Conclusion: Notre Dame de Paris/The Hunchback of Notre Dame (1956)

Publicity still

I think that Notre Dame de Paris (1956) can best be compared to La Esmeralda. Both were written by people who had a considerable knowledge of the source material, Victor Hugo, the original author, and Jacques Prevert, poet and screenwriter, respectively.

Both also, while faithful in certain departments, fall short in regards to characterization. The characters of La Esmeralda were cardboard cutouts, here they are a bit more developed, but not substantially. Both also suffer from censorship, as can be seen in the character of Claude Frollo.

While La Esmeralda eventually ended in riots, Notre Dame de Paris eventually was forgotten. Some hold it as a classic, particularly in Europe, where it was more successful. Others, particularly those who were young when the film was released, remember it sentimentally.

Film director Guillermo del Toro recalls in an episode of Trailers From Hell that the film "is a sentimental favorite of mine."

He also goes on to mention that, "It does away with some of the more controversial elements of the novel, but you can see (when Esmeralda and Phoebus are kissing) why my interest was, um, growing as a child. I was introduced by the birds and the bees and all of those mysteries by Gina Lollobrigida, who made up in certain departments what she lacked in acting skills."

One of the few distant shots in the film

The English version is the inferior of the two, but not by a whole lot. It does feature some rather poor dubbing, and, for whatever reason, they added a lot of Anthony Quinn grunting and making guttural noises in the English version.

It can be pretty irritating.

The lack of artistic direction doesn't help either.
.
While I do appreciate sticking to the source material, especially with the ending scene, that doesn't excuse the film's shortcomings.