ÉVALUATION IMDb
7,1/10
5 k
MA NOTE
Ajouter une intrigue dans votre langueA lonely princess and a poor cobbler fall in love while trying to reclaim three magical orbs stolen by a bumbling thief, all while outwitting an ambitious sorcerer.A lonely princess and a poor cobbler fall in love while trying to reclaim three magical orbs stolen by a bumbling thief, all while outwitting an ambitious sorcerer.A lonely princess and a poor cobbler fall in love while trying to reclaim three magical orbs stolen by a bumbling thief, all while outwitting an ambitious sorcerer.
Vincent Price
- ZigZag
- (voice)
Eddie Carroll
- The Thief (Majestic Films version)
- (voice)
- (as Ed. E. Carroll)
- …
Stanley Baxter
- Gofer
- (voice)
- …
Kenneth Williams
- Goblet
- (voice)
- …
Windsor Davies
- Chief Roofless
- (voice)
Frederick Shaw
- Goolie
- (voice)
Thick Wilson
- Hook
- (voice)
Eddie Byrne
- Hoof
- (voice)
Avis en vedette
The Thief and the Cobbler was 30 years in the making, was released in a couple of different chopped up forms, then someone took all the footage they could find to try and create a version of the director's original vision, called the Recobbled Cut. There are a few versions of this fan-edited version; I saw the most recent, Mark 4, and that's the version I'm reviewing.
The film is made up of finished animation pulled from video, some 35mm finished footage, some work prints, test animations, half done sequences, and still sketches. In spite of this miscellany, the story of a kingdom under threat from a thief, a one-eyed warlord, and Vincent Price, has a fairly coherent and engaging story.
The quality varies from moment to moment. Some scenes are fully finished, but many look like there are details missing, and color and quality vary from moment to moment. But much of what is there is truly stunning. There are wonderfully clever effects, like a top down, shot of a chase over a tiled floor that reveals an optical illusion. Parts have a Fleischer Brothers surrealist aspect, while the finale, the wildly elaborate destruction of a vast war machine, would have been one of the greatest animated sequences of all time had it been fully finished. Even in its current form it's incredibly impressive.
It's hard to know how the final film would have looked. The director was apparently constantly changing and reanimating sequences (which lead to cost and time overruns that got him thrown off the project), so even the "finished" parts might not have been final. But I salute the guy who put this together and hope that someday he or perhaps Disney (who may have more footage in a vault) will create something even closer to the director's vision.
Well worth watching for animation fans who can deal with the flawed presentation.
The film is made up of finished animation pulled from video, some 35mm finished footage, some work prints, test animations, half done sequences, and still sketches. In spite of this miscellany, the story of a kingdom under threat from a thief, a one-eyed warlord, and Vincent Price, has a fairly coherent and engaging story.
The quality varies from moment to moment. Some scenes are fully finished, but many look like there are details missing, and color and quality vary from moment to moment. But much of what is there is truly stunning. There are wonderfully clever effects, like a top down, shot of a chase over a tiled floor that reveals an optical illusion. Parts have a Fleischer Brothers surrealist aspect, while the finale, the wildly elaborate destruction of a vast war machine, would have been one of the greatest animated sequences of all time had it been fully finished. Even in its current form it's incredibly impressive.
It's hard to know how the final film would have looked. The director was apparently constantly changing and reanimating sequences (which lead to cost and time overruns that got him thrown off the project), so even the "finished" parts might not have been final. But I salute the guy who put this together and hope that someday he or perhaps Disney (who may have more footage in a vault) will create something even closer to the director's vision.
Well worth watching for animation fans who can deal with the flawed presentation.
It's too bad the studio thought it necessary to add mediocre songs (I dislike the American rule that all animated films must be musicals) and an annoying voice-over to a mute character, this is really one of the most visually interesting American animated films I've seen. As others have pointed out, the look of the film owes a debt to MC Escher. The film often has a more abstract than realistic look, which I find interesting. In places, it makes me think a little of French animation I've seen.
I found the Jonathan Winters voice-over for the thief to be rather annoying and distracting, as the thief was intended to be a silent Wile E. Coyote-type character, and I think he would've been funnier if he had remained silent. The songs are pretty forgettable too. If you can get past this studio tampering, you'll find a very interesting and unusual animated film. The film is also noteworthy for being a widescreen cartoon, which you don't see made very often these days. Of course, this means a good deal of the picture is lost on video. I know there's probably not the biggest demand for it, but I'd be interested in a DVD release of this film so it could be seen as it was intended.
