A truly great and under appreciated film. And Maureen Ohara - what a magnificent beauty she was, and what a classy, classy lady she remained. Thanks for posting this.
Masterful movie. Very informative documentary. But I can't believe that they didn't even think to mention Sir Cedric Hardwick's incredible performance as Frollo!
Only because of Laughton's role 'over-shadowing' of Hardwick's own performance...both of them gave the finest performances of their careers, in what I consider to be one of the greatest, if not the greatest movie ever made.(all of humanities 'Sins' are here, both venal and mortal...and yet 'Quasimodo' is 'more human' than any of them) His love for 'Esmeralda' is pure and real...like that of a dog for his 'Master'. He loves his 'Father' (Frollo) even though he's cruel and uncaring for him, still he loves him...until his heart is broken by his father's own lust for the Gypsy girl that consumes him until he feels he must kill her to save his own soul from betrayal of his vows to God...and Quasimodo makes what for him is the 'ultimate sacrifice'...the taking of his father's life.
What's so masterful about not including the two skeletons at the end, showing that a man's looks aren't important? I won't watch any version where she gets the handsome gentlemen at the end. It makes Quasimodo a cuckold
Gerry Nightingale That’s a pretty big theme for any decade to grapple with. What startling is how kind the king is and how cruel the system toward average people. Story wise, I enjoyed the fact that it’s on the cusp of a human rights revolution depicted by the pamphleteer.
@@wariswrong4920 I remember when hollywood altered the end of the man who laughs (1928), the universal did not have the courage to make a tragic ending with the death of Dea and gwynplaine. Have already made a happy end with Anna Karenina of 1927.
Thank you so much for posting this. This version is one of cinema's greatest achievements and Laughton gives a performance that is peerless. Anthony Hopkins did a good job in a made for TV version but Laughton is the definitive Hunchback. Maureen O'Hara....what an extraordinarily beautiful lady.
This is a very interesting documentary. I had read somewhere that RKO went over to the original Universal set for the silent classic, but this debunks that in favor of the RKO ranch.It's hard to deny "Gone With the Wind" for Best Picture of 1939, but "Hunchback" should have been nominated for Best Picture and Laughton should not only have been nominated for Best Actor, but he should have won. Ditto for Alfred Newman's magnificent score. This film was a true classic.
@@lifeingeneral9111 You're an idiot. Of course the pedophiles should never have been protected and should have been punished at the time of their offenses. But those individuals don't represent the Church and there is no reason to be glad this beautiful institution burned.
So so sad about Notra Damn and Quasimodo was the first person that came to mindalso I remember seeing the Charles Laughton version one day and omg I bawled my eyes out I just wanted to hug. Him and protect him keep him safe
Thanks for this. Typical of all pre-digital films, The shots had to be wrestled into existence painfully every day. All the wide , surging crowd scenes were approved of by a single director, not rendered by a Korean supervisor-and the difference is certainly up there on the screen.
Iv been so lucky to have been to Nore Dame and I heard the bells ringing and I said to my friend aww there’s Quasimodo ringing his bells it was so sad about the fire I so hope to go back one day once it’s been restored
Honestly i think it was just 1939 was a tsunami of amazing films and he was overlooked. Any other year and this film would have been recognized for the magic it was.
Academy Awards are all about money, designed to promote a studios' or a producer's up and coming actors who they think need a boost. The studios & now producers enter the nominations for their own films. It's a trick on their part to make us think the awards are based on merit alone.
Shocking only 2 Oscar nominations. Not ever for Laughton, or the art directors. But...it was a year of monumental films providing a lot of competition for the honours. This one, to me, was/is darn near the top of films that year.
No interest in seeing this untrue versions politically correct ending. This wasn't the classic story with the entwined skeletons of Esmeralda and Quasimodo at the end. And it wouldn't even be PC anymore because he was the victim of Esmeralda's lookism if she went off with a handsome dude at the end of this weird adaptation. Shame on Hollywood for thinking the public couldn't handle the book's poignant and tragic but romantic ending. That was the real story. And the handsome Phoebus was a horrible jerk in the book. Why reinvent him as good? Did the American audience need that nonsense? Would it hurt our sensibilities? At least the 1956 Lolobridgeda and Anthony Quinn version did justice to the real story. What a waste this version was for unnecessarily going off script, like it mattered.
My feeling exactly..I also thought Laughton was too much of a Village idiot ,marshmallow gargoyle depiction..hard to believe he would possess colossal strength,like Quasimodo in the book..Quinn was a little more believable,having played a strong man in another movie..but neither actor really portrayed the Quasimodo in the book..He was young,(barely 20 years old)extremely strong,and educated(by Frollo) He didn't talk because he had trouble hearing,but was far from being an idiot.He was a man feared and shunned because of his appearance..Esmeralda brought out his good qualities..
