User reviews

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.

I will give you my honest opinion, and say that the Recobbled Cut is the best version of this ambitious but excellent film. It is really a shame with what has happened to this movie, to be honest they should have left it as Richard Williams envisioned. Neither of the other cuts felt the same, "Arabian Night" in particular I couldn't get into at all due to the mediocre songs and Jonathan Winters sometimes got on my nerves as the thief. Based on my overall thoughts of this film, this is very underrated and very well done. The animation is done in a somewhat unique style, the backgrounds are sophisticated enough, the colouring is lovely and the character features are quite impressive. The music too is wonderful, I noticed some of my classical music favourites like the Force of Destiny Overture(Verdi), Night on Bare Mountain(Mussorgsky) and Fantasia on a Theme of Thomas Tallis(Vaughan Williams) all used to surprisingly good effect. I do think Vincent Price deserves more praise for his voice work for Zig Zag, for it was absolutely superb, so deliciously evil, hammy and arch, very like when he voiced Ratigan in Great Mouse Detective. Also the climax is brilliant, utterly riveting. The characters are fine, Zig Zag is a great villain, and Yum Yum is quite vivacious for a princess. Tack the Cobbler, although he never speaks here, and personally I think it is better that way, is still an engaging enough protagonist, and the scripting is good. While the story is very nice and an interesting concept, there are parts when it feels a little draggy and drawn out. Overall, despite the tinkering it has suffered, this is an excellent movie. 8/10 Bethany Cox

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 Thief and the Cobbler, created by the animator responsible for Roger Rabbit and the Pink Panther, was a beautiful film. That is, if it ever were completed properly. The film is probably the big inspiration for Disney's Aladdin, which was just as great. The animation is so brilliant, not even the likes of Disney or Don Bluth could top it. It's a film you'd have to feel bad for, since it took up to 26 years to make and seemed to fail and get butchered.

It's about a cute mute (at least he should've been) named Tack, a cobbler, who might compare to Jo-Jo in the Blue Sky version of Horton Hears a Who. The other main character is the swamp-coloured, cheeky, silent thief (at least he should've been silent). He is crazy for gold stuff as Scrat from Ice Age is crazy for acorns and he stinks so much that his flies follow him everywhere he goes. Tack falls in love with the pretty Princess Yum-Yum, daughter of the lazy King Nod (the inspiration for the Sultan), which gets the blue vizier Zig-zag angry. Zig-zag is the inspiration for the Genie and Jafar who can say anything in rhymes and is voiced by Vincent Price. The most important thing the characters need to take care of though the Thief is just too greedy to know about is the set of three golden balls above the tallest minaret. If the balls were taken away, the dark, half-blind army of One-Eyes will attack.

I've seen the three main versions; the Recobbled cut, the Allied Filmmakers version and the Miramax version. First, I am going to talk about the Recobbled cut. This cut is made by a big fan named Garrett Gilchrist of a fan company named Orange Cow Productions. He compiled footage and original sound tracks he collected from all versions of the film and people who worked on the film, no matter if it's unfinished, low quality or animated poorly by Fred Calvert. He also included classical music to make it a little more epic. It could possibly the best fan edit ever made.

10/10 for the Recobbled cut.

The Allied Filmmakers/Majestic Films version, The Princess and the Cobbler, was released only in Australia and South Africa. It was taken away from Richard after Warner Bros. rejected it and completed quite badly by television animator Fred Calvert and the Completion Bond Company. Fred added extra animation that looked as if Don Bluth animated it (some of the extra animation was produced at his studio), dialogue for Tack and crappy songs that made it quite a rip-off of Aladdin. Fred also changed the plot by mixing up scenes a little. The Thief was still silent, only making a few gasping, grunting or chuckling noises, and Zig-zag kept his great Vincent voice.

3/10 for The Princess and the Cobbler.

