D
Deleted member 107043
I mean, woah.... 
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
New Frozen Show replacing Aladdin at DCA
- Thread starter Burgower1994
- Start date
PrincessJenn5795
Active Member
Whoever had the idea that Hunchback of Notre Dame should be made into a kids movie was nuts. The book is incredibly dark, and there is nothing at all in it that suggests it is appropriate for kids. They drastically changed the story, and tried to lighten it up by adding cutesy gargoyles and making Captain Pheobus a hero (he really wasn't) with a funny horse, and taking out huge chunks of the original story, but they could not really change the fact that it was never meant as a kids' story. I didn't like the movie much because I didn't want my kids watching it and it was too far removed from the actual story for me. Disney obviously tones down a lot of the stories they tell, but they don't typically have to go to the same lengths as they did from Hunchback. Making fairy tales less dark is a lot different from completely rewriting the story.
I do love the music from Hunchback though. I am just not sure that the music is enough to make a stage production of the story worth seeing.
D
Deleted member 107043
It certainly wasn't the first time that Disney was accused of watering down a story in an animated film. That's kind of what Disney does.
Phroobar
Well-Known Member
Exactly. See Little Mermaid.
PrincessJenn5795
Active Member
I know, and I said as much. My point was that they had to completely rewrite Hunchback and still weren't able to make it into something parents are okay with their kids watching. When even Disney can't Disneyfy a story, it probably shouldn't be turned into a movie aimed at kids.
Along with every other fairy tale they have told. The difference is they were able to tell the story and make it suitable for kids at the same time. They changed the ending, but most of the story elements were there, just toned down. There was so much taken out of the original Hunchback story, which is almost 1000 pages long BTW, and turned into something completely different and still not good for kids.
GiveMeTheMusic
Well-Known Member
The stage production sticks much closer to the book, eliminating the cutesy gargoyles and letting the story get much darker than the film. That's one of the reasons why Disney Theatrical wasn't comfortable marketing it on Broadway. Its two engagements in San Diego and New Jersey over the past year omitted the Disney name and logo from the title.
PrincessJenn5795
Active Member
In that case, I would probably really like it.
D
Deleted member 107043
I guess I disagree that it was a movie aimed specifically at kids. If anything the film didn't seem to know who its audience was, especially considering that it was rated PG. I know that the masses assume that animated movies are for children, but there is a wealth of animated films produced by the Studio that embraced ideas and themes that were slightly more mature. Fantasia and Hunchback are perfect examples.
PrincessJenn5795
Active Member
I am fine with animated movies being aimed at adults, but Hunchback was released with the same type of marketing as their more kid oriented ones. They had sing-a-long videos and my first reader books and toys in kids' meals. Fantasia really was aimed more at adults. If they wanted Hunchback to be aimed at adults they should have left out some of the cutesy additions and stuck more to the original story.
Curious Constance
Well-Known Member
And it still shows up on "Kids" Netflix too. I could care less about languange or "Superhero" type violence, but that movie, with the villian literally saying he will either "have" Esméralda or she'll burn in hell? Ummmmmm, no.
D
Deleted member 107043
Maybe Netflix should consider placing the film elsewhere. Again, the movie is rated PG, so it's not like there isn't a warning.
PrincessJenn5795
Active Member
They should, but you can't really go by the PG status alone. There are a lot of movies that are PG that are that rating because a movie has "rude humor" or "mild action." Frozen was rated PG, and there is no song about a guy wanting to either "have" or kill the object of his sexual obession. It is almost impossible for movies to get G ratings anymore, but in the 90s they were a lot less dainty about what counts as G or PG. I am willing to bet if Hunchback came out today, it would be rated PG-13, and Netflix just categorizes by labels and ratings, so it will be in the kids section.
Phroobar
Well-Known Member
When they did the Hunchback show at Disneyland I believe they included that song in the show. It was pretty intense and creepy song but I think back then we saw it in the same light as Scar's song in the Lion King. It was just the villain's song. The Pirates of the Caribbean use to have men chasing women without food in their hands. There was the one fat pirate that talked about "hoisting his colors on the likes of that shy little one". Now he just mumbles about a map with Jack looking over his shoulder. Walt accepted the original fat pirate's lines but now it's bad.
Has the world always been this scary or are we just a lot more sensitive to it? Back in the 80's there was partial or brief nudity in PG movies and people would swear like sailors in them. Now you see that kind of thing in PG13. Makes me wonder what R was like in that time and frame of mind.
Has the world always been this scary or are we just a lot more sensitive to it? Back in the 80's there was partial or brief nudity in PG movies and people would swear like sailors in them. Now you see that kind of thing in PG13. Makes me wonder what R was like in that time and frame of mind.
D
Deleted member 107043
Have you ever seen the full uncut version of the Exorcist? Even now I wonder how Warner Brothers had the guts to release that film in the early 70s. Even more surprising is that it won and Oscar for best adapted screenplay!
PrincessJenn5795
Active Member
I have, and I am fairly sure that and Children of the Corn are behind my phobia of creepy kids. That movie scared the crap out of me!
D
Deleted member 107043
Yeah, I don't do creepy kids hiding in corn fields.
D
Deleted member 107043
I haven't. I would ask you to tell me more about it but I'm afraid we're going to be reprimanded for not staying on topic.
Old Mouseketeer
Well-Known Member
The use of tracks (pre-recorded music) is a delicate matter with the AGVA and AFM unions. The principle roles at Aladdin, Magical Map, and Fantasy Faire all sing live (unless there is an emergency sub). The trumpet at Magical Map and the Piano at Fantasy Faire are live. The orchestra and chorus at Map and Aladdin are tracks and the dancers lip synch. This is all negotiated and approved with the performer unions.
Back in the '70s there was a lot of back and forth on this at WDW. Before he created Voices of Liberty for Epcot, Derric Johnson had a Christian/patriotic group, the Re'Generation, that performed on MK's Castle Stage every February for President's Days. They were a track group of 10 singers with prerecorded orchestra and vocals that were mixed with their live voices. Over the five years they were there, they were all track one year, track mixed with WDW Band three years, and entirely live one year. A number of the a'capella arrangements used by Voices today after Derric's retirement date back to Re'Gen.