Thief of Bagdad

Yep that's right, I own both the MGM and now the Criterion versions of, The Thief Of Bagdad, and after comparing the opening sequence (with the boats and the cityscape), the scene where the blind man is telling his story so far, to the harem girls (where there's slight blurring in the long shots as well as a slight over enhancement shimmer on the blind man's face) and the registration problem area (where Sabu meets the spider in the temple) the print used is exactly the same one, as both versions have the exact same problems in exactly the same areas.

As for the purported colour saturation differences between the two discs, from my close scrutiny of the movies, I'd have to say that there isn't any difference at all.

The reds look over saturated to the point where the Grand Vizier's turban bleeds slightly, the blues are sky blue bright, and the skin tones are coppery, which is true to the skin tones of the people populating this movie.

The real question now should be, why Criterion chose to release this film as is, without attempting to do any restoration?

I had thought that the reason for the exuberant prices of Criterion DVDs was because we where suppose to be getting the best possible prints of films, but in this case, we're giving the same print with some extras, and expected to pay 3 times the price of the MGM disc.

Also of note, the chapter selection is better on the MGM disc as there are pictures with the captions, where as the Criterion chapter select, is text only (something Anchor Bay did away with years ago, because it was too confusing, i.e. the Evil Dead DVD, "Evil dead attack", um, which evil dead attack, there are several, so the description is useless).

So, as far as I'm concerned, the choice as to whether to get the Criterion edition rests with whether you want the extras and not with the picture quality.

So if you have the MGM DVD and aren't interested in shelling out more cash for a couple of extras (which I didn't find all that spectacular; no feature length making of to be had on this disc) then skip it, but if you don't own the out of print MGM disc, want the extras, or (like me) are a completes, then pick this up, just don't expect an upgraded print.

Hope this helps.

Note: both DVD's where viewed on a 27" JVC higher end (but not progressive scan enhanced) tube TV with a year old model, Sony DVD player, with the TV colour, contrast, sharpness, etc., set up using the THX optimizer from the, "Cars", DVD.

I discovered this movie recommended on Roger Ebert's site.

Considering this was made in 1940, the effects are amazing with towering genies flying horses flying carpets, and a special world filled with vibrant colors, amazing storytelling, and sparkling dialogue.

According to Ebert his 7 year old grandchild loved it, so it has a classic timeless quality about it.

The version I saw also featured commentaries with both Martin Scorsese and Francis Coppola, who were both inspired by this movie as children, and it would appear that this is a favorite among well known directors such as George Lucas. Their affection for this movie and its history is quite obvious.

The story is loosely based on a story from the Arabian Nights, features a young man, a beautiful princess, a dangerous scheming magician, and a quick witted young boy but any description will surely sell the movie short.

I totally enjoyed it not only for its beauty, but for its story, and the way it grips you, and its surprising twists and turns. Loved the genie. You could easily imagine a child being quite taken with this movie.

Scorsese, Coppola, Ebert, and Lucas are right.

I think you will love it, and I hope this was helpful.

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.