Le Bossu de Notre-Dame 2: Le Secret de Quasimodo
Original title: The Hunchback of Notre Dame II
IMDb RATING
4.6/10
8.7K
YOUR RATING
Quasimodo goes into action when a magician seeks to steal one of the bells of Notre Dame.Quasimodo goes into action when a magician seeks to steal one of the bells of Notre Dame.Quasimodo goes into action when a magician seeks to steal one of the bells of Notre Dame.
- Awards
- 2 wins & 12 nominations total
Jason Alexander
- Hugo
- (voice)
Paul Kandel
- Clopin
- (voice)
Charles Kimbrough
- Victor
- (voice)
Kevin Kline
- Phoebus
- (voice)
Michael McKean
- Sarousch
- (voice)
Demi Moore
- Esmeralda
- (voice)
Haley Joel Osment
- Zephyr
- (voice)
Jane Withers
- Laverne
- (voice)
Jim Cummings
- Archdeacon
- (voice)
Frank Welker
- Achilles
- (voice)
- …
April Winchell
- Lady DeBurne
- (voice)
Nicholas Guest
- Villager
- (voice)
- …
Featured reviews
Like many sequels to Disney Classics, this sequel is lousy!!! Let's start with the good things. Almost the entire cast from the first movie returns. Actually, only Mary Wickes has been replaced, which is no surprise, since she is passed away... As for the new guys: Michael McKean is average as Sarousch. (This might have been a nice role for Tim Curry, though...) Jennifer Love Hewitt is very good as Madellaine! Also, her singing voice is magnificent! Haley Joel Osment has a good role too, but isn't as good as he was in Beauty and the Beast: A Magical Christmas. Now for the bad things. Character design sucks!!! Sarousch looks uglier then Quasi himself! The music sucks too. It has absolutely nothing in common with the church music from the first movie. Also, the special effects are lousy! The bell 'La fidele' should look like it has diamonds and juwels all over it. So it could have been shining like the sun. Instead, it is badly drawn... Actually, the entire animation is done crappy... and off course, the story... It's not as bad as it could have been! But certainly not worthy for a sequel to such a great movie!!!
In conclusion: Kids will like it. No person in the world will actually love it! Even if your a collector like me: don't buy it. In Holland it had one good thing: it came out 2 months earlier then in the US...
In conclusion: Kids will like it. No person in the world will actually love it! Even if your a collector like me: don't buy it. In Holland it had one good thing: it came out 2 months earlier then in the US...
Surprisingly touching and fun, most can not get passed the down-graded animation, but it was created by the animators for TV cartoons in Japan. The story itself is sweet and engaging and I love how the original cast returns to their roles. True this film can not compare to the music of the original, yet I am glad to see this film created, because Quasimodo deserves love and they created a worthy character in Madeline. If the film had been created by the Disney animation studio I bet people would have a much better opinion of it. You should see it, it is a cute and bouncy tale. I don't much care for direct to video animated movies, but this one won me over
The first HOND is my favorite Disney film of all time, and definitely ranks in my top five films favs EVER. This film, however, is just a joke to try and entertain children with a watered-down, lighthearted comedy movie that fails to be original or entertaining. The animation is crap, the plot line is simple enough to bore you to death, and the villain is not even a fraction of the greatness Frollo was. All the villain is after is a stupid bell, how boring is that? The characters aren't even that likable, even Esmeralda, Phoebus, and Quasi don't share the same spark of personality they had in the first film. They're basically cardboard cutout characters. The songs are annoying and guess what? The may have killed off Frollo, one of the deepest villains in Disney history, but at least they still have the cute gargoyle sidekicks! (shoot me now.) Don't bother seeing this film, just don't. It is absolutely the worst Disney sequel I have ever seen in my entire life.
Lets see, how can I describe Hunchback of Notre Dame II, the sequel to a Disney classic? I think George Carlin said it best when he said... (look at my one line summary)how dare Disney make a sequel to such a good film? I mean really, there was nothing good about this film. It was cheesy, boring, had corny jokes, and dreadful animation!
I saw this one with my sister (who you would know better as dlmcmaster) and we both hatted it! seriously, the gargoyles in the first film where great, in the sequel, they were stupid and extremely annoying! The whole thing blew major chunks and was a travesty to the house of Disney. Now I was not expecting something great, as a matter of fact, I rented it for the sheer purpose of riping it a new one. But nothing can prepare you for Hunchback II.
I saw this one with my sister (who you would know better as dlmcmaster) and we both hatted it! seriously, the gargoyles in the first film where great, in the sequel, they were stupid and extremely annoying! The whole thing blew major chunks and was a travesty to the house of Disney. Now I was not expecting something great, as a matter of fact, I rented it for the sheer purpose of riping it a new one. But nothing can prepare you for Hunchback II.
A previous commentator remarked that this monstrosity of a DTV sequel could only be watched in chunks. I found it interesting that my experience with this movie involved blowing chunks.
I know that's an awfully immature way to describe my experience with Hunchback II, but that's exactly what this thing did to the original Hunchback. It took the very dark (for Disney, at least) original and removed everything from it that made it mature and compelling. The only thing to remain fairly untainted by this incarnation of the film was the one element that was out of place in the original...the gargoyles. They were right at home in this one. That's a bad sign...it's indicative of the overall decline in the film's maturity level.
