Being a child is condemning Frollo for his actions

Being a child is condemning Frollo for his actions

Being an adult is realising that he did nothing wrong, and walked the most righteous path avalible to him

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=U3NoDEu7kpg
drive.google.com/file/d/0B_8iU2zi5GUtZjJkMmJDcGp1alk/view
youtube.com/watch?v=r3dfBvuHSzk
youtube.com/watch?v=ckwgbtWMZeE
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

I always felt really bad for him as a kid. His death was fucked up. Also they really didn't even try portray gypsies in a positive light.

youtube.com/watch?v=U3NoDEu7kpg

He also got the best character song

Chucking kids into wells is not good for your karma

The ends justify the means

>Attempted rape is ok

>implying you can portray gypsies in a positive light
Still Frollo was a beta faggot with a glorious song
>Choose me, or the fire

being a child is having a black or white morality. grow up autism.

Yeah, it's rape that's not OK dumbass

Best Disney song of all time, desu lad.

"The ends" was killing a kid

>adult
>still watching shitty disney adaptations
Lol ok.

A corrupt kid

What I truly want to know is why Disney decided to film this story?

Don't get me wrong, it's one of Disney's best and I'm glad they did. Still, where did the idea come from? Who looks at a story about lust, torture and death, which was written with the purpose of saving an ancient cathedral from destruction, and thinks "Oh man this will make a sweet kids' cartoon!"

>chaperon shaped like a tricorne

It's mind-boggling how much better the movie is with the gargoyle scenes cut out.

What the fuck was Disney thinking with these abominations?

Is there a gargoyle-free cut out there somewhere? Too lazy to do this myself.

The tonal shifts are almost Bollywood-level terrible.

Probably shareholders saying it was too dark

No one defends gypsies. Not even SJW or the most dim witted liberals. They are that despised.

There's this: drive.google.com/file/d/0B_8iU2zi5GUtZjJkMmJDcGp1alk/view

It's not perfect (you can tell when there's cuts and there's a few instances where they briefly appear), it's clear it was quick and dirty, but goddamn does it improve the movie a lot.

Thanks man.

>did nothing wrong

Burning down most of Paris because he was thirsty for brown is doing pretty wrong desu.

deus vult xDDD

But the gypsies were shitting up his city and how else was he supposed to get rid of them for good? The movie doesn't even try to justify their behavior. All they do is steal and destroy.

Destroying the gypsies wasn't even his main motivation at the end, he was desperate for the brown gypsy pussy. His dick was what caused him to chimp out and start setting everything on fire.

The fuck was the end here?

This is just pure speculation, but first look at the movies they had already made the previous years up to Hunchback and how they kick started their success with animated movies. These movies were almost exclusively adaptations of old fairy tales or adaptations of novels (like Lion King being a adaptation of Hamlet). The majority of these stories are actually quite dark, so to speak, and not all that happy before Disney gave them a kiddie makeover, which isn't a bad thing.

What I'm trying to get at is that the decision makers at Disney:
1) wanted to tackle or let the animators tackle some serious source material, since it had worked well so far.
2) Saw that someone had a good vision of what the movie could be and gave a great pitch simply.
3) Actually had some respect for their audience (kids and adults) and knew that aren't all that fragile as our post-modern society makes them out to be, and thus were willing to challenge them with somewhat more dark (in lack of a better word) stories.

Your sense of morality is pretty fucking warped, user. Gypsies engagin in petty crime is far preferred to the burning of the city. Which in no way is even guaranteed to solve the crime problem.

Frollo did everything wrong. He tried to cloak his own shortcomings and faults in piety, and was willing to destroy and murder just to get to rape a girl. Not to mention he advocated genocide and constantly abused his powers of office.

Just as I watch this: are we the audience to believe the gargoyles are actually alive and just hide as stone for anyone but Quasi, do we know clearly that he's just imagining it, or is it ambiguous?

artposting because I don't have anything relevant but nice pictures are nice.

a) Post-mordernism was trendy in the 80s and Hunchback was adapted by Disney in 1996
b) Deconstructing the notion of children being fragile and not able to be challenged is the most post-modern perspective in this case

Just another example of someone (probably a Sup Forumstard) using words without understanding them

Best disney song hands down

It would be nice if it was just his imagination, but based on the climax where they start attacking soldiers and sending flocks of birds, they must be real. Or the entire climax is imaginary.

isn't esmerelda too brown to be roma?

