Best movie of this year hands down!

Too much of everything

The film was still a fun one that will make you laugh and have you leaving the theater feeling like you just stole something valuable and got away with it.

The acting in this movie is really good.

It is not the best film regarding Hugo,s popular novel but it is watchable mainly for Richard Harris performance ....by the way he really looks like Nosferatou minus the pointed ears abd nails

I watched the Disney version of this sort years ago and I can tell you this, this film is way darker. I was really surprised and also saw at the same time, that Quasimodo was killed by his guardian Frollo. Jaysus, Frollo really was such a psychopath, who really wanted Esmeralda and not give a crap about anyone else.I really felt sorry for Quasimodo when he was trying to rescue Esmeralda and thrown into a stand where people threw food at him. It's really hard to watch that scene, especially Frollo watching him be tortured. Seriously, that scene makes you angry with Frollo haha! Salma Hayek looked absolutely stunning as Esmeralda. She really knows how to show those dance moves, even when she was on "Dusk Til Dawn" movie I think that same year with George Clooney & Quentin Tarantino! This movie is really good but it is sad at the same time. Don't be thinking it'll be like the Disney version because I'm afraid it ain't!

-=contains spoiler from both original and movie versions=-i am a huge fan of Notre dame De Paris musical,i also read book this summer and i watched movie today,in the beginning i was hopeful to watch a good film especially when i saw 6.3 IMDb point.first scenes were good but i actually waited for,theaters scene directly from book,but it was normal but when Esmeralda kisses gringoire i felt something is wrong..they don't even kiss in book,even in musical..and there were huge gap why Esmeralda being judged by sorcerer,in the book she teaches her goat how to respond numbers of clock or write word "phoebus".. wait there were a phoebus weren't there? in this movie he is some soldier junk nothing more,the creators made Quasimodo's love to show around and they even canceled Frollo's love..but Notre dame was frollo. his thoughts his struggles between love of god and love of human in movie we cant find anything like that all we have is,some villain who is really bad and kills people whose clashes with his thoughts..and not mentioning phoebus,not mentioning love of frollo,not mentioning jehan (brother of frollo) not mentioning mother of Esmeralda (maybe it is OK,the storyline would have chopped much)they even not mentioned the real story.. (another PS:frollo wasn't a opus dei or some cult member he actually in interest with alchemy he tries to make gold..he was stuck in science and religion)finally don't watch this movie,it is some kind of directors edition to real masterpiece,and if you have watched it before read the book,god have mercy on you..you must read to book immediately..this movie is worse than hunchback of Notre dame II the animated movie,spend your time with watching Notre dame De Paris musical.. enough said..

This is very much a television version of the tale, the film starts out like an episode of 'Xena...', with little meaningful dialog or character description. It does get a bit more substantive after a while, but all characters are still cartoonish. Salma is the exotic beauty. Richard Harris is an evil and sexually repressed Frollo, fiending to bust a nut up in Salma. The other characters, including Quasimodo are quite forgettable. Its also a sorta liberal version of the story, Frollo is a suppressor of Enlightenment ideals, like the abbot in 'Name of the Rose', and Quasimodo is a champion of liberty. The shadowy side of the Quas character is ignored, though he does pour liquid led on people. He is really only an outsider in that he looks different and enjoys playing with bells more than the average person. Perhaps the film is intended for children, but I doubt it, considering Frollo flogs himself bloody to amend wanting to spank his monkey. A mostly uninteresting and forgettable, but not awful, and sometimes entertaining, rendition of the tale.