The first film centered around our protagonists' struggle against Frollo, whose lust for power and for Esmerelda provided a conflict more psychological than would have been found in an average Disney movie. This centers around a guy who wants to steal a big, fancy bell from the bell-tower along with his lovely assistant (who happens to fall in love with Quasimodo along the way). That's it. And people say the first film would have sent Hugo spinning in his grave! The returning characters are not immune from this either. They were at least somewhat well rounded out in the first film, but they have become two-dimensional cardboard cut-outs of themselves.
In fact, pretty much every aspect of the film has become flat. The music has regressed from the choral chants which were so appropriate to the movie's setting and the songs which so perfectly fit the moods and characters in the film to more-or-less generic Disney movie music (if I remember correctly; I've tried to block several aspects of the movie from my memory). There's no use commenting on the "artwork"; it's the same DTV schlock that we've become used to seeing from Disney's TV animation unit. The difference between it and the artwork from the original is like the difference between a child's messy crayon drawing and finely-rendered computer animation.
So, how to sum up? What can I say here that hasn't been said in previous reviews of this and other Disney DTV sequels? Ending with the plea for Disney to stop the insanity would be futile, seeing that sequels are in the works for "Mulan" and "The Jungle Book" (that one should break my will to live). I suppose it's just best to keep our eyes peeled for more of these imposters to the throne of what was once Disney quality. (Heck, these aren't imposters...they're not even trying to masquerade as quality films!)
I know that's an awfully immature way to describe my experience with Hunchback II, but that's exactly what this thing did to the original Hunchback. It took the very dark (for Disney, at least) original and removed everything from it that made it mature and compelling. The only thing to remain fairly untainted by this incarnation of the film was the one element that was out of place in the original...the gargoyles. They were right at home in this one. That's a bad sign...it's indicative of the overall decline in the film's maturity level.
The first film centered around our protagonists' struggle against Frollo, whose lust for power and for Esmerelda provided a conflict more psychological than would have been found in an average Disney movie. This centers around a guy who wants to steal a big, fancy bell from the bell-tower along with his lovely assistant (who happens to fall in love with Quasimodo along the way). That's it. And people say the first film would have sent Hugo spinning in his grave! The returning characters are not immune from this either. They were at least somewhat well rounded out in the first film, but they have become two-dimensional cardboard cut-outs of themselves.
In fact, pretty much every aspect of the film has become flat. The music has regressed from the choral chants which were so appropriate to the movie's setting and the songs which so perfectly fit the moods and characters in the film to more-or-less generic Disney movie music (if I remember correctly; I've tried to block several aspects of the movie from my memory). There's no use commenting on the "artwork"; it's the same DTV schlock that we've become used to seeing from Disney's TV animation unit. The difference between it and the artwork from the original is like the difference between a child's messy crayon drawing and finely-rendered computer animation.
So, how to sum up? What can I say here that hasn't been said in previous reviews of this and other Disney DTV sequels? Ending with the plea for Disney to stop the insanity would be futile, seeing that sequels are in the works for "Mulan" and "The Jungle Book" (that one should break my will to live). I suppose it's just best to keep our eyes peeled for more of these imposters to the throne of what was once Disney quality. (Heck, these aren't imposters...they're not even trying to masquerade as quality films!)
Did you know
- TriviaThis film boasts an unusually star-filled cast for a low-budget direct-to-video cartoon. In fact, all of the characters who reprise in this sequel are played by the same actors except for Laverne, Djali, and Achilles. Laverne actress Mary Wickes passed away in 1995 shortly before completing her work in the original. Jane Withers, who finished Wickes' work on that film (uncredited), voices the character in this one. Mary Kay Bergman committed suicide in 1999 so Djali was voiced by Frank Welker, who played the baby bird in the first film, while also taking over for Achilles. Bob Bergen, the original voice of Achilles, is the only living actor to not return for the sequel for a character that returned.
- GoofsWhile working as a metaphor for the movie's "beauty is within" message, La Fidele bell is an impossible object: with the interior covered in gold and jewels, it would be both impractical (nobody would see it, and church decorations are meant to be seen) and useless, since the acoustics would be terrible, not to mention the clanger of the bell would damage the decoration every time it rang.
- Quotes
Madellaine: [seeing La Fidele for the first time] Oh, it's beautiful.
Quasimodo: Yes, you are. I-I mean, yes, she is! La Fidele, that is. That's her name, La Fidele. "The Faithful One."
[lifting La Fidele up to reveal the inside to Madellaine]
Quasimodo: But she's even more beautiful on the inside.
[Madellaine gazes eagerly]
Quasimodo: I'll-I'll show you.
- Crazy creditsAs with the original first film, no opening credits aside from the film's title are shown.
- ConnectionsFeatured in Troldspejlet: Episode #26.8 (2002)
- SoundtracksLe Jour D'Amour
Written by Randy Petersen and Kevin Quinn
Arranged by Carl Johnson
Performed by Jason Alexander, Tom Hulce, Paul Kandel, Charles Kimbrough, and Jane Withers
Details
- Release date
- Countries of origin
- Official site
- Language
- Also known as
- The Hunchback of Notre Dame 2: The Secret of the Bell
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
- Runtime1 hour 8 minutes
- Color
- Aspect ratio
- 1.66 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content