The Thief and the Cobbler

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.

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.

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)!

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?

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.