I found the Jonathan Winters voice-over for the thief to be rather annoying and distracting, as the thief was intended to be a silent Wile E. Coyote-type character, and I think he would've been funnier if he had remained silent. The songs are pretty forgettable too. If you can get past this studio tampering, you'll find a very interesting and unusual animated film. The film is also noteworthy for being a widescreen cartoon, which you don't see made very often these days. Of course, this means a good deal of the picture is lost on video. I know there's probably not the biggest demand for it, but I'd be interested in a DVD release of this film so it could be seen as it was intended.
I've had the opportunity to view a copy of the workprint Richard Williams cobbled together (consisting of finished footage, storyboards, and pencil tests), and it gives a good idea as to what the movie would have been like if Williams had managed to finish it.
Is it better than the Miramax version? Most definitely. Miramax vandalized the movie by adding those voice-overs for the Thief and the Cobbler characters - a ludicrous idea, since these characters were designed to be SILENT. Seeing these quiet characters not moving their mouths - but hearing wise-cracking dialogue, and dialogue that doesn't fit the character's personalities - is infuriating and very distracting. Though Miramax didn't do all the butchery, since the movie was significantly cut by other hands, and with poor linking animation added. (Not to mention some HORRIBLE song numbers.)
The workprint beats the Miramax version by far - but it's not perfect. True, seeing all that uncut animation - AMAZING animation - makes it a must see. It's breathtaking at times. But if the movie had been finished, I'm sure critics and audiences - when not gushing about the animation - would have criticized the story and characters. There's barely a story here, and it takes forever to get going. And once it gets going, there are plenty of times when the story stops for a pseudo intermission. Apparently, Williams was so charmed by all the vignettes that he thought up (mostly to do with the Thief bumbling around and making an ass of himself), he didn't want to leave any of them out. Seen by themselves, the vignettes are funny and a wonder to the eye. But seeing one after the other...well, it gets tiring after a while.
As well, with all the effort put in making visual splendor and animated gags, it seems not much was put into fleshing out the characters more than they are now. (Though they all have a charm that carries them further than you'd expect.)
Though I do have some sympathy for Williams for the heartbreak he suffered after being fired from the project (after working on it for more than 20 years!), he must accept his share of the blame for his firing and the eventual butchery of his project, seeing that he constantly went over time and budget, and refused to stop "improvising" as well as avoiding scripts and storyboards.
Anyway, seek the workprint and avoid the Miramax version!
Is it better than the Miramax version? Most definitely. Miramax vandalized the movie by adding those voice-overs for the Thief and the Cobbler characters - a ludicrous idea, since these characters were designed to be SILENT. Seeing these quiet characters not moving their mouths - but hearing wise-cracking dialogue, and dialogue that doesn't fit the character's personalities - is infuriating and very distracting. Though Miramax didn't do all the butchery, since the movie was significantly cut by other hands, and with poor linking animation added. (Not to mention some HORRIBLE song numbers.)
The workprint beats the Miramax version by far - but it's not perfect. True, seeing all that uncut animation - AMAZING animation - makes it a must see. It's breathtaking at times. But if the movie had been finished, I'm sure critics and audiences - when not gushing about the animation - would have criticized the story and characters. There's barely a story here, and it takes forever to get going. And once it gets going, there are plenty of times when the story stops for a pseudo intermission. Apparently, Williams was so charmed by all the vignettes that he thought up (mostly to do with the Thief bumbling around and making an ass of himself), he didn't want to leave any of them out. Seen by themselves, the vignettes are funny and a wonder to the eye. But seeing one after the other...well, it gets tiring after a while.
As well, with all the effort put in making visual splendor and animated gags, it seems not much was put into fleshing out the characters more than they are now. (Though they all have a charm that carries them further than you'd expect.)
Though I do have some sympathy for Williams for the heartbreak he suffered after being fired from the project (after working on it for more than 20 years!), he must accept his share of the blame for his firing and the eventual butchery of his project, seeing that he constantly went over time and budget, and refused to stop "improvising" as well as avoiding scripts and storyboards.
Anyway, seek the workprint and avoid the Miramax version!
Back in the mid-90s, I first discover this movie on TV. And I immediately found it to be another movie to enjoy.
Since then, it wasn't until the early 2000s, when I learn about it's shocking and tragic history.
"The Thief & Cobbler/Arabian Knights" takes place in a fictional desert world. The story focuses on a partly silent cobbler name Tack & a silent thief. The kingdom they're in, is known for the protected treasure of 3 golden balls. If those balls were to be removed from their place, and fall into enemy hands. Then the kingdom will fall. Tack was a poor cobbler until he got convicted for leaving tacks on the road of the visor's parade. And was saved from imprisonment when Princess Yum Yum had a liking for him, and asked for a cobbler to fix her shoes. Not only did Tack found what appears to be the girl of his dreams. He soon finds himself to be a possible hero of the kingdom.