Miramax picked up Fred's edit, called it "Arabian Knight" and ruined it. They turned what could've been a masterpiece into a masterpiece of crap. They cut some scenes out because they thought they were too disturbing or long, added more repetition, gave Tack the inappropriate voice of Matthew Broderick and gave everyone who couldn't talk some annoying thought talk that distracted from the great animation. The thief, voiced by Jonathan Winters, spoke about everything he could see and thought that he was in the real world of the present day by speaking present day references ("Nobody lives like this except college kids.") and pop culture references ("I'm going to Disneyland!"), and he wouldn't shut the hell up. Nor would anyone else. The edit overflowed with dialogue, with tons of grunting voices and more usage of "What?" from King Nod. And that's right; Phido and the other animals could actually thought-talk as well. What, did Jim Davis suddenly take over the production? This isn't a Garfield TV special. What were they thinking? Did they care about the original's creator? It probably inspired the butchery the Weinstein Company did to the film version of The Magic Roundabout when they added cuts, random flatulence jokes, pop culture references and moose dialogue.

0/10 for Arabian Knight.

So the only version of this film to watch is the Recobbled cut. Don't waste your time with the other versions. A true-to-the-story restoration of the film was put on hold when Roy E. Disney left The Walt Disney Company so that the company could be totally butchered, but Garrett Gilchrist hears that the Disney restoration has been continued, so there's hope yet!

Here at last is the long-awaited theatrical release of Richard Williams' "The Thief and the Cobbler." Begun in the late 1960s but not brought close to completion until after Williams created "Who Framed Roger Rabbit?" in 1988, it was conceived as an exercise in expression through animation, with an amazing roster of animation legends new and old [Art Babbit, Grim Natwick, many of Disney's and ILM's new masters] passing in and out of the project over many decades, all widescreen and 60s-groovy, baby. But now it comes to us at last, and it's really not all that good. The reason? Miramax, a subsidiary of Disney and perhaps fearing the very obvious parallels to their own "Thief" remake, "Aladdin," has cut the film to shreds. Not only have they added three truly awful songs, deleted one character [the witch, now just an eye], and removed much of the original's best shots, but the rather nice original soundtrack has been replaced with a crass, narration-heavy butchery that adds constant voice to Williams' great silent characters. Those who know anything about the original will consider this a hack job. But see it anyway, if only for the still-groovy animation and to see where "Aladdin" came from. Now why wasn't Disney sued for this? A great work, by one of the great masters, and please Miramax, your version sucks, so let's see the original sometime soon, ok?

Animation has been proven time again that cartoons can be just as engaging as regular live action films. It's also known that animation gives filmmakers the power to create anything they want that the real world may be too hard to try and materialize. One person who knew this well was animator Richard Williams, a man who really knew the profession inside out. Whether it be creating fun title sequences to the Pink Panther films, or helping to create Who Framed Roger Rabbit (1988) one of the most memorable live-action cartoon films to date, Williams had the hand for eye catching animation. Sadly, he never achieved his lifelong dream, of finishing this film. As well respected as he was, this has remained never fully completed the way he wanted it to be done.

Co-written by Williams, Margaret French and a slew of other ghost writers from over the years, the story is about a cobbler by the name of Tack (Matthew Broderick) who happens to be wound into a crazy adventure because of a bumbling thief (Jonathan Winters). The thief wants to steal three golden spheres from the kingdom of Nod (Clive Revill) that provide protection from the evil one eye army. Scheming behind the king's back is ZigZag (Vincent Price), hoping to not only rule the kingdom but also marry King Nod's daughter Princess YumYum (Jennifer Beals). Overall the story is okay, but because the final cut of the film suffered from so much meddling, there's a lot to be desired.

The Miramax re-edit has enough dialog throughout the film, but much of it feels to be in the wrong places. Both Tack and the thief say very little of anything outside of their heads. This leads to very little interactions between the essential characters and ultimately a lack of development within the story. Princess YumYum & Tack have scenes where they are together, yet there's only a couple where they share an actual conversation. Much of the time, audiences will hear more of Jonathan Winters' dialog for the thief's inner monologue. By no means can the characters be criticized for not having distinct personalities, but as a whole they're level of investment is low.

The voice acting is enjoyable though. Matthew Broderick and Jennifer Beals from Flashdance (1983) and Vampire's Kiss (1988) have acceptable chemistry. And as much of Jonathan Winters' dialog adds nothing to the plot, his moments are comical too. Of course, the best though goes to Vincent Price for his performance as ZigZag, the every other line rhyming antagonist. All the words recorded from Price are so entertaining to listen to. There's also other characters like Mighty One-Eye (Kevin Dorsey), Chief Roofless (Windsor Davies) and Phido the Vulture (Eric Bogosian). All who have interesting dialog as well.

