Il ladro e il ciabattino

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 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.

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'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!

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?