Meanwhile the visor: Zig-Zag plots to steal the golden balls and present them to the enemy side: The One Eye Army. With the gold balls in their possession, they'll destroy the kingdom with their number of soldiers and weapons of all kinds. Can a cobbler like Tack, really be able to save a country? In development for more than 28 years. Making this film the longest animated/feature length film to be in production. The version I saw on TV, was considered to be an alternate and less convincing movie than the other kind that was attended to be seen. As I learn the original animators and writers spent so much time, the whole thing was shelved by various distributors.
After seeing the revised version(which has numerous storyboard/UN finished scenes). I was remotely surprised on how different it is. Minus all the changes and unnecessary dialog & songs used in the Miramax version.
A lot of people consider this to be a rip off of Aladin. But trust me, it's way different from Aladin. Not as well known as Aladin. But it's one of those movies that deserve more. If it was finished by the original dudes who put their life's work into. Then people would recognize it as a classic.
It's yet to get a better DVD release. And the revised version of this film is out there, but hard to find. This and Twice Upon a Time are perfect examples of animated movies that became fan favorites over the years.
The original version is intended for sophisticated viewers. While the Miramax version was made to be kid friendly.
Since then, it wasn't until the early 2000s, when I learn about it's shocking and tragic history.
"The Thief & Cobbler/Arabian Knights" takes place in a fictional desert world. The story focuses on a partly silent cobbler name Tack & a silent thief. The kingdom they're in, is known for the protected treasure of 3 golden balls. If those balls were to be removed from their place, and fall into enemy hands. Then the kingdom will fall. Tack was a poor cobbler until he got convicted for leaving tacks on the road of the visor's parade. And was saved from imprisonment when Princess Yum Yum had a liking for him, and asked for a cobbler to fix her shoes. Not only did Tack found what appears to be the girl of his dreams. He soon finds himself to be a possible hero of the kingdom.
Meanwhile the visor: Zig-Zag plots to steal the golden balls and present them to the enemy side: The One Eye Army. With the gold balls in their possession, they'll destroy the kingdom with their number of soldiers and weapons of all kinds. Can a cobbler like Tack, really be able to save a country? In development for more than 28 years. Making this film the longest animated/feature length film to be in production. The version I saw on TV, was considered to be an alternate and less convincing movie than the other kind that was attended to be seen. As I learn the original animators and writers spent so much time, the whole thing was shelved by various distributors.
After seeing the revised version(which has numerous storyboard/UN finished scenes). I was remotely surprised on how different it is. Minus all the changes and unnecessary dialog & songs used in the Miramax version.
A lot of people consider this to be a rip off of Aladin. But trust me, it's way different from Aladin. Not as well known as Aladin. But it's one of those movies that deserve more. If it was finished by the original dudes who put their life's work into. Then people would recognize it as a classic.
It's yet to get a better DVD release. And the revised version of this film is out there, but hard to find. This and Twice Upon a Time are perfect examples of animated movies that became fan favorites over the years.
The original version is intended for sophisticated viewers. While the Miramax version was made to be kid friendly.
Famously ill-fated animated feature by the renowned Richard Williams, which remains uncompleted despite his having worked on it for almost 30 years!; the film was eventually released in two bastardized versions under the titles of THE PRINCESS AND THE COBBLER (1993) and ARABIAN KNIGHT, while bootlegs actually a workprint closer to Williams' original vision have also surfaced (which is the edition I acquired).
It's a typical Arabian Nights fantasy and it's no secret that the Disney Studios 'borrowed' some of its ideas for their hugely successful ALADDIN (1992). Of course, we have a hero (the Cobbler), a heroine (the Princess), a comic-relief sidekick (the Thief) and a villain (the Grand Vizier); the latter is recognizably voiced by the late great Vincent Price (running the whole gamut of emotions in the process), while one of the more interesting aspects of the film is that the titular figures are given no dialogue (except for one silly line by the Cobbler at the very end). Both also have other weird characteristics: the Cobbler's mouth is shaped like two nails set side by side with their points meeting, while the Thief is constantly being followed by a swarm of buzzing flies!
The plot basically revolves around three golden balls atop the King's (shouldn't that be Caliph?!) palace which, if removed, would bring disaster upon the land and, sure enough, the Thief is after them. Needless to say, the Grand Vizier called Zig-Zag (with faithful vulture companion Phido in tow) not only craves power for himself but the Princess' hand, too, and he secretly connives with a warring people intent on conquering Arabia to this end. As expected, the visual design is extremely colorful and amazingly detailed (especially effective is Williams' clever use of perspective) though it's hardly rendered justice by the fuzzy quality of the copy under review (to check out the film as mangled by other hands is clearly out of the question for me).
