughton's Quasimodo still has the power to shock. In the film's most disturbing sequence, Quasimodo is whipped for attempting to abduct Esmeralda on the orders of his guardian. After his tunic is ripped away to expose his hump, he receives 50 lashes in a scene that is still brutal despite 70 intervening years of cinematic excess. The brutality is only relieved when Esmeralda steps forward to give him water. When Quasimodo attempts to hide his ugliness from Esmeralda in the bell tower of Notre Dame, it illustrates Laughton's ability to project a character through pounds of makeup. He also projected onto his character the way he felt about his own lack of physical attractiveness.Laughton searched within painful life experiences to inform his roles. He didn't have to look far for pain in this demanding film. Apparently the hours spent applying his makeup put a strain on Laughton's relationship with his makeup artists, and at some point, they humiliated Laughton by pinning him down and squirting soda water in his face. Laughton drew on such experiences to help him plumb the depths of Quasimodo's despair. In my opinion, through Laughton's inspired performance and superb production values, the 1939 film eclipses all the other versions. Despite many remakes, this remains the definitive film version.