The Hunchback of Notre Dame II | 
| Director: Bradley Raymond
Actors: Jason Alexander, Jennifer Love Hewitt, Tom Hulce, Paul Kandel, Charles Kimbrough
Studio: Walt Disney Video
Category: DVD
List Price: $19.99
Buy New: $3.80
You Save: $16.19 (81%)
New (72) Used (60) Collectible (5) from $2.97
Rating:  48 reviews
Sales Rank: 22677
Format: Anamorphic, Animated, Closed-captioned, Color, Dolby, Dts Surround Sound, Dvd, Widescreen, Ntsc
Languages: English (Original Language), English (Subtitled)
Rating: G (General Audience)
Region: 1
Aspect Ratio: 1.66:1
Number Of Discs: 1
Running Time: 68 Minutes
Shipping Weight (lbs): 0.2
Dimensions (in): 7.1 x 5.4 x 0.6
MPN: D21317D
ISBN: 0788825526
UPC: 786936141450
EAN: 9780788825521
ASIN: B00005T7H3
Theatrical Release Date: March 19, 2002
Release Date: March 19, 2002
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
| |
| Similar Items:
|
| Editorial Reviews:
Product Description
Now that frollo is gone quasimodo rings the bell with the help of esmeraldas & phoebus son zephyr. But when quasi stops by a traveling circus owned by evil magician sarousch he falls for madellaine sarouschs assistant. But greedy sarousch forces madellaine to help him steal the cathedrals most famous bell. Studio: Buena Vista Home Video Release Date: 01/25/2005 Starring: Jason Alexander Tom Hulce Run time: 68 minutes Rating: G
Amazon.com
Most of the original characters from Disney's The Hunchback of Notre Dame--plus a few new ones--return for this animated sequel. Esmeralda (Demi Moore) and Phoebus (Kevin Kline) now have a son named Zephyr (Haley Joel Osment), with whom Quasi (Tom Hulce) has become friends. When the circus comes to town, the hunchback becomes enchanted by a magician's assistant, Madellaine (Jennifer Love Hewitt), but the her boss, the vain Sarousch (Michael McKean), is also a thief with an eye for the cathedral's jeweled bell. He forces Madellaine to woo Quasi while he carries out the theft. Will he get away with it? Will Madellaine learn to see the inner Quasi? And will he be able to trust again when he learns of her deception? Songs and humorous high jinks from the gargoyles, including Jason Alexander's Hugo, illustrate the lesson that--as in the first feature--you can't judge a book by its cover. This sequel is squarely aimed at a younger audience than the original was; children from 5 to 10 should be very entertained. --Kathleen C. Fennessy
|
| Customer Reviews: Read 43 more reviews...
 An Abomination to the Original June 8, 2009
Enlightening Perception (California, USA)
Before I start the actual review, all I can say is THANK GOD that Walt Disney Pictures shut down the division of DisneyToon studios that cranked out the crappy cheapquels. And THANK GOD that John Lasseter, who's the head of Pixar, told Disney to stop making them because they undercut the value of the originals and were bad in quality. If another studio had to tell Disney to stop making the cheapquels, that just proves how bad they are. Because these cheapquels are made by a completley separate division of Disney, they aren't considered canon or as continuations of the originals (Going to the Disney parks, the Disney stores, the Disney Cruise lines, and the Disney Princess Line is proof of that - there, you don't see them advertising the cheapquels, only the original movies and characters, and plus, do you see "Beauty and the Beast and the Enchanted Christmas" and other cheapquels on Broadway, like with the originals? Don't think so!), but that still doesn't stop me from voicing my opinion about how bad these cheapquels are and rejoicing over the fact that all the cheapquels are being locked in the Disney Vault forever. All the cheapquels are bad in quality - horrible animation, songs and an awful plot, character regression, as opposed to character development, and making all the characters we came to know and love in the originals so out of character to the point that they're unrecognizable - this one, no exception. Let's take a look.