At 96 minutes, THE THIEF AND THE COBBLER with its slight plot and even thinner characters does tend to drag a bit (especially during the climax and the Thief's protracted hair-raising stunts to survive a conflagration), but the latter's amiable antics throughout and Price's agreeably hammy rendition more than make up for any such deficiencies. For the record, many other notable actors were roped in for the project over the years with sometimes more than one person being engaged for the same role (the King, for instance, was voiced by both Anthony Quayle and Clive Revill and the narrator was either Felix Aylmer or Ralph Richardson)!
It's a typical Arabian Nights fantasy and it's no secret that the Disney Studios 'borrowed' some of its ideas for their hugely successful ALADDIN (1992). Of course, we have a hero (the Cobbler), a heroine (the Princess), a comic-relief sidekick (the Thief) and a villain (the Grand Vizier); the latter is recognizably voiced by the late great Vincent Price (running the whole gamut of emotions in the process), while one of the more interesting aspects of the film is that the titular figures are given no dialogue (except for one silly line by the Cobbler at the very end). Both also have other weird characteristics: the Cobbler's mouth is shaped like two nails set side by side with their points meeting, while the Thief is constantly being followed by a swarm of buzzing flies!
The plot basically revolves around three golden balls atop the King's (shouldn't that be Caliph?!) palace which, if removed, would bring disaster upon the land and, sure enough, the Thief is after them. Needless to say, the Grand Vizier called Zig-Zag (with faithful vulture companion Phido in tow) not only craves power for himself but the Princess' hand, too, and he secretly connives with a warring people intent on conquering Arabia to this end. As expected, the visual design is extremely colorful and amazingly detailed (especially effective is Williams' clever use of perspective) though it's hardly rendered justice by the fuzzy quality of the copy under review (to check out the film as mangled by other hands is clearly out of the question for me).
At 96 minutes, THE THIEF AND THE COBBLER with its slight plot and even thinner characters does tend to drag a bit (especially during the climax and the Thief's protracted hair-raising stunts to survive a conflagration), but the latter's amiable antics throughout and Price's agreeably hammy rendition more than make up for any such deficiencies. For the record, many other notable actors were roped in for the project over the years with sometimes more than one person being engaged for the same role (the King, for instance, was voiced by both Anthony Quayle and Clive Revill and the narrator was either Felix Aylmer or Ralph Richardson)!
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesThe film holds the record for the longest production schedule of a completed feature: 28 years.
- GaffesDuring the song sequence in the desert scenes, it is said they are all illiterate, but earlier they were seen reading.
- Citations
[last lines]
[original version]
Princess Yum-Yum: I love you.
[Tack takes the tacks from his mouth at last]
Tack the Cobbler: And I love you.
[they hug]
- Générique farfeluThe end credits of the South African/Australian prints of "The Princess and the Cobbler" show scenes from the movie that were scrapped from the edited versions, including the Thief narrowly avoiding getting his arms chopped off, behind the credits. However, the prints of "Arabian Knight" only use a black background behind the credits.
- Autres versionsFour major versions of the film exist - the workprint, The Princess and the Cobbler, Arabian Knight, and the Recobbled Cut. Richard Williams' 1992 workprint was bootlegged on video, and copies have been shared among animation fans and professionals for years. It is an unfinished work in progress. A slightly later workprint from 13 May 1992 was preserved by Williams himself as "A Moment In Time," archived and digitally duplicated by the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences. "The Academy has it, it's in a 'golden box' now and it's safe," Williams said. The unfinished version was screened at the Academy's Samuel Goldwyn Theater.
- ConnexionsFeatured in I Drew Roger Rabbit (1988)
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et surveiller les recommandations personnalisées
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Sites officiels
- Langue
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- The Thief and the Cobbler
- Lieux de tournage
- sociétés de production
- Consultez plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
Box-office
- Budget
- 25 000 000 $ US (estimation)
- Brut – États-Unis et Canada
- 669 276 $ US
- Fin de semaine d'ouverture – États-Unis et Canada
- 319 723 $ US
- 27 août 1995
- Brut – à l'échelle mondiale
- 669 276 $ US
- Durée1 heure 39 minutes
- Couleur
- Rapport de forme
- 2.39:1
- 2.35 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant
Lacune principale
What is the Spanish language plot outline for Le voleur et le cordonnier (1993)?
Répondre