As mentioned before the character designs themselves are very unique and captivating to look at because of the way they were animated. John Leatherbarrow was credited as cinematographer to this picture, although it's unclear as to what he contributed since this is an animated feature. Either way, the animation is still a dazzling array of sequences and colors that only Williams could conjure up. The film score and songs were composed by Robert Folk. Having experience working with scores focused more on comedies and or militaristic settings, hearing his music to this feature was a nice surprise. Not only did it fit the film well, but was very pretty, as were the songs sung by Bobby Page.

It's unfortunate that Richard Williams did not receive the proper treatment for his dream goal film, but his memory will live on in the separate cuts of each film. While the Miramax cut is certainly not the best, it isn't the worst either. Sadly, the dialog used doesn't really develop its characters well, which is a big problem. But the characters do have charm, there are funny moments, the music is wonderful and the animation is mesmerizing.

I can't stand this film being so obscure. It was a 30-year-old labor of love that Richard Williams promised to be the greatest animated film ever, before it was taken away by his creditors. All he cared about was the perfection of the art, rather than the restrictions of schedules and budgets. What happened to the movie was awful, but the remaining animation shines through, greatly. I, for one, was very upset with the release of the Miramax version on DVD, with only pan and scan, and a lack of extras. It was an insult to the original version. I really hope the restoration project is revived soon. A fully restored Director's cut is my on and only "Dream DVD". That film really changed my life and outlook on animation. It deserves more recognition and it's a great learning exercise for animators. Stay away from the Miramax version.

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)!

This is the greatest animated feature film of all time, but unfortunately Warner Bros took it away from Richard Williams because he went way over budget and schedule.

When they took over they added some terrible songs and dialogue to Tack (who never talked in the real version) and many other nasty changes, then released it in selected cities in the US only.

It took 20 years to get made and has some of the greatest moving images of all time.

The title is supposed to be "The Thief and the Cobbler"

My 8 year old son has loved it for years, never gets sick of it.

Finally, Vincent Price's voice performance is excellent and it was one of his last.

Richard williams started this ambitious animated film way back in 1968. Working with him were some of the original Disney animators such as Art Babbit and Grim Natwick as well as Ken Harris and Emery Hawkins from Warners. The film was originally self financed by Williams with money coming in from his animated commercials. After winning an academy award for Roger Rabbit he got the film financed externally so it could be completed. This turned out to be a bad decision because after going over budget the investors got nervous and pulled the film from him, having it completed by someone else. The film had about 10 to 15 min left to complete when it was taken out of Williams hands. Instead of just completing the film, the person in charge of the completion decided to re-work the film to make it more "mainstream". He replaced much of the original scenes with song segments and farmed out the animation . The resulting film was released in a few different edits. On called "The Princess and the Cobbler" in Australia and one called "Arabian Knight" in the US by Miramax. The Miramax version is much worse because they added constant narration and voices to characters who were intended to be silent. After Disney purchased Miramax, it's version ended up on home video under the original title "The Thief and the Cobbler".

Richard Williams "Work Print" which is the work in progress version is the only way we can tell what this film could have been. It has not been released, but can be found as a bootleg.

It was just amazing. Why? Well, this Richard Williams work is so awesome that Disney, Richard Rich, Don Bluth, nor even Chuck Jones couldn't do it better than Richard Williams.

The characters are the sneaky, greedy Thief. He doesn't hate himself. He just likes his job. He can steal anything, including the three golden balls. He reminds me of Jason from the Friday the 13th film series, except he doesn't kill anybody. You know what, fine, he reminds me of Scrat from the Ice Age film series.

Then, there's the hero, Tack the cobbler, whose also a lonely, silent shoemaker. When I look at him, he reminds me of Jojo from Horton Hears a Who. The Blue Sky Studios version. Anyway, Tack finds his true love, Princess YumYum, who reminds me of Megara from Disney's Hercules, except not a Daria-like princess, nor a manly woman princess. Just a kind, innocent, sensitive princess.