First, the animation is so bad its enough to make one go blind! The animation and cinematography of the original was spectacular, and here, in this movie, the animation looks like a coloring book! The colors aren't bright and vibrant, but are rather dull. Notre Dame no longer looks majestic and grand, but instead looks more like the Leaning Tower of Cheeza. Additionally, the characters look nothing like themselves! Their faces look completley different, and Esmeralda's eye and skin color change every few frames. The characters' movements are rather choppy and are proof of a lack of quality in the animation. Its apparant that no effort was put into animating the characters we've come to know and love, nor was any effort put into making the new characters look presentable.
Next, the songs. There are only a few, but they're horrible. I know the people in charge of the music aren't Menken and Schwartz, but the lack of effort put into these songs is inexcusable. Did the songwriters write the songs in five minutes? They're completley forgettable, and don't fit into the movie at all. The songs just seem "there" and don't serve any purpose. Also, the song "I'll Stick By You", sung by Quasimodo and Zeypher, is by far the worst. The lyrics are horrendous, and Tom Hulce, as talented as he is, can't save it.
The story is also horrible. The great thing about the first movie was that it wasn't afraid to confront a more mature story. Though the demographic of the original movie was little kids, Walt Disney Pictures still made Frollo out to be the cruel villian everyone knows he always was, and put very mature themes into that movie, such as infanticide, lust, religious hypocrisy, social injustice, and genocide. The first movie introduced a story with a timeless moral, that we should always look on the inside as opposed to just one's outside appearance in order to know who the person actually is, and that we should appreciate all those who come from backgrounds different than our own. The cheapquel, however, has a storyline that's so ridiculously laughable - a circus comes to town, and the villian, the owner of the circus, wants to steal a bell. A bell. We go from a judge who was bent on exterminating the Roma and lusting after a Romani girl, and knowing that he can't have her, plans on burning her to death while justifying his cruelty toward a young Hunchback, to... a pansy, narcissist circus leader who wants to steal a bell. What a huge setback that is! Also, Sarousch has nothing on Frollo. He's neither cunning or menacing, but comes off as selfish, arrogant, and self-absorbed. Also, we have Quasimodo falling in love with Madeline, an aspiring trapeze artist. It'd be one thing if Madeline, like Esmeralda, and the other Disney heroines we've come to know and love, had a mind of her own, was assertive, and confident, but instead, she constantly belittles herself! How does Quasimodo find that attractive? And its not like Madeline develops into a more confident young woman who knows of her worth, either. Throughout the movie, she always puts herself down! Its ridiculous.
Then, we have the characters. They aren't themselves. It was like the makers over at DisneyToon completley forgot the original movie! Phoebus goes from the brave, idealistic, solider and the compassionate man who respects others - basically, the man he developed into in the original movie, to the stupid, pompous, capitan who's prejudiced of those who are different from him. It was as though he learned nothing in the original movie. Plus, he's prejudiced against Esmeralda's - his wife's, people! He completley forgets the fact that Esmeralda is of Roma descent and that his son, Zeypher is part Roma as well, even though he doesn't look the part. Ridiculous. Zeypher serves no purpose whatsoever. He just screams and is annoying. Esmeralda is nothing like herself. In the first movie, she was beautiful, vibrant, yearned for justice, and stood up for those who needed it. Now, she's submissive, quiet, and watches on the sidelines as bad things happen to those in Paris, and as her son gets kidnapped. The Esmeralda in the original movie would've taken matters into her own hands! Here, she just stands by the sidelines and watches everything play out. She's no longer apart of it. That was a major character regression, and a horrible one at that. Esmeralda went from being a strong heroine to a weak young woman with nothing to live for.
Next, there's Clopin. Clopin is not himself in this movie. In the first movie, he was the lively Gypsy King, the most morally ambiguous character in the Disney canon - you never knew what his true motives were, one minute putting on puppet shows for children, and the next, wanting to hang Quasimodo and Phoebus for trespassing. His mysteriousness, and the fact that you never knew which side he was on, made him an intriguing character. Now, he's reduced to one song, reapperances every couple of scenes, and worst of all, he's reduced to complaining about a bell! What a shame! How tragic that Paul Kandel, a Tony nominated actor and critically acclaimed theatre and Broadway performer, wasted his time and talent on this crappy movie! Also, the gargoyles aren't themselves, either. They don't look themselves, and it seemed like they were only used to take up time, serving no purpose. Quasimodo didn't regress in this movie, but he doesn't develop, either. But not even the talented Tom Hulce could save this horrible movie.
