So for my Halloween themed viewing I decided to watch The Hunchback of Notre Dame, the original from 1923. A caveat for anyone wanting to watch particularly old films: the CW is that streaming platforms such as Amazon have the best copies of films and that films uploaded to YouTube may be any old VHS copy someone taped off a grainy TV broadcast. My believing this resulted in a major "Gee, I could have had a V-8" moment. I watched this film on Amazon, later checked out copies on other streaming platforms which were even worse. The one on Amazon was so bad I assumed nothing better was available although I kept questioning why such a famous film hadn't been restored while thinking of movies the same age or older which looked SO much better which really distracted from watching the film, what there was of it. It had a good soundtrack (some of the others didn't even have that) but the picture was so faded and scratched it was like watching through a heavy downpour of rain/snow/sleet depending on the scene. It was also more blurry than it should have been, but it was at least watchable. I didn't feel like shutting it off and looking for a better copy at the time which was my mistake. Afterwards I found a MUCH BETTER copy on YouTube also with a good soundtrack. I learned no 35 mm versions exist anymore and all available copies are taken from 16 mm prints. I didn't feel THAT bad because I didn't like the film THAT much and wouldn't want to watch it again.

I chose it mainly because my favorite author, Ray Bradbury, wrote of the profound effect this film, particularly Lon Chaney as Quasimodo, had on him as a three-year-old child when the film came out. It may have been impressive for a three-year-old in 1923 but less so now. What did impress the hell out of me were the sets and costumes. They went all out. The cathedral was apparently a life-sized replica you'd swear was the real thing. Early on in the film Quasimodo climbs down the entire facade. I don't know whether this was Lon Chaney himself or a stunt man, but it is a sight to behold. There was a cast of at least hundreds, if not thousands, for the crowd scenes. Lon Chaney kept darting out his tongue like a snake, not just when he was supposed to be taunting the crowd, but throughout the film, which I found off-putting. Charles Laughton's performance in the 1939 film was a lot more relatable. Other than the tongue thing I guess Lon Chaney was good and the rest of the cast was good for the standards of the time. The film seemed really long and I'm surprised a young child had the attention span to sit through it even in 1923. I can't say a lot about how it compares to the book as I never read the book nor do I ever intend to. The ending is more of a downer than the 1939 film but much less of a downer than a book, but the ending to the 1923 film is epic in a way the 1939 film is not. If you have to watch it, check YouTube first and make sure you find a fully restored version in 4K.

As noted in his book, THE BRADBURY CHRONICLES, by Ray Bradbury biographer Sam Weller, Lon Chaney's version of THE HUNCHBACK OF NOTRE DAME "laid the groundwork in his fertile mind for what would later become Ray’s trademark — the strange, the fantastic, the imaginative all wrapped up in a story most decidedly human. . . . THE HUNCHBACK OF NOTRE DAME ignited a lifelong love of film — a medium that later forged his keen sense of story and his grasp of quick narrative movement.”

Sometimes I have a bit of spare time during the day and I have decided to try to watch the better copy of the Hunchback movie a bit at a time during these times rather than spend it on Facebook or something. I don't really want to set aside a solid two-hour block to watch the whole film again beginning to end. Maybe I will like it better when I see the better print.