Matthew B
The Thief of Bagdad challenges the negative opinion many people have of movie producers. Traditionally the movie producer is thought to be the crude and commercial driving force who interferes with the creative talent of the director and writer.
Here we have a film that actually went through six different directors, including producer Alexander Korda himself and his brother, Zoltan. The project went through so many changes and delays that its young lead actor Sabu had actually grown several inches by the time that the film was nearing completion, and some early scenes had to be shot again. Such a process sounds like a mess, but it seems that Korda kept his nerve. The final movie is coherent and brilliant, and enormous fun to watch.
The story is set in the world of the Thousand and One Nights, complete with genies and flying carpets, but it is not based on any specific story in that book. The hero is the grandson of Harun-al-Rashid, a regular character in the book. There is some perfunctory praise of Allah. The film opens in the middle of the story with a beggar telling listeners what happened to him, calling to mind the storytelling of Scheherazade in the Thousand and One Nights.
The beggar telling the story is blind, and he has a dog that is able to identify false coins. Notably the first image we see in the movie is a drawing of an eye daubed on a boat. Eyes play a significant part in the film, and we get occasional close-ups of the eyes of the leading villain, a sorcerer, later on.
Meanwhile a princess is in a deep sleep, and cannot be awakened. These details tantalise the viewer into watching the movie to learn more about how this situation arose, so the blind narrator goes back to the beginning of his tale, and the story begins in earnest.
The vizier is played with malicious glee by Conrad Veidt. Dressed permanently in black, Jaffar is the embodiment of pure evil, with his rasping voice and vicious face. Jaffar is also a magician, but his skills are those of the dark arts. Later when he casts a spell on the movie's titular character, we see the shadow of his hands reaching out to his victim.
Apu is played with enthusiasm by Sabu, a regular actor in movies of this time. An Indian by birth, Sabu was often brought in to act the role of Indian or Middle Eastern young boys. He was generally bare-chested, a rarity in movies at that time, and only permissible because he was playing a non-white character. Sadly his career thrived briefly on the racism of his age. Notably his surname is never included in his acting roles – it is Dastagir.
One of the best features of The Thief of Bagdad is that its special effects were very good for the time in which it was made, and are still a pleasure to look at today. This was the first movie to use blue screen effects. The film was given an illusion of depth by hanging a matte painting over the camera, and deliberately creating a blurry effect. A genie was created using an optical printer.
However the special effects were made more real by using actual people, animals or objects where possible. The genie is a real actor, the flying carpet is a real carpet, and the flying horse is a real horse. The movie uses large sets which never look like anything except a movie set, but the artificiality adds to the magical and fantastical ambience.
A whole range of sets and props are used to ensure that the viewer is treated to a great spectacle – we see a large genie, a clockwork flying horse, a lethal clockwork woman with many arms, and a giant spider, to name but a few. In line with Korda's grand vision for the film, there are a large number of extras, and a rousing music score.
I wrote a longer appreciation of The Thief of Bagdad on my blog page if you would like to read more: https://themoviescreenscene.wordpress.com/2018/03/17/the-thief-of-bagdad-1940/
Rated 5/5 Stars •
Rated 5 out of 5 stars
09/22/23
Full Review
Taylor L
Imagine receiving three wishes from a genie and using your first one on a pan of sausages.
Not nearly as commonly mentioned as many other adventure films of the period, The Thief of Bagdad was a startling success in its day and a landmark in film design, with its early use of Technicolor and implementation of image compositing through bluescreening, courtesy of special effects coordinator Lawrence Butler. Nominally a remake of the earlier Douglas Fairbanks film that also takes inspiration from the One Thousand and One Nights, this adaptation from Michael Powell and Alexander Korda clearly had a direct influence on Disney's Aladdin, which carries over many of the distinct character design features, but shows its age in places; the film places much greater emphasis on its then-stupefying visual effects, and flounders haphazardly when it comes to character and tone, featuring an adventurous spirit but lacking the swagger of swashbucklers produced at around the same time. John Justin's Ahmad, nominally a main character, is lifeless and dull, it's only when you get to the supporting characters that the film begins to convery some energy, particularly with Rex Ingram's Djinn and Miles Malleson's Sultan of Basra (who also doubles as screenwriter).
While innovative for its composite visual effects, the film's most endearing component is its practical design, featuring monumental sets brimming with color; right as the film starts the audience is treated to an incredible port scene, with full-sized ships draped in resplendently bright flags. As the film goes on, the film seldom slouches in its sets and costumes, able to hang with the best of the exotic adventure romps of the era, which largely compensates when the story lags behind. Creative miniatures and use of perspective give a sense of scale that few films of the era could match, though narratively speaking some pre-war contemporaries seem to have done more with less. (3/5)
Rated 3/5 Stars •
Rated 3 out of 5 stars
09/18/22
Full Review
isla s
This film features some brilliant set pieces of the time. The music felt a bit over the top at points but its quite colourful visually and plot wise it moves at a gentle pace (which is not necessarily a bad thing, depending on your patience and so on). I liked that it featured a charming naivety with some impressive special effects given it dates from the 40s.
I'd say this is definitely worth a watch if it interest you, although the plot is perhaps a little too slow for modern generations, it may not interest everyone but I mainly liked it in terms of seeing the special effects, the costumes and the cinematography.
Rated 3.5/5 Stars •
Rated 3.5 out of 5 stars
03/31/23
Full Review
sarah w
The Greatest Live Action Adaptation of Aladdin ever, Alexander Korda's The Thief of Bagdad deserves to be the greatest Arabian adventure that Hollywood has to offer in 1940, and it is still an excellent flick today as of 2022. June Duprez did do a nice job for acting as the Princess.
Rated 5/5 Stars •
Rated 5 out of 5 stars
03/31/23
Full Review
Audience Member
A fun and funny film, but it certainly hasn't aged as well as other films from the same era. I imagine the special effects that elicit guffaws today were getting oohs and ahhs in 1940. Conrad Veit and Sabu are very fun, and the plot is really weird in a charming way. The colors are still gorgeous, the colors and the outlandish costumes and (some of the) sets are the best parts of the film for me.
Rated 3.5/5 Stars •
Rated 3.5 out of 5 stars
01/21/23
Full Review
jordan m
I think I gave myself a little too much context prior to watching this and as a result I wasn't as impressed as a newcomer may have been. The 1924 Thief of Bagdad's special effects stood out more from its peers than this movie's effects did. This one had the bad luck to have apparently invented the bluescreen effect that's become so ubiquitous that it's rather easy to spot in modern viewing, whereas the effects in the 1924 one (like turning a climbing pole into a rope while he's resting on top of it) are still impressive today. The main thing this version had going for it was the tremendous use of color in its backgrounds & costumes, rivaling Wizard of Oz in how heavily they leaned into the vibrant color palette as a key to the movie's quality. Some individual scenes played like the actors could've used more rehearsing as there were miscues and awkward moments that didn't seem intentional. I wouldn't say that I enjoyed watching the original more than this one because there's a lot of benefit in adding color and sound, but to me the original was more finely crafted.
Rated 3/5 Stars •
Rated 3 out of 5 stars
03/31/23
Full Review
Read all reviews
Post a rating
>