There's the villain, ZigZag, which is voiced by none other than the great Vincent Price. He says his sentences in rhymes, which is a cool concept for a villain. Along with him is his bird, Phido.

There's a plot where the cobbler, Tack is getting arrested by ZigZag, however, King Nod, the Nanny, and Princess YumYum allowed Tack to be hired as a shoemaker. The thief tries to steal the shoe, and then, Tack chases the thief.

But, the thief is willing to get the three golden balls. Meanwhile, King Nod had a vision that the One-Eyes are going to take over Baghdad. But, it was not a dream.

ZigZag, however, was about to do his evil stuff... because he's a villain. Yes, don't ask. Anyway, the thief gets the balls, and then, the balls were dropped, as ZigZag gets the balls so he can give them to the one eye.

Tack, the Nanny, and YumYum travel to fight the One-Eyes. This results with the band of Brigand and the old hag witch.

Then, they battle, with the Thief getting the balls back, and trapped in the fire and in the battle for his wild ride.

Tack, the nanny, and YumYum defeated ZigZag and the one-eyes, as they get the balls back to King Nod.

This has got to be the greatest animated classic ever! Really! In fact, there's a bootlegged fan DVD of it restored with classical music playing. This could be the best bootlegged fan DVD ever.

FINAL VERDICT (for the original, adult-oriented, uncut, better-than-sex version): 10/10!

Now, it's been 3 decades in the production, and of course, it was about to be released in 1992 for Warner Bros., but ended up unreleased due to Disney's release of Aladdin.

So, Fred Calvert completed The Thief and the Cobbler as fast as he can, and of course, he alienated the lost, unfinished, animated masterpieces of all time.

This results in The Princess and the Cobbler, released in the UK, Australia, and South Africa in 1994 by Allied Filmmakers (those that are responsible for the awful 1993 movie, Super Mario Bros. (based on the popular NES/SNES game) and Tim Burton's produced stop-motion film, James and the Giant Peach), and they call it, The Princess and the Cobbler.

This is mediocre. It added '90s pop-like songs from characters that are rejects from either Richard Rich films or Don Bluth films. They do keep the original Vincent Price voice. Notice that even though the Thief isn't talking in this version like the original version, he only screams, grunts, and gasps.

Overall, this is not all the way as good as the original.

FINAL VERDICT (for the Allied Filmmakers version): 5/10

Now, in 1995, one year after that version was released in Australia, UK and South Africa, Miramax used that version, but they called it Arabian Knight, and... oh my god! What am I doing? Why am I reviewing the Weinsteins' version? WHY?!? Well, here we go.

This one is brain dead. In fact, they added the inappropriate voice of Mathew Broderick. What?!? However, they do keep the Vincent Price voice, so I'll give Miramax a bit of a credit. Then, there's the Thief, and what have they done? They made the Thief TALK in this film... IN HIS MIND! But, the thief isn't the only one, the alligators and Phido also talk in their thoughts. What, the director of Homeward Bound took over the production?! And of course, the montage, and the great parts were all distorted and cut-out. That's a very generic idea for Miramax! Overall, it sucks! It's worse than Disaster Movie, Batman & Robin, Catwoman, High School Musical, Superman IV: Quest for Peace, Transformers: The Revenge of the Fallen, and every single Uwe Boll movie ever made.

FINAL VERDICT (for the Miramax version): 0/10!!!

So please, watch the original version. You may like it. In fact, a long time ago, Roy E. Disney was to restore the original version. So there has to be hope! Maybe.

Director Richard Williams came up with the story in 1968 and developed it over the years. His lifework ended in 1995 when Miramax dumped this film on video without giving it a (proper) theatrical release.

There are a lot of things wrong with this film. The story is poor and can't hold the attention very long. It also has to do with the fact that in 1992 Disney came up with Aladdin, which scored big time at the box-office as we all know. The animation (especially the characters) sometimes look like they were drawn like an East-European animated TV-show (for anyone who hasn't seen these shows: they're very poorly drawn). The songs are... easy to forget. I'm not a fan of songs in animated films. Even in Disney films I don't like them, mostly unnecessary and holding up the story.