The German and Swedish versions are also GOAT-tier:
youtube.com/watch?v=r3dfBvuHSzk

youtube.com/watch?v=ckwgbtWMZeE

>yfw the entire climax is his hallucination as he's dying of starvation inside Esmeralda's tomb like in the original

Would Gaston and Frollo be cool with each other? They are both the best Disney villains and had the best songs.

Based Frollo

>Watch Hunchback with a grill
>She bites her lip in the groping scene

Women like to get fucked by old white men?

>Also they really didn't even try portray gypsies in a positive light.
You can't do the impossible.

Gypsies are just roving bands of thieving shitskins.

>powerful
>just
>intelligent
>righteous
>experienced
>rich

Frollo is the ultimate male

I don't think so. Gaston would think Frollo's a boring straight-edge fuck. Frollo would think Gaston is a degenerate.

Disney make the best villains. Most of their villains all have sympathetic causes and reasons that really blur the line of "were the villains actually justified in their actions".

Take Gaston and Scar for example. Both were justified in everything they did, yet were deemed villains because we only got 1 point of view.

>Scar
>Marxist who brings multiculturalism to the (white) Pride Rock
>Sympathetic causes

I never understood how Gaston is a villain. He wanted to rescue Belle from the dude who kidnapped her, imprisoned her, and emotionally abused and gaslighted her. As far as the people of the town were concerned, he could also be brutally raping her every night and fattening her up to be eaten on Christmas.

>Disney making a mockery of Hunchback of Notre Dame adaptation
>Making gypsies look good

Fucking disgusting. In the book gypsies were irrelevant and Frollo wanted to fuck Esmeralda. When he couldn't he assasinated Phoebus and blamed her for the murder.

You didn't watch the movie. They didn't make gypsies look good. They were irrelevant to the plot and the main crux was indeed Frollo wanting to fuck Esmeralda.

Take that fedora off sometime.

>Irrelevant to the plot
>Gypsy hideout
>Evil Whiteys discriminating poor gypsies by burning Paris
>Esmeralda shouting for justice against the poor gypsies

>Being an adult is realising that he did nothing wrong

No. Giving into to his lust and risking everything to bang the brown gypsy was a terrible thing he did.

I still like him though.

Gaston is an "Anti-Villain". I had to google what it means, but this is what it came up with:

>he Anti-Villain is the opposite of an Anti-Hero — a villain with heroic goals, personality traits, and/or virtues. Their desired ends are mostly good, but their means of getting there are evil.

Seems sort of right to me. Gaston was trying to be all Heroic. But it was only for his personal gain.. By the time Belle was in Beasts castle he had already gotten over her and probably only decided to raid his castle because he wanted the fame and glory of "Killing the beast" and taking what he thought was his. He was the villain through and through.

How come not even Jews are defending gypsies? They are also a minority.

>Also they really didn't even try portray gypsies in a positive light.
watching it now; sure they do. Gypsies are strongly associated with 'freedom'.

"Gypsies don't do well inside stone walls."
"But you're safe here, you have sanctuary"
"I don't have freedom"

"give me liberty or give me death" and "those who value security over liberty" are both founding-father quotes that pervade the American mindset. Implicitly we get "gypsies are just tryina get along, and also they're FUCKING AMERICAN AS SHIT YEAH SHE"S ABOUT FREEDUM I"M ABOUT FREEDUM"

(funny though, that when they were spoken, they were speaking of business freedoms. Average Joe seems to not understand that the origin of the word liberal is the restriction of govt interference in business we now call conservative. Business freedom worked so well that the suits lived to see themselves become the bad guys. Then again, arguably, the EIC had freedom and they were already the bad guys. Moral is that business freedom is best and most powerful freedom.)

The gypsies were obviously the good guys in the movie.

gaston fucks belles dad over.
everything else is just him being too full of himself.

The beast should've been killed though. Fuck that faggot.

...

