More film versions

[silverwhistle]

Today, I was lucky enough to get Kevin J Harty's The Reel Middle Ages secondhand. It's a compendium of films on mediæval themes, and includes several versions of NDdP.

I was interested to note that in the French silents, La Esméralda (1905) and NDdP (1911), Claude's profession and the tragic ending are retained. It's Hollywood that changes things

Comments

[silverwhistle]

I haven't seen many film adaptations of Notre Dame, I have only read the book and seen the Disney interpretation.

Re: the Disney, you have my deepest sympathies.

The first adaptations I saw, before reading the book in 1981, were the 1976 BBC version (excellent - studio-bound, but with inventive set reminiscent of the architectural forms you see in mediæval manuscripts, and it has the best ever Pierre and Jehan) and the 1956 film, which used to be on TV a great deal when I was young. I then saw the 1939 and 1982 versions on TV. I saw the 1923 and Disney versions and 2 ballets and the musical for the first time in 2009. I love the musical and the French ballet by Roland Petit. I refuse to watch the 1997 US TV version on principle, as it sounds even worse than the Disney version.

But I have heard good things about the 1956 version and I should probably watch it. The thing is, is that a good film isn't always the most faithful to the book - I mean ... a film is a film.. if it is going to be exactly like the book, why not just read the book?

Because a film should try to bring to life the book in spirit as far as possible. You want to see the characters you love brought to life. The ballet managed it, despite paring it down to 4 main characters, and despite some modernisation, the musical does it, too.

But bowdlerisation because of censorship such as the Hays Code (secularise Claude, removing the struggle over clerical celibacy, and the plot falls apart, because he ceases to have a problem), shifting emphasis on to a secondary character (Quasimodo is not the main character, or the most interesting one, FFS!), wilful distortions of characters, happy endings… No. If the end result is basically a different story, only loosely inspired by the book, it's dishonest to market it as an adaptation. If things like that are done to the work of living authors, they ask to have their names taken off the credits: dead authors should be treated with as much respect. (And why is it that film-makers care more about alienating some bases than others?)

The 1956 version changes some things, but it's the best big-screen version, I think, and the only one I've seen that takes us to Montfaucon. Alain Cuny is marvellous as Claude, and Anthony Quinn is a believable Quasimodo, whereas Chaney and Laughton were triumphs of ham and excessive make-up.

I would really love to see the 1965 BBC serialisation, but I fear it's lost. It needs a serial length to do it justice, and in those days the BBC was good at fidelity to source.