Now to the good parts of this film: The animation is brilliant at times, as it is poorly at other times. The brilliant stuff is especially the Escher-like surroundings throughout the story. The voice cast is very good. Vincent Price, Matthew Broderick, Jennifer Beals and eric Bogosian, Toni Collette and Jonathan Winters all do well. Finally, the jokes. There were as many good jokes as there were bad ones. Most of the jokes came from The Thief and referred to the 20th century pop-culture and half of them are good, the other half are not. Some jokes are good, but not for this film. Whatever they were thinking, I guess they needed a funny sidekick to make some wisecracks.

In all, an interesting film. The good animation at times can hardly make up for all the flaws throughout the film. Still I wonder why Williams couldn't come up with a better story for this one. He worked long enough on it. There are many good ideas in this film, but they are mostly poorly developed.

Despite its flaws I rate it 7/10.

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!

I saw "The Princess and the Cobbler" in an Australian cinema in 1993. I gather that this version is much the same, but not entirely; and that Australian (and, for some reason, South African) audiences got to see a bit more footage than everyone else. Maybe I'm wrong about this. I do know that, in a sense, this movie doesn't exist: there's just a lot of footage and more or less apt ways of putting it together.

Forget the ways of putting it together: the footage is great, some of the most sumptuous and witty animation you will ever see. I don't know how to plead its case without making a false impression. "Sumptuous", might, to some people, suggest a kind of misguided photo-realism - but no, the drawings are beautifully stylised. "Witty" and "stylised" sounds a bit like code for that kind of animation whose only distinction is its cheapness - but no, clearly a lot of work and detail has gone into the animation. Perhaps I can put it best by saying that the villain has six fingers and blue skin; but he's so convincingly animated that I was halfway through my second viewing before I noticed either fact.

"The Thief and the Cobbler" was one of the earlier, more appropriate titles. It's the only title I've heard that accurately describes the story. It's not a bad story. And the thief is a wonderful character. For his sake I would put up with any number of trite lyrics like, "She is more than this / She is more / So much more / She is more than this."

Forget I quoted those words. Watch it - and bemoan the fact that you can't watch it on a wide screen.

Here is a beautifully animated movie, truly fascinating to watch. I believe the only flaw is the presence of Jonathan Winters. I understand the producers' thinking when casting him, but in my opinion, the thief should have been silent as intended. Winters' comments (apparently ad libbed) were very distracting.

My friend and I are huge Vincent Price fans. We're trying to see every movie Price has made. We heard that in 1995 an animated movie called Arabian Knight with Price as the evil Zigzag. We read about its troubled production and I must say we were not expecting much.

When we rented it we were utterly amazed. This film is wonderful! The animation is astounding. Roger Williams is one hell of an animator. Sure, it has problems, but while watching it I thought to myself that if this movie were completed in the late 1960s or early 1970s, it would have been gone down in history as one of the greatest animated films of all time. It would have become a cult classic with a HUGE following!

I am humbled by this film and the story of Richard Williams, which rivals the sad tale of Erich von Stroheim's tormented production GREED. The good news: most of his masterpiece exists and it can be seen. AVOID AT ALL COSTS the versions you may find in "legitimate" locations... these are bastardized, cut, and filled with inferior, cheaply done filler-scenes without the input of the man who had been slowly crafting the film at a low simmer for three decades! I have just witnessed, via a poor quality bootleg VHS tape, this utter masterpiece which surely stands over all the animated films I've seen, and the vast majority of live-action, too. Gone are the songs, gone are the celebrity voices, and all of the violence reinstated. This site's claim that over 1000 on-screen deaths are present is probably on the mark - whole crowds meet their doom in painstakingly animated sequences. It was also in the correct aspect ratio.

Mr. Williams: please get your version out somehow - even with some sequences supplemented by storyboard sketches or without color in spots, this is better that anything Pixar has ever even done.

This was a butchered movie.

You can't deal with "the Thief and the Cobbler" without recounting the sickening story behind it, so here's the really short version (I may have some facts wrong, so don't quote me on any of this). Richard William's wanted to be the first person to animate an entire feature-length movie all by himself. It took him nearly three decades to finish about twenty minutes. By the late 80's he was driven nearly insane drawing every single frame of film *by hand* by himself, so Disney offered to help him finish it.

