AVALIAÇÃO DA IMDb
7,1/10
5 mil
SUA AVALIAÇÃO
Adicionar um enredo no seu idiomaA 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.
- Direção
- Roteiristas
- Artistas
Vincent Price
- ZigZag
- (narração)
Eddie Carroll
- The Thief (Majestic Films version)
- (narração)
- (as Ed. E. Carroll)
- …
Mona Marshall
- Nurse (Majestic Films version)
- (narração)
- …
Joan Sims
- Mad and Holy Old Witch
- (narração)
Stanley Baxter
- Gofer
- (narração)
- …
Kenneth Williams
- Goblet
- (narração)
- …
Clinton Sundberg
- Dying Soldier
- (narração)
Windsor Davies
- Chief Roofless
- (narração)
Frederick Shaw
- Goolie
- (narração)
Thick Wilson
- Hook
- (narração)
Eddie Byrne
- Hoof
- (narração)
Avaliações em destaque
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.
If you've seen the ORIGINAL VERSION, this is not true. Disney DID NOT originally help the creator of this movie. I don't know the entire movie, but if you go to www.thiefandthecobblar.com it includes a short biography of the man who originally began this project. I watched the original movie when I was VERY VERY little. You can NO LONGER PURCHASE IT ((if you can...PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE TELL ME...)) Although some minor video stores still carry it. The original, if found, was BEAUTIFUL and I must say, absolutely hilarious. No matter who watched it with me, it was always loved. Just this evening I watched the version I'm certain that you speak of. The dubbed version, I believe bought by Disney, is total CRAP. It hurt me to watch it. I don't even want to know what happened when they renamed it Arabian Knight. All I know is if you can find the original, it's an incredible animated masterpiece.
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?
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.
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!
Você sabia?
- CuriosidadesThe film holds the record for the longest production schedule of a completed feature: 28 years.
- Erros de gravaçãoDuring the song sequence in the desert scenes, it is said they are all illiterate, but earlier they were seen reading.
- Citações
[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]
- Cenas durante ou pós-créditosThe 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.
- Versões alternativasFour 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.
- ConexõesFeatured in I Drew Roger Rabbit (1988)
Principais escolhas
Faça login para avaliar e ver a lista de recomendações personalizadas
Detalhes
- Data de lançamento
- Países de origem
- Centrais de atendimento oficiais
- Idioma
- Também conhecido como
- Arabian Knight
- Locações de filme
- Empresas de produção
- Consulte mais créditos da empresa na IMDbPro
Bilheteria
- Orçamento
- US$ 25.000.000 (estimativa)
- Faturamento bruto nos EUA e Canadá
- US$ 669.276
- Fim de semana de estreia nos EUA e Canadá
- US$ 319.723
- 27 de ago. de 1995
- Faturamento bruto mundial
- US$ 669.276
- Tempo de duração1 hora 39 minutos
- Cor
- Proporção
- 2.39:1
- 2.35 : 1
Contribua para esta página
Sugerir uma alteração ou adicionar conteúdo ausente