The Hunchback of Notre Dame (1957)

This is a must-see and one of the best documentaries - and films - of this year.

The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful

By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

An old-fashioned movie made with new-fashioned finesse.

I don't quite understand why this movie is always pulverized in favor of overrated 1939 Hollywoodization or the Disney travesty. Admittedly it needs more "oomph" - some blame director Delannoy, I heretically think problem is Hugo's own novel, which is well-written but hardly exciting story. However, Alain Cuny is excellent as Frollo, and while cutting off the dungeon scene is a mistake, in general the script by Jean Aurenche and Jacques Prévert is pretty faithful to Hugo. Sure, this Esmeralda is not Hugo's sixteen-year-old heroine, but she is one of the most sympathetic versions of the character. I rather take her than some sleazy young girl acting worse than a two franc whore.

I've been trying to see this movie for years just on the strength of a screenplay by Jacques Prevert and Jean Aurenche and it did no harm that the director was Jean Delannoy. The cast I can take or leave though I've got a lot of time for Jean Tissier in the comparatively minor role of the King. People who care about French cinema are acutely aware that this film was made in 1956 when the new wavelet was hovering in the wings. Petulant schoolboy Truffaut had already trashed Aurenche, Delannoy and a gang of other French film makers he wasn't fit to clap a slate for, and semi-amateur Godard was dreaming of his first anti- cinematic movie which turned out to be Brainless. This is exactly the kind of workmanlike, professional piece of craftsmanship they were trying to overthrow, not quite top-drawer but even bottom-drawer Delannoy-Aurenche-Prevert is light years better than Truffaut and Godard on the best day they ever had. No one is going to accuse Gina Lollabrigida of committing the crime of actually acting but if you need a pretty face to play a sensual gypsy girl she was as good as any, as for Quasimodo it could just as well have been Edward Everett Horton beneath all that Max Factor and the make up would be the role. All in all I'm glad I waited.

In this third version of The Hunchback of Notre Dame we get a story far closer to the truth of Victor Hugo's classic novel. Unlike the productions done starring Lon Chaney and Charles Laughton, this one was done in France by the French who took pains to remain faithful to the version Victor Hugo wrote. Note the title in the original French and note it's the cathedral not the hunchback who is the center of the story. That allowed Italian film star Gina Lollobrigida to be billed first and then Anthony Quinn as the hunchback. No doubt about it Lollobrigida is the sexiest Esmerelda going, she makes both Patsy Ruth Miller and Maureen O'Hara look like nuns. Then again she was who the movie going public was paying to see.This is not to take anything away from Anthony Quinn who seems to extend his role as the brutish strong man in La Strada into his portrayal of Quasimodo. Although Charles Laughton's performance is my favorite, this does not denigrate Quinn in any way. The rest of the cast is made up of players from the French cinema. I particularly liked Jean Tissier as the 'Spider King' Louis XI. It's a subtle piece of acting and you can see why this was no man to trifle with.The Hunchback of Notre Dame is a tale of innocence. Quasimodo's to be sure, but even the sexy and voluptuous Esmerelda. She may know all about sex, but she's pretty ignorant in the ways of the political world. Both protagonists are used by forces and people they cannot comprehend.This version of the Victor Hugo classic has its supporters and they should support this great retelling of a classic tale.

Non -French users may find it hard to believe it,but Jean Delannoy is despised by almost everybody in his native country.The NOuvelle Vague clique,on H.M. JL GOdard's service ,was always putting him down.That was (and is) certainly unfair cause Delannoy made two great "Maigret" and some of his works "la Symphonie Pastorale " Dieu A Besoin des Hommes" or "les Amitiés Particulières" are certainly worth a watch.His "secret de Mayerling" which is hard to find is certainly interesting too.Lit classics were also one of his favorite genres: abetted by Jean Cocteau,he updated "Tristan and Iseut" (as "l'Eternel Retour" ).Later he would transfer Madame de La Fayette 's "La Princesse de Clèves" (1961) with commendable results -the critics slagged it off- Here he tackles "Notre Dame de Paris" ,with a big budget (wide screen , color and an international cast were not so common in 1956 in France).His version is academic ,as would be Le Chanois's -another Bete Noire of the Nouvelle Vague- "les miserables " (1958).It's icily impersonal ,and it's the actors who save the movie from tedium:although too old ,Lollobrigida has beauty,charm,sensuality and even wit going for her;Quinn is a good -but not as outstanding as Charles Laughton-Quasimodo;Robert Hirsh is excellent as Gringoire;On the other hand,Jean Danet is a mediocre Phoebus.Although inferior to Dieterle's version ,Delannoy's work is more faithful to the novel (the ending notably) but there's a problem concerning Claude Frollo:why has he become a layman?Part of the reason might be found in the director's belief.Jean Delannoy is a true believer: in "Dieu a Besoin des Hommes" he showed spiritual concern.And recently,he released two religious movies in a row " Bernadette" (Soubirous) and "Marie de Nazareth".So maybe ,he changed Hugo's character because it was unbearable to him that a priest should desire a woman.Alain Cuny,whose portrayal of FRollo is a bit monotonous, had a brilliant career ,from Carné's "Les Visiteurs du Soir" to Fellini's "La Dolce Vita" and "Satyricon".