The beast wasn't a good person though. He got cursed because he was a selfish prick who I believed left an old women to freeze to death. He had severe anger issues and everyone in the castle was afraid of him. I believe threatened to kill belles father too right? Yea he was a complete asshole. Never understood how he was the "good guy"

This, gas the degenerates, keep France french

>He got cursed because he was a selfish prick who I believed left an old women to freeze to death.

It been so long since I seen the movie since I was a kid, but wasn't it some asshole fairy that turn him into a beast becauase he wasn't nice enough or some shit?

>deformed gypsy
Basically not even human Tbh

Huh, Now I think about it Frollo is basically Sup Forums.

> Wants to kill the degenerates
> Heavily into God
> hates an entire race of people
< Still wants to fuck a woman from that race though.

I mean shit the gypsies are basically refugees in this film and he sees them as murderous and theifs, which they are actually presented to be. Fuck, for a Disney film they actually make it morally unclear.

Anyways, Frollo is Sup Forums

Nah.

Gaston hangs with Clayton, they're drinking buddies.

They also kind of present them as theifs and criminals too though.

I mean in the underground city of theirs they where gonna hang the gang for not being gypsies. Quasimodo and the soldier where only helping the gypsies because of their penises, not morality sake

>adaptations of novels (like Lion King being a adaptation of Hamlet)
>Hamlet
>novel

Am I the only person who remembers Beast killing Belles father?

Women have a thing for imaginary rape.

This scene was also strangely hot.

Get the fuck back to /lit/. I know who you are.

Tarzan is always so overlooked. What went wrong?

I don't recall it being bad in any way.

>suck my dick or i'll kill you

this is basically the whole of frollo's motivation

The best part about this film is that it reinforces the notion that incels need to learn their place as beta orbiter cucks and that CHAD ALWAYS gets STACY and her BROWN GYPSY PUSSY

bone law > gravity

Who's going to play Frollo in the inevitable live action?

Sounds about right, yeah.

I'm not sure, it was good enough. Maybe just bad timing? I don't remember any hype when it came out.

The soundtrack was shit though, no catchy songs.

So that's how you get laid, just rape 'em

Well, Alan Rickman is dead so I'm guessing Jeremy Irons.

Hamlet is a play, dude.

Shes the one who started to entice him user.

She's basically a stripper man. If you're such a beta that you can't watch a stripper do her job without falling in love then you deserve to be pushed off a church roof.

>be in love with girl since child
>do the best you can to win her over
>chad comes all of a sudden on a boat and gets the love of your life in one night
>you try to defend your future wife from this jerk chad
>get shot and killed
>she forgets all about you and marries the person who caused you to die

It was a witch that disguised herself as an old hag looking for shelter. He told her to fuck off and was punished for it. What is really messed up is all his servants were punished too for no real reason.

>modern refugee crisis
>brown people taking white women

Really gets the neurons firing, doesn't it?

Holy shit Did John Smith Become A Jerome and cuck this redskin poor guy?

Fuck man the white man is actually pretty evil.

RED GENOCIDE

the lower class arent actuality people so it made no difference

The French are literally the scummiest of all whites though. If you read up on history they are nothing but back stabbing psychopathic power hungry shitlords

He was so pretty. Pocahontas was such a dumbass,

The British are much worse though. They broke every treaty they ever signed with my country. Britfags have no honour, and they still don't.

We still burned their shit at Chatham though, so fuck em.

Why do his nipples look like that?

it was a different time

The ends justify the means ;)

>magic hair granting the immortality of Jesus to mortals

BURN THE WITCH

...

Who wouldn't want to fuck Esmeralda though?

I think Mother Gothel is actually the best Disney Villain of all time. Frollo is amazing don't get me wrong but Mother Gothel is amazingly written. Tangled was honestly a mediocre movie except for her.

Got to sell this movie to the kids.

...

>people pretend that Frozen was a "return to form" for disney
>not even any memorable villains

>Frollo did nothing wrong
>

They don't need to be cut out, just reinforced that they're figments of Quasi's imagination in his desire for friends. If only the movie could be edited properly to reflect that, and also tone down their shit a little.

Maybe a Hunchback live-action rated PG-13 would solve that issue? But it would still suck because RIP Tony Jay.

...