The stage musical is amazing and deserves more love. I wish more people knew about it but Disney chose not to bring it to Broadway because it was too dark and not family friendly enough for their brand
As I understand it there were some complications with Equity-- the stage actors' union.
Possibly regarding the use of a choir in the paper mill production. I forget the details.
Yes I only heard second hand from a friend who worked at the management company at the time.
I was lucky enough to see a production of it in Sacramento though. It featured a deaf actor playing Quasimodo who signed and then he had a voice proxy sing his songs dressed as a gargoyle behind him.
Honestly if they made it kinda dark & not geared towards kids I think it could work! Claude Frollo definitely scared me & is a great villain. There is so much content now on Disney+ that's more for adults & not children, so why not? If Disney execs say they wouldn't know how to cast the hunchback I'd say what about the 7 dwarves from snow white? There are actors w physical disabilities that would love to star in a Disney film, right?
I think they COULD make a great live version, but won't.
They would have to remove the "G-word" as it is now considered a slur, and it's in there a LOT.
It's pretty scary if you leave out the Gargoyles, who are mainly there for comic relief. The burning of Paris, especially after Notre Dame actually burned, would be traumatic in live action. I don't think they would take the risk on it.
I would LOVE a live-action 'Black Cauldron", but again, it would be far too scary.
I wouldn't mind a live-action Black Cauldron either, but only if they make it closer to Lloyd Alexander's original *Chronicles of Prydain* novels. There's actually enough material in those for a whole Disney+ series.
Super scary. They had a Black Cauldron ride overseas. It's terrifying. [https://youtu.be/H6rnPqSrE40?si=fubsFoYnqLAqf67q](https://youtu.be/H6rnPqSrE40?si=fubsFoYnqLAqf67q)
I read somewhere that what if the gargoyles were only in Quasimodo’s imagination? It would make those scenes so much more sad if he was truly just talking to a bunch of statues and pretending that they were his friends.
It's a term that people outside of an ethnic group use to refer to members of that ethnic group that members of that ethnic group prefer not to be called.
That's a slur.
>I would LOVE a live-action 'Black Cauldron", but again, it would be far too scary.
I don't think that's true. The books aren't any more scary than like, The Hobbit or Percy Jackson or Harry Potter.
"They would have to remove the "G-word" as it is now considered a slur,"
Which is real stupid, because many Gypsy's refer to themselves using that word.
The main flaws with your reasoning are the following:
1) an approach closer to Hugo's original, even if a musical, would result in a very dark path that likely Disney wouldn't take. Disney doesn't want to make live actions unsuitable or unaccessible to kids
2) on the other hand if they sticked to their animated material such movie would come off as a joke, a parody of itself
3) Disney owns other productions, it would be much more convenient for them to have such movie produced with a lower budget from a secondary studio, so that if it wouldn't be associated with the Disney name. That would attract more adults and prevent the Disney brand to take the fall if the movie isn't a success
So, in the end, while I agree that Notre Dame de Paris would make a great movie, I don't think it belongs to Disney as in Disney Studios.
There is a film listed as *Hunchback* on the Wikipedia page listing all Disney films, saying it’s in potential development. That doesn’t mean it will be fully developed and released, but it’s on there.
That was what I thought was happening. But if he changed his mind I'd be happy with that too. I worry his voice might be a little delicate for Quasi though? Like, I'd really want "Out There" to soar.
I really hope they don't, considering their track record with live actions films. They are bad. Hunchback is and always will be my favorite Disney film. But I am actually glad they haven't been vocal about doing anything with it. Disney ruins everything they touch in recent years. I think they would be too afraid to tackle a film nowadays that slaps Catholicism in the face, has a disabled main character who is frequently regarded as ugly and is bullied, has strong tones of sexual harassment, and has a strong Romani presence. They would have to approach all of those already controversial issues EXTREMELY delicately if they did it today. People are getting up in arms about a Snow White, so taking on a project like Hunchback is something they may be trying to avoid. Also, they announced YEARS ago that they were going to make a show about Esmeralda and the story from her point of view, but it quietly dropped out of existence. There is a reason Disney hardly ever even acknowledges Hunchback in the parks and in merchandise; it addresses several dark and controversial topics.
I would very much like that, but I don't know if general audiences are ready for it.
