What makes it different from others?

Purely Joyful Movie!

This movie feels like it was made purely to piss off people who want good shows

Amazing worth wacthing. So good. Biased but well made with many good points.

Sets and costumes are stark and simple - gypsies seem to find their clothes from modern-day garbage, Esme is stuck in ugly peasoup-colored dress - but what Notre-Dame de Paris loses in visual beauty and spectacle it wins with wonderful music and drama. Helene Segara is strong-voiced and suitably tortured as innocent gypsy Esmeralda, Garou is my favorite Quasimodo and Daniel Lavoie (too handsome to be Frollo, actually) is wonderfully hammy as racist, repressed priest: he gets many of the best and most evocative songs, sings them very well indeed and manages to evoke odd mixture of hate toward Frollo's actions and sympathy toward the man himself. Weird. For some reason librettists has changed Frollo's obsession to gypsy Esmeralda - his "angel of darkness" - from lust/infatuation to lust/hate. Unfortunately it has Hugo's downer ending, which is, quite frankly, even more depressive and frustrating than it's touching, but the result is oddly captivating.

Despite not being a true musical performance this is truly a great performance with great singers.Garou with his special voice as the hunchback.A performance i really like.I could sense the pain in his voice.Beautiful Helene Segera as Esmeralda.A vulnerable soul in a racist world.Patric Fioiri as the confused soldier not knowing to whom to give his love.Daniel Lavoie as the priest Frollo torn by the love for Esmeralda and his faith.Bruno Pelletier with his beautiful voice playing Gringoire the poet. Great dance and stage work. Well written music that express all the feelings from each character Great ensemble in a great piece of musical history.

... but the trouble of this production is that it's very far from a good musical.Granted, one can't always expect the witty masters like Sondheim or Bernstein or Porter; yet the music of this piece makes even Andrew Lloyd Webber look witty. It's deadly dull and uninventive (with one or two exceptions) and just after I watched it I couldn't recall a single significant melody - which is rather tragic coming from someone who learned the whole Another Hundred People from three listenings.It is also strangely un-theatrical. It takes place on an incredibly large stage (one really has to feel sorry for those people in front rows who broke their necks in order to see something happening 50 meters on the right or 100 meters on the left) and does absolutely nothing with it. When there's supposed to be one person singing on-stage, that's just what you get - and the rest of the enormeous stage is empty. For me as an aspiring theatre director it was almost painful to watch.The fact remains, Cole Porter seems to have captured the French culture in his works better than these no-talents can ever come close to. And I'm puzzled by the popularity of this would-be-legendary musical.

This is definitely a great musical, definitely one of th best adaptation of the original work. As the previous person said, but there was a mistake made by him or her, Bruno Pelletier was Gringoire, not Frollo. The whole musical was amazing, every singer had an amazing performance, communicating emotion even to non-french speakers. It has beautiful music and lyrics, as well as singers that can sing them well. Out of every one of them my favourite is definitely the Quebecois Bruno Pelletier. He had a very beautiful voice and played the character of Gringoire really well (one thing to note is that Gringoire's character is changed a lot, but Bruno Pelletier was superb in his role.) Even thought there are changes from the original work the musical stayed rather true to the original story. A work very worth seeing, even if you don't understand one word of French it can still touch you. (there are subtittles in many language)