And the irony is that the Anthony Quinn version, the one closest to the book, is one of the worst versions due to it's casting and directorial choices. I'm a stickler for the book as well, but you can't deny the 1939 version is a great movie. Anthony Quinn played his like a village idiot and Gina Lollabrigida played Esmeralda like a Tavern wench, too mature and lack of innocence/ naivete. If you want a good marriage of something closer to the book, I highly recommend the 1982 version with Anthony Hopkins as Quasimodo.
among the two is a hunchback of NOTRE DAME, a goodlooking Roman Soldier who was without a PUPPET HAT....a true story which made into film/true to life.
A truly great and under appreciated film. And Maureen Ohara - what a magnificent beauty she was, and what a classy, classy lady she remained. Thanks for posting this.
" Why was I not made of stone like thee" The saddest line in this movie!
I love the traces of Irish in Maureen O'Hara's accent, it's charming! Rather nice on the eye, too.
I always felt sorry for Quasimodo I just wanted to give him a big hug and kiss his cheek and be his friend and I wouldn’t be afraid of him
Do you feel sorry for the 20k people who were killed in East Ukraine since 2014 by the Ukrainian government installed by the Obama coup?
Same!
Nice one …
how beautiful is this lady may God have mercy on her soul
@mickey7411 she was not naked...scantily clad, but not naked in lady godiva
"Laughton" was the finest actor of...ever! To be part of any show or film with him in it was a 'PRIVILEGE'...not 'work'.
The most talented actor of all time.
Really wonderful to hear Maureen describe the film.
Spent an evening at a concert inside Notre Dame. Bach, Stravinsky, Part. But kept thinking of Newman's music :).
Truly a great classic.. this movie. ❤️
Masterful movie.
Very informative documentary. But I can't believe that they didn't even think to mention Sir Cedric Hardwick's incredible performance as Frollo!
Only because of Laughton's role 'over-shadowing' of Hardwick's own performance...both of them gave the finest performances of their careers, in what I consider to be one of the greatest, if not the greatest movie ever made.(all of humanities 'Sins' are here, both venal and mortal...and yet 'Quasimodo' is 'more human' than any of them) His love for 'Esmeralda' is pure and real...like that of a dog for his 'Master'. He loves his 'Father' (Frollo) even though he's cruel and uncaring for him, still he loves him...until his heart is broken by his father's own lust for the Gypsy girl that consumes him until he feels he must kill her to save his own soul from betrayal of his vows to God...and Quasimodo makes what for him is the 'ultimate sacrifice'...the taking of his father's life.
totally agree ...he was the great foil to the hunchback
What's so masterful about not including the two skeletons at the end, showing that a man's looks aren't important? I won't watch any version where she gets the handsome gentlemen at the end. It makes Quasimodo a cuckold
Gerry Nightingale That’s a pretty big theme for any decade to grapple with.
What startling is how kind the king is and how cruel the system toward average people.
Story wise, I enjoyed the fact that it’s on the cusp of a human rights revolution depicted by the pamphleteer.
@@wariswrong4920 I remember when hollywood altered the end of the man who laughs (1928), the universal did not have the courage to make a tragic ending with the death of Dea and gwynplaine.
Have already made a happy end with Anna Karenina of 1927.
One of the best looking black and white films.... wonderful cinematography, editing... lots of wide shots.... magnificent
Thank you so much for posting this. This version is one of cinema's greatest achievements and Laughton gives a performance that is peerless. Anthony Hopkins did a good job in a made for TV version but Laughton is the definitive Hunchback. Maureen O'Hara....what an extraordinarily beautiful lady.
This is a very interesting documentary. I had read somewhere that RKO went over to the original Universal set for the silent classic, but this debunks that in favor of the RKO ranch.It's hard to deny "Gone With the Wind" for Best Picture of 1939, but "Hunchback" should have been nominated for Best Picture and Laughton should not only have been nominated for Best Actor, but he should have won. Ditto for Alfred Newman's magnificent score. This film was a true classic.
Charles Laughton was born to play this character
Hunch back Notre dame is best movie
Such a tragedy with the burning of the Cathedral in Paris today. 😥
Certainly is Lana. Glad someone else is here to pay tribute. Hope they rebuild it soon.
I think the fire focused the world’s attention on these big themes suddenly.
You don’t know what you got until you’re losing it.
It is also my friend made a joke saying it was Frollo and his Hellfire
just a bunch of child molesters... let it burn!!!!!!
@@lifeingeneral9111 You're an idiot. Of course the pedophiles should never have been protected and should have been punished at the time of their offenses. But those individuals don't represent the Church and there is no reason to be glad this beautiful institution burned.