They did a completely half-assed job on the remaining animation and songs, added narration where there was no need, slapped the title "Arabian Knight" on it, and whipped it in and out of theaters before the unwitting public could say "'Aladdin' rip-off".

We'll never get to find out what kind of movie Williams would have made. As sad as that is, it's probably better to admit it's a non-issue and deal with the movie we do have (and don't get me wrong; that does NOT mean that what happened to "Thief" isn't disgraceful).

It is worth a rental just to see what remains of the original, Williams produced animation. You will be able to tell the difference; the Williams scenes are the ones where the characters seem to be roaming around a series of Escher prints. His finale, where the Thief destroys a gigantic mechanical army with one slapstick accident after another, is still breathtaking. Fast-forward to these bits and, definitely, watch them with the sound off.

I am one of the privileged view to have seen the original version of this movie . I studied animation in college and there was a copy of this movie uncut on video in the colleges animation library. It is a masterpiece of film. I can only imagine the amount of work that went into this film and to think Disney bastardised it and made Aladdin.

Im not surprised at this though Disney have done this with many a movie in the past. Princess Mononoke being prime example they stopped this from being released for a very long time. John Lassiter is to thank for GIbli studios now having the ability to release their own movies in the states without having to rely on the thieving gits that are Disney.

This film is an example why looking to perfect something can make you never truly complete it. Richard Williams back in the 60's started this example. He loved what he was creating with this film so he waited so he could perfect the movie. Years passed when he created his finest achievement in "Who Framed Roger Rabbit"'s animation. This got him a deal with WB. He now had more money to help finally create the film to perfection, but now he had a deadline. This deadline was not met, and Willams creation that he worked on for most of his life was taken away from him. The lesson of this story is don't focus on total perfection. If you do you end up with the piece of donkey crap I am reviewing today. Annoying characters, bland as hell songs, and constant added in humor. Let's start with annoying characters shall we. While many of the characters are bland and annoying the one who really got on my nerves was The Thief. He just won't shut the hell up. He doesn't speak so he monologues. Every second I have to listen to him crack an unfunny joke. Next is the songs which are by far the worst things about this movie. They have some of the flat out laziest lyrics I have ever heard. It's like if took Lady Gaga's lazy lyric writing and put it in a kids movie minus the sex and drugs. I could write better lyrics. Then we have the annoying as hell humor. After Aladdin came out they got the idea of forcing pop culture references into a film that's humor is silent is completely ridiculous. It's like if you took City Lights, made it sound, and had Charlie talk about going to Six Flags or something like that. Overall the film is simply a mess. It was raped and thrown in the ocean with cinder blocks to its feet. Now that I have said I hate the changed version now let me talk about the Recobbed Cut. This was a fan made cut that changed everything so it would be like it was intended to be like. It breaks my heart to watch it. It shows how this could have been a classic, but it was taken from a genius' hands and was destroyed. The Thief and The Cobbler are silent like they are supposed to be, the sound effects are made so they would sound older, the songs are gone, missing scenes are added, and the pop culture references are gone. In this new version we get more likable characters, more focus on animation, and a much better sense of humor. It would have been a classic, but perfection was wanted to the point where it was destroyed.

1 star out of 4 (changed version)

4 stars out of 4 (Recobbled Cut)

This is one of the most innovative and amazing pieces of animation I have ever seen. The treatment of each of the characters was fresh compelling, unique and entirely hilarious, especially that of Zigzag the Sorcerer and of the Thief. Princess Yum Yum was every bit as seductive as Richard William's Jessica Rabbit. The use of meticulously crafted geometric designs and patterns for the backgrounds was a delightful change from the photo realistic computer generated images offered up as the order of the day. This could easily have been considered an historic piece of classic family entertainment weren't it for the intrusive and entirely unnecessary dialogue of the usually funny Jonathan Winters as the voice of the thief. His mumblings in no way moved the story forward or complimented the visual personality of the thief, interjecting meaningless dribble into the what would be otherwise, natural pauses in the rhythm of the story. Richard Williams could have easily basked in the same spotlight as does Tim Burton or Roald Dahl. I'll keep an eye out for a 'directors cut' to share with my friends.