Why ‘The Hunchback of Notre Dame’ should be remade but not by Disney

In 1996, Walt Disney Pictures released the film The Hunchback of Notre Dame, which was helmed under the direction of the same people who made Beauty and the Beast, Gary Trousdale and Kirk Wise. The film opened to positive reviews and was a staple in the Disney Renaissance and Gen-Z childhood.

Disclaimer: This article expresses the author's personal views on the subject.

The film is based on the classic novel of the same name by French author Victor Hugo. With most of its adaptations, the Disney film gave the final product a more light-hearted iteration but misunderstood hunchback. It failed to add Hugo’s darker elements which made the book so incredible.

Expand Tweet

Of course, it’s not that the Disney film is bad, it just may not have been what Victor Hugo was looking for if he wanted his work adapted for the screen. That said, here are some reasons why Disney should have no business being involved in a remake of The Hunchback of Notre Dame.

Disney needs to leave The Hunchback of Notre Dame alone

Edgier Themes

Quasimodo as he appears in the film (Image via Disney)

Disney is great at making magic for all of its viewers, but it fails to go darker for fear of upsetting younger viewers, and it does not cut to the heart of the book’s beauty. The 1996 Hunchback of Notre Dame was already very dark for children to digest as it talked about infanticide, lust, damnation, and cruelty towards people with disabilities. However, it still maintained a G-rating that allowed all audiences to see the film.

If seeing a cartoon that was made for kids was traumatizing, seeing a live-action remake that is more closely tied to the book would be a nightmare that could haunt the recesses of someone’s imagination for an age.

Seeing a more monstrous hunchback being beaten and mocked by a crowd, having the hunchback kidnap the Gypsy Esmerelda, or having Gypsy be hung by Frollo and his men seem like missed opportunities that the Disney film couldn’t or wouldn’t put on display. Seeing more of these moments might be something that audiences need in the lore that Hugo first gave us.

Omitting Unnecessary Characters

Something that needs to be addressed is the fact that the gargoyles in the Disney film have been a thorn in the side of fans for a long time. It is almost certain that Hugo would not approve of these characters in the fabric of the story.

The three gargoyles from the 1996 film, Victor, Hugo, and Laverne, were meant to serve as a Timon and Pumba-style comic relief, but when putting into perspective the monumentally dazzling story that was behind it, they seemed incredibly out of place.

It’s perfectly understandable to have a dark drama and add some necessary comedy relief, but when it causes a complete tonal shift in the structure of the movie, the characters become more intrusive than compelling.

In an older sense, Gargoyles were designed to stave off any demons or evil spirits from a building. That said, one would imagine that they would be stoic, graceful, and mysterious. You wouldn’t expect them to be corny and silly. A remake that went by the book would easily depart from these ideas.

Live-Action

'The Hunchback of Notre Dame' (Image via Disney)

Any remake of the adaptation will most likely be live-action, and that’s the best route for it. Animation and performance capture are both great, but there seems to be nothing more authentic than the traditional live-action medium.

Seeing, living, breathing human beings on the screen takes you into a world that makes you feel like it could have happened, while cartoons give a more sanitized and fantastical version of an account that occurred, but because it is a cartoon, it seems less realistic and more outside the realm of reality.

Many people gravitate to cartoons because animation gives artists more freedom to express themselves in what they draw. The thing is, if this iteration were to be more grounded, then reality would be a necessity. It would cut deep into the hunchback’s character and would be the defining factor between childish and dramatic storytelling.

Homage to Victor Hugo

The most obvious reason to have another film company make a remake of The Hunchback of Notre Dame would be to pay homage to the original author Victor Hugo. The marvel that is Hugo’s novel is so embedded within the DNA of French and American culture that going against the source material seems like more of a disservice to Hugo’s Gothic vision, even if only a few things were changed to fit the narrative of children.

However, the reason that so many adaptations get so much grief from fans and audiences is that they don’t honor the source material. It seems disheartening to waste the potential of an adaptation that’s poorly written and disregards the legend that created it.

Final Thoughts

A still from The Hunchback of Notre Dame (Image via Disney)

Disney has a flair for keeping people interested in their work, and they have built an undying fan base around their empire, but there are things that Disney has touched that may not be in the audience’s best interest. The Hunchback of Notre Dame is meant to be a dark and ethereal portrait of the Middle Ages. It was not meant for children, and it was not meant to be jovial or to have a happy ending.

The only conceivable way to respect the source material that Victor Hugo brought to the world is to not stray away from Hugo’s vision and use the darkness to the filmmakers’ advantage.

Hugo’s brilliant piece of literature discussing beauty, sadness, death, and life is still, to this day, unparalleled in its concept and execution. It would be a waste if it were squandered on one-dimensional, childish gibberish. Disney, I love you, but please sit this one out and let an R-rating suffice.

Edited by Shreya Das