My FAVORITE movie as a child in the late 50s.
So so sad about Notra Damn and Quasimodo was the first person that came to mindalso I remember seeing the Charles Laughton version one day and omg I bawled my eyes out I just wanted to hug. Him and protect him keep him safe
LOL it's actually "Dame"
Notre DAMNED
Same here.
This is my favorite version of the story. It was also very inspirational to my love for special makeup effects.
Thanks for this.
Typical of all pre-digital films, The shots had to be wrestled into existence painfully every day.
All the wide , surging crowd scenes were approved of by a single director, not rendered by a Korean supervisor-and the difference is certainly up there on the screen.
Iv been so lucky to have been to Nore Dame and I heard the bells ringing and I said to my friend aww there’s Quasimodo ringing his bells it was so sad about the fire I so hope to go back one day once it’s been restored
One of my favorite movies.
LOVE LOVE LOVE this movie!! (Subscriber-for-Life)
One of the "forever classics" among films
How was Charles Laughton not nominated for an Academy Award?
Honestly i think it was just 1939 was a tsunami of amazing films and he was overlooked. Any other year and this film would have been recognized for the magic it was.
Right?!!!! And his courtroom speech in "This Land is Mine"....and so many more. A great actor, great actor.
What a shame I Claudius was never completed. Theres a good docu on u-tube about that too.
and Maureen O Hara?
Academy Awards are all about money, designed to promote a studios' or a producer's up and coming actors who they think need a boost. The studios & now producers enter the nominations for their own films. It's a trick on their part to make us think the awards are based on merit alone.
Shocking only 2 Oscar nominations. Not ever for Laughton, or the art directors. But...it was a year of monumental films providing a lot of competition for the honours. This one, to me, was/is darn near the top of films that year.
Great and Wonderful share. Thank you. Gorgeous filmmaking story
Laughton should have received his second Oscar for his portrayal.
among the two is a hunchback of NOTRE DAME, a goodlooking Roman Soldier who was without a PUPPET HAT....a true story which made into film/true to life
The movie is a classic I loved all the versions from Lon Chaney to the Disney one heard Disney are doing a live action version in the near future
Maureen O'Hara is such a treasure!
Can't believe Edmund O'Brien was ever that thin!
excellent. Thank you.
If you would discover the real meaning of Hugo's novel you would fall of your chair.
I love movie
Charles Laughton was a genius …
where can i find that version of Ave Maria ?? have looked for decades...
Classic
dead ringer for Quasimodo
😎👍🗽
EN ESPAÑOL COMODORO YESMERARDA PELIKULAS KONPLETAS
1939 .. and when did the Nazis invade France ?
No interest in seeing this untrue versions politically correct ending. This wasn't the classic story with the entwined skeletons of Esmeralda and Quasimodo at the end. And it wouldn't even be PC anymore because he was the victim of Esmeralda's lookism if she went off with a handsome dude at the end of this weird adaptation. Shame on Hollywood for thinking the public couldn't handle the book's poignant and tragic but romantic ending. That was the real story. And the handsome Phoebus was a horrible jerk in the book. Why reinvent him as good? Did the American audience need that nonsense? Would it hurt our sensibilities? At least the 1956 Lolobridgeda and Anthony Quinn version did justice to the real story. What a waste this version was for unnecessarily going off script, like it mattered.
My feeling exactly..I also thought Laughton was too much of a Village idiot ,marshmallow gargoyle depiction..hard to believe he would possess colossal strength,like Quasimodo in the book..Quinn was a little more believable,having played a strong man in another movie..but neither actor really portrayed the Quasimodo in the book..He was young,(barely 20 years old)extremely strong,and educated(by Frollo) He didn't talk because he had trouble hearing,but was far from being an idiot.He was a man feared and shunned because of his appearance..Esmeralda brought out his good qualities..
Just to add,the Disney version should have never been made!
Fuck you, moron. this film is a true masterpiece. a film adaptation can be true in spirit to the novel but not necessarily identic to this.
And the irony is that the Anthony Quinn version, the one closest to the book, is one of the worst versions due to it's casting and directorial choices. I'm a stickler for the book as well, but you can't deny the 1939 version is a great movie. Anthony Quinn played his like a village idiot and Gina Lollabrigida played Esmeralda like a Tavern wench, too mature and lack of innocence/ naivete. If you want a good marriage of something closer to the book, I highly recommend the 1982 version with Anthony Hopkins as Quasimodo.
No matter how i like this movie and actors, i have to agree with you. We need more productions that are faithfull to the original story.
Take ing of it to sracy
among the two is a hunchback of NOTRE DAME, a goodlooking Roman Soldier who was without a PUPPET HAT....a true story which made into film/true to life.
??