Doesn't hold up all that well. Fun film but doesn't do much to fully grasp your attention.

Gives a more 1001 Nights spin to the 1924 silent version. A classic epic fantasy film with spectacular sets, costumes and art design rendered in lush technicolor. As ever with grand productions, the script is shallow, contrived and unsophisticated, but it does have an innocent charm. Justin and Duprez are dashing and radiant as Prince Ahmed and the Princess of Basra, but their acting is completely overshadowed by that of the masterful Veidt as Jaffar. Malleson as Sultan and Sabu are also good.

335

I'm sure this was quite the spectacle back in the day, but it has not aged well. The dialogue is bloated, the acting banal, and the special effects laughable. John Justin is seriously embarrassing as Prince Ahmad, but the exception is Conrad Veidt as Jaffar.

"A fable light on condescension but committed enough to the pleasure principle that the audience is served one giddy act of visual sorcery after another." - Bill Weber

#306

It might have aged considerably, but it's charm remains intact. There's many faults to point at here but the production value and the beautiful technicolor should be enough reason to consider this film timeless. A truly fun adventure, I never wanted it to end; one of those films that reminds one in simplistic beauty what cinema is all about.

Maybe not the best movie, but incredibly entertaining with some pretty amazing effects, make up, and sets.

I enjoyed the romance and the script in places, but it never really held my attention.

This production was seriously screwed up by the outbreak of WW2. It was shot by six different directors, not all of whom were on the same continent, and none of whom had a complete script. The result is a real mess. Beautifully shot, and great FX, but the story is disjointed and has all manner of logic problems. (Sound familiar?)

Beautiful color, impressive sets and costuming, full of wonder and whimsy and a sense of fun. But I didn't LOVE it. I couldn't put my finger on it at first, but I narrowed it down to Conrad Veidt. He doesn't have the oomph to carry a leading man speaking role. He brings no life to the character, and that made it hard for me to get invested. An impressive and in some ways magical production, but the lackluster performances keep it from perfection.

It's a fun adventure movie with wonderful technicolor, but it's a little too silly to really be great. The acting is sometimes too over the top and the effects, while great for their time look pretty odd at times.

# 337

Except for its place in history, and a colorful presentation, there's really nothing exceptional to be found here.

For the time period, quite good.

a satisfying, but generally unfocused fantasy romp that easily proves to be more than eye candy and truly impresses. it's a wonder that this movie isn't remembered in a more kind and widespread manner.

Colorful (in the most literal sense, that is, filled, stuffed, gorged with color) Arabian Nights tale, a United Kingdom/United States joint venture, produced by Alexander Korda, designed by his brother Vincent, associate-produced by William Cameron Menzies, who designed the Douglas Fairbanks silent version of the tale, and directed by three different people. All in all, richer in production values than in real imagination. Veidt is everything you might want in an evil vizier and more

There was some memorable moments I remember from seeing it for the first time as a kid, but otherwise it was not that successful film or story. Especially white main actors were funny. Some sets were impressively huge though. It would be nice to see the older version than this.

320

"There is an innocence to The Thief of Bagdad that is notably unusual in today's theaters."