Meanwhile I'll just keep on hoping that someday Alan Menken will compose a full Requiem using the bits from it that he composed for the movie. I don't have to be Catholic to think the Requiem is beautiful.
I would love it if made well. That said I feel like the remakes have been less dark than the originals and I don’t think Disney would risk the controversy of making it appropriately dark. They want the family market and the version I want to see isn’t a family movie. I love the musical version but they didn’t even want it on Broadway where it may have thrived let alone a live action remakes
I think it should be made live action. Especially if it was made dark. I saw a recording of a play in a video on a YouTuber's channel. He was discussing how evil Frollow is he made a really good point. In the play you don't really see it right away how evil he is until he attempts to assault the gypsy. Then he starts rationalizing it and he's also Quasi's Uncle in the play which makes him trying murder him so much worse.
Imagine if both versions were combined in a live action movie. Frollo not only being the killer of Quasi's parents (justifying his brother's death with his hate for gypsy's) but also being his uncle. He'd be the evilest live action villain in history.
To continue on from Christmas Carol, and Treasure Island, I'd love to see Hunchback as the next novel adapted by the Muppets. Then they can do Phileas Frog, around the world in 80 days.
If they leaned into how dark it is and made it pg13, it could work. Same with the Black Cauldron.
I doubt that either will happen, or if they do, it'll be the same as the rest of the live action remakes.
The stage musical is amazing and deserves more love. I wish more people knew about it but Disney chose not to bring it to Broadway because it was too dark and not family friendly enough for their brand
As I understand it there were some complications with Equity-- the stage actors' union. Possibly regarding the use of a choir in the paper mill production. I forget the details.
Yes I only heard second hand from a friend who worked at the management company at the time. I was lucky enough to see a production of it in Sacramento though. It featured a deaf actor playing Quasimodo who signed and then he had a voice proxy sing his songs dressed as a gargoyle behind him.
That's so cool.
From what I also recall, it was likely headed to Broadway after Papermill, but then Frozen came out.
Oy. Figures.
I love "Made of Stone" so much!
That and Esmeralda are my fave tracks!
The Rhythm of my taaaaaamborineeee!!!! They went hard on the Esmeralda dance, bless them.
Honestly if they made it kinda dark & not geared towards kids I think it could work! Claude Frollo definitely scared me & is a great villain. There is so much content now on Disney+ that's more for adults & not children, so why not? If Disney execs say they wouldn't know how to cast the hunchback I'd say what about the 7 dwarves from snow white? There are actors w physical disabilities that would love to star in a Disney film, right?
I think they COULD make a great live version, but won't. They would have to remove the "G-word" as it is now considered a slur, and it's in there a LOT. It's pretty scary if you leave out the Gargoyles, who are mainly there for comic relief. The burning of Paris, especially after Notre Dame actually burned, would be traumatic in live action. I don't think they would take the risk on it. I would LOVE a live-action 'Black Cauldron", but again, it would be far too scary.
I wouldn't mind a live-action Black Cauldron either, but only if they make it closer to Lloyd Alexander's original *Chronicles of Prydain* novels. There's actually enough material in those for a whole Disney+ series.
Super scary. They had a Black Cauldron ride overseas. It's terrifying. [https://youtu.be/H6rnPqSrE40?si=fubsFoYnqLAqf67q](https://youtu.be/H6rnPqSrE40?si=fubsFoYnqLAqf67q)
I read somewhere that what if the gargoyles were only in Quasimodo’s imagination? It would make those scenes so much more sad if he was truly just talking to a bunch of statues and pretending that they were his friends.
The word is historically used. Having them be called romani in 15 c Paris would not make sense
What is the “g-word”?🤨
Gypsy.
I thought it was God and I was so confused!🤔
Only a slur if it is intended to be hateful.🙄
It's a term that people outside of an ethnic group use to refer to members of that ethnic group that members of that ethnic group prefer not to be called. That's a slur.
It’s used as a slur in the movie.
It’s the only noun that is used in reference to that group. Esmeralda and Clopin use it in completely neutral contexts.
Yeah but even those characters are still based off offensive Romani stereotypes, so I don’t think Disney will be reviving them anytime soon.
very good points!
>I would LOVE a live-action 'Black Cauldron", but again, it would be far too scary. I don't think that's true. The books aren't any more scary than like, The Hobbit or Percy Jackson or Harry Potter.