Obviously, I don't recommend this movie. I'd skip it, as it's not worth watching. Of course, I'd just skip it anyway since its not considered canon, but if you want to watch a great Disney movie with a good plot, fantastic songs, brilliant animation, and characters who develop throughout the story, then this movie isn't for you. In fact, none of the cheapquels do any of the things that made the original movies so great. There's a reason why the public hated the cheapquels. There's a reason why they're not being made anymore and why Disney is doing all they can to make sure they're never seen again. This movie is proof of that.
Haven't received the package, Where is the movie? December 15, 2008
Maria Madrid
0 out of 1 found this review helpful
I am still waiting for this package. I don't know what happen, but has not arrived.The Hunchback of Notre Dame II
Off from the original plot, however... May 10, 2008
Sierra (FANTASYLAND!!!)
I agree with other reviewers when they say that the animation was not the best and that the story line was completely off from the original film, but think for a second about what this message is trying to bring.
Quasimodo is obviously not much to look at and Madellaine is not exactly the "ideal" disney heroine that everyone has grown up to. She's real and she's "common". They both are considered underdogs and are very shy and timid people. Although Quasimodo is a bit braver because of his experience hiding in the the Bell tower for twenty years. This film celebrates love. Not the type of love you see in chick flicks where its love at first sight and that false romantic stuff, but the unconditional love that all of us deep within want and need. Otherwise, we will always feel alone.
This film actually did make me cry a bit, for I was suffering emotionally that day when I watched it, so this movie really touched me. The songs were magnificent. I don't mean the music quality, like the Bells of Notre Dame in the first one, but the lyrics were wonderful!
Such as: "Ordinary Miracles"
and Jennifer Love Hewitt's song: "I'm Gonna Love You".
I believe everyone needs this message, because our society has a very glamourous and false view on what love is. This movie for me a slight hope, a glimmer of light, that their is a chance for everyone to find love.
I mean, of course people want that romantic relationship and of course people want to know what that's like. It's completely normal to desire for that, but the term LOVE is different than ROMANCE.
My only cons about this film is the animation and this sequel is way off from what the original story line was actually about.
 Hunchback of Notre Dame 2 January 22, 2008
Arlene Ullrich (Cedar Rapids, IA United States)
A true Disney movie with all the wonderful anitmation, action, and care, Disney
puts into their movies, Excellent for all Ages.
A story that grows on you. October 17, 2007
Darla L. Ramirez (Brownton, MN USA)
H'okay. I remember watching this sequel when it first came out, and I remember that I thought it was extremely cheesy.
Come back some years later, and I was at my local grocery store [which also has a video rental too], deciding to rent some Disney movies [At 20, I still rent those the most...I'm thinking the people know me as the 'Disney Girl' xD]. Well, I saw "The Hunchback of Notre Dame 2" On the shelves and remembered that I didn't like it, but didn't remember why. So I gave it a shot and rented it again. I thought it wasn't too bad, but kinda cheesy at times, and a month later now, I rented it again. xD
I've gotta admit, I've come to love this story. It's a story that grew on me when I just gave it a chance...which I suppose is one of the lessons taught in this story, go figure. xD
The animation is definitely not up to par to the original, but I've definitely seen worse. I've also come to enjoy the songs..well. All the songs except 'Fa La La La Falling in Love'. That song will probably have to grow on me some more. And the main villain, Sarouche [or whatever you spell his name] is a bit of a cliched villain, but eh. And I've come to love Madelaine, I didn't like her so much at first because I'm a big Quasimodo lover. xD I didn't want to let him go! lol.
'Ahem. Anyway, It's a lovely story that grew on me, and I really enjoyed the movie. I would give it 3-4 stars, but I feel kinda sorry for it because of the low reviews, so I'm giving it a five. Disney could have done better if they spent some more time on it, maybe fleshing the plot out a bit, and also spending more time on the animation, but I still love the movie. It's wormed it's way into my heart. ;)
So yeah, if you didn't like the movie at first, why don't you try to watch it again? Who knows, it may grow on you too. :3
|
|
|
