Lovesusti The Worst Film Ever

TaryBiggBall It was OK. I don't see why everyone loves it so much. It wasn't very smart or deep or well-directed.

Clarissa Mora The tone of this movie is interesting -- the stakes are both dramatic and high, but it's balanced with a lot of fun, tongue and cheek dialogue.

Roy Hart If you're interested in the topic at hand, you should just watch it and judge yourself because the reviews have gone very biased by people that didn't even watch it and just hate (or love) the creator. I liked it, it was well written, narrated, and directed and it was about a topic that interests me.

Dalbert Pringle These are 3 descriptive words that I'd say would best describe the production side of this 1940, Technicolour, Romeo & Juliet story - Erratic - Uneven - Disjointed.And the reason for this film's overall visual inconsistency and instability has to do with the fact that it took 6 directors (Yes - 6!!) to finally bring "Bagdad" to its corny-but-cute "happy ending".As the story goes - It was skinflint, Alexander Korda who produced this picture. And he was totally obsessed with keeping this fantasy-extravaganza film under a tight budget and remaining in full control of its simpering story-line.This, of course, placed Korda in repeated conflict with each subsequent film-maker who took over the direction and, in turn, who Korda promptly fired for non-compliance.Anyway - With "The Thief Of Bagdad" now being 77 years old - I really did try to cut it some slack (even though its visuals didn't even come close to those of 1939's "The Wizard of Oz") - But - The truth is - This picture really did stink, big-time.*Note* - I'd say that the absolute, most hilarious highlight of this picture was the totally cheesy "monster spider" scene.

LeonLouisRicci Ambitious Arabian Nights Adventure that has Found Itself in the Fond Memory Banks of Grown Up Children and Child Like Adults. Viewed from a Pre-CGI Perspective and from an Age of Innocence that was Soon to be Bombed Into Oblivion, this is a Remarkable Achievement.The Appeal is Obvious, Mostly as Escapism Fantasy into a Foreign Landscape and World from Long Long Ago with its Stunning Architecture and Vibrant Colors Meshed with a Culture Complete with Flying Carpets, Blue Skinned/Multi-Limbed Goddesses, Genies, Horses that Take to the Air, and Other Fantastic Flourishes.The Incredible Set Design, Lush and Lavish Color Schemes, Gaudy Costumes, and a Standout Musical Score All Add to the Movies Universal and Timeless Appeal. However, it's Not Without Some Clunkiness. Leading Man John Justin has Absolutely No Screen Presence and is Extremely Stiff Almost to the Point of Distraction. The SFX are Mostly Impressive but it Must be Pointed Out that there are Times When they Do Draw Attention to Themselves. June Duprez as the Princess has a Beauty that is Standard and Nothing Resembling Royalty or Fictional Females of Supreme Enchantment. Conrad Veidt as the Villain and Sabu are More than Passable. There are Many Highlights, the Most Mesmerizing is the Spider Battle and Overall "Seeing Eye" Temple Scenes that are the Best in a Movie that is Filled with Such Things. The Genie SFX are Inconsistent and the "Real" Wooden Exaggerations Like the Foot and Ear, as Like a Few Other Attempts Here and There are Hopelessly Dated.Overall, a Charmer that Can be Forgiven its Limitations Because the Best Parts are Oh So Good and the Film does Wonders to Transport the Audience to a Land Beyond the Senses. Must See Viewing for Film Historians, Fantasy Film Fanatics, and Children from 6 to 60.

jbirks106 Made back when "Arabian Nights" movies were still novel, this lavish production was already a "remake" back in 1940. I haven't seen the Douglas Fairbanks version, but after watching this Technicolor rendition I'm eager to give the earlier film a watch. Unlike that 1924 incarnation, this film has no major stars. It doesn't even have a single director (at least three are credited). But with Alexander Korda producing, and Michael Powell directing much of it, "Thief" retains a singleness of vision and purpose. The undisputed star of the film is Conrad Veidt as the devious usurper Jaffar. It's a tour de force by Veidt, who superbly renders Jaffar's menacing countenance, but in a surprisingly complex and at times even sympathetic way. Both he and John Justin's Ahmad are vying for the affections of the gorgeous princess, played by June Duprez. Sabu, playing Abu the young thief, and Rex Ingram, playing the djinni, are outstanding.But the real star, which shocked me for a 1940 film, is the special effects. Flying horses and carpets, child's play in the CGI era, were no mean task back then, but the results are believable and at times spectacular.I highly recommend the 2-disc Criterion release, which in addition to a making-of documentary contains two commentary tracks: one with directors Francis Ford Coppola and Martin Scorsese, and one with film historian Bruce Eder. Both Coppola and Scorsese relate their boyhood introductions to the film, and provide valuable insight into the visual and musical aspects of the film. Eder supplies fascinating historical context. Also included is a feature, "The Lion Has Wings," a rather heavy-handed bit of propaganda and in no way the equal of "Thief," but interesting nonetheless as a reflection of England's entry into World War II.

runamokprods After reading love letter after love letter to this film from just about every critic, as well as filmmakers like Scorsese and Coppola, I feel a bit churlish and Scrooge- like doing anything other than embracing it without reservation. I certainly enjoyed and appreciated this great looking early Technicolor spectacle, It's fun, sweet, always entertaining, but the effects, while impressive for their day are distractingly dated, and the character development is sketchy at best. The two romantic leads in particular are pretty shallow, and seem to fall instantly in love for no other reason than the story tells them to, On the other hand both Conrad Veight as the sometimes over the top, but enjoyably hateful villain, and Sabu as the lovable lad who helps a king regain his kingdom fare much better. There are sequences I did find flat out wonderful (the whole very famous interaction between Sabu and the genie he finds and frees holds up to all the clips I've seen over the years), And given current politics, seeing Islam treated as benign and poetic is certainly refreshing. Maybe I was over prepared, or expecting too much. I didn't fully 'get' the greatness of 'Citizen Kane' the first time I saw it either, because I was so over-hyped. In any case, it was enough fun that I won't regret giving it another look, and seeing if it grows on me even more with a second viewing.