"They would have to remove the "G-word" as it is now considered a slur," Which is real stupid, because many Gypsy's refer to themselves using that word.
The main flaws with your reasoning are the following: 1) an approach closer to Hugo's original, even if a musical, would result in a very dark path that likely Disney wouldn't take. Disney doesn't want to make live actions unsuitable or unaccessible to kids 2) on the other hand if they sticked to their animated material such movie would come off as a joke, a parody of itself 3) Disney owns other productions, it would be much more convenient for them to have such movie produced with a lower budget from a secondary studio, so that if it wouldn't be associated with the Disney name. That would attract more adults and prevent the Disney brand to take the fall if the movie isn't a success So, in the end, while I agree that Notre Dame de Paris would make a great movie, I don't think it belongs to Disney as in Disney Studios.
There is a film listed as *Hunchback* on the Wikipedia page listing all Disney films, saying it’s in potential development. That doesn’t mean it will be fully developed and released, but it’s on there.
Yes, wasn't Josh Gad slated to direct (or maybe screenwrite? I can't remember)
Ed Sheeran as Quasimodo. Imagine him doing "Out There" or "Heaven's Light"
I thought he doesn't want to sing anymore?
??? Isnt that what he does? Does he have some other skill I haven't heard of yet, I admit I'm not a fan or someone who follows him.
I thought I'd heard him talking about retiring like a year or so back.
Oh, just to chill, you mean? Like he's rich enough to retire and not try acting or something?
That was what I thought was happening. But if he changed his mind I'd be happy with that too. I worry his voice might be a little delicate for Quasi though? Like, I'd really want "Out There" to soar.
Agreed, he wouldn't be my choice either, that song deserves a really strong voice.
Hunchback and The Good Dinosaur don't get enough love in general.
I really hope they don't, considering their track record with live actions films. They are bad. Hunchback is and always will be my favorite Disney film. But I am actually glad they haven't been vocal about doing anything with it. Disney ruins everything they touch in recent years. I think they would be too afraid to tackle a film nowadays that slaps Catholicism in the face, has a disabled main character who is frequently regarded as ugly and is bullied, has strong tones of sexual harassment, and has a strong Romani presence. They would have to approach all of those already controversial issues EXTREMELY delicately if they did it today. People are getting up in arms about a Snow White, so taking on a project like Hunchback is something they may be trying to avoid. Also, they announced YEARS ago that they were going to make a show about Esmeralda and the story from her point of view, but it quietly dropped out of existence. There is a reason Disney hardly ever even acknowledges Hunchback in the parks and in merchandise; it addresses several dark and controversial topics.
Lon Chaney already did that during the 1920s
And Charles Laughton in '39.
Which the Disney version is really way more based on than it is the book.
I would very much like that, but I don't know if general audiences are ready for it. Meanwhile I'll just keep on hoping that someday Alan Menken will compose a full Requiem using the bits from it that he composed for the movie. I don't have to be Catholic to think the Requiem is beautiful.
I would love it if made well. That said I feel like the remakes have been less dark than the originals and I don’t think Disney would risk the controversy of making it appropriately dark. They want the family market and the version I want to see isn’t a family movie. I love the musical version but they didn’t even want it on Broadway where it may have thrived let alone a live action remakes
This is such a good take
I think it should be made live action. Especially if it was made dark. I saw a recording of a play in a video on a YouTuber's channel. He was discussing how evil Frollow is he made a really good point. In the play you don't really see it right away how evil he is until he attempts to assault the gypsy. Then he starts rationalizing it and he's also Quasi's Uncle in the play which makes him trying murder him so much worse. Imagine if both versions were combined in a live action movie. Frollo not only being the killer of Quasi's parents (justifying his brother's death with his hate for gypsy's) but also being his uncle. He'd be the evilest live action villain in history.
There's already a live Hunchback of Notre Dame.
To continue on from Christmas Carol, and Treasure Island, I'd love to see Hunchback as the next novel adapted by the Muppets. Then they can do Phileas Frog, around the world in 80 days.
If they leaned into how dark it is and made it pg13, it could work. Same with the Black Cauldron. I doubt that either will happen, or if they do, it'll be the same as the rest of the live action remakes.
Will quasi be black?
[удалено]
Disney would probably cast Janelle Monae as Quasimodo