Un visiteur chez Aladdin

This slapstick sequel to A KID IN KING ARTHUR'S COURT returns Thomas Ian Nicholas as reluctant time traveler Calvin Fuller. This time he is sent back to the time of Aladdin courtesy of a genie played by Taylor Negron and meets up with Ali Baba played by Nicholas Irons. This film does a few things right. The locations, sets, and soundtrack are lifted from studio films of the 40's and 50's (or at the very least Indiana Jones sets). This was the hey day for this type of adventure film, especially comedy versions such as the Road To pictures. You can almost see that the script was written for Hope and Crosby or Lewis and Martin in the lead roles occupied by Thomas Ian Nicholas and Nicholas Irons (especially when the two must disguise themselves as harem girls) with the glaring exception that Thomas just doesn't have the comedy chops that the pros did. With few punch lines to end a scene Thomas just seems to sit there waiting for the action to stop. The director resorts to gags last seen in the Ernest comedies (pulling out an endless array of props from the 20th century such as an electric tooth brush). They are accompanied in the plot by three thieves (instead of forty) which owe much to The Three Stooges. Once introduced The Three Thieves just don't do much which is a shame. The rest of the cast plays it rather straight much like the supporting characters in an Abbott and Costello film. As I said, this film does a few things right, namely selecting a tried and true formula for comedy, a bit old, but perhaps new to the intended audience. Rhona Mitra as the romantic interest for Thomas is Hollywood gorgeous and does a good job in her role. James Faulkner as the evil Luxor will remind you of every evil antagonist in these type of films but he does it well. Another thing the film does right is play on the hip-comedic genie that Robin Williams played in the Disney animated feature. Negron has the look and the right attitude and the director doesn't overplay him. In the films of the 40's and 50's everyone spoke English, but that was okay since the audience basically granted the film the ability to "translate" for convenience sake (sort of an early version of Star Trek style translators). Some of these films took place in the 20th century in which English was common all over the world and in others all the characters were from the same time and place. In the case of A KID IN ALADDIN'S PALACE, we have a 20th-century Californian conversing quite easily with English speaking Arabs in an era when I suspect few spoke the language. Being a children's film, and a slapstick comedy, this problem is solved by just ignoring it. That's okay, because when we are first introduced to the character Calvin he is wearing a T-shirt labeled ACME PIZZA DELIVERY suggesting that some of the scenes might be lifted from a Warner Brothers cartoon, and soon enough we have the bad guys falling into vats of colored paint and jumping up against block walls with a splat. Reality has little place here. Though not of the caliber of the studio classics, this is a fine family film with nothing to offend.

What a train wreck. I was forced to watch this film under circumstances that I'd rather not repeat here. Everything was wrong with it; the story was predictable, the special effects were the worst I've seen in a 90's film, the princess didn't look like she'd ever been to the Middle East, and who could forget the cheesy hang glider scene?

Rating: 1/10

This should have won multiple Oscars. Best Picture. Best Screenplay. Best Director. Thomas Ian Nicholas should have walked away with Best Actor. Possibly one of the ten greatest films ever made.

This has to be the crappiest movie I have ever seen. The special effects on the genie look like the work of a two year old. I know it was low budget but I have seen movies with a third of their budget do better. If you have any desire to buy this on DVD or please not VHS fight the urges.

Better than the original, I would not have predicted that in fairness.

'A Kid in Aladdin's Palace' is still very much a poor film, but they do improve on 1995's 'A Kid in King Arthur's Court'. That's a surprise, especially as this was made without the collaboration of Disney; Trimark and Tapestry went it alone with this.

Cast-wise it's roughly the same in terms of what's given. Of course the first film has the (in retrospect) star names of Kate Winslet and Daniel Craig, who don't return for this, but this cast list give just as much as those from the '95 production did to be frank.

Thomas Ian Nicholas does, however, return to reprise his role. I actually found him more bearable here, he's slightly less wooden and the dialogue written for him is a little more suitable. Rhona Mitra is solid as Sheherazade, none of the others are anything noteworthy but are OK.

I found the mix between 'present day' and 'old day', a thing I criticised the other film for, passable, it's still a bit forced but at the same it does do it better than the Disney original. The desert surroundings, meanwhile, are more interesting that the forest/castle setting of the King Arthur release.

As noted near the top, I still found this a slog to get through and it isn't anywhere near good - but it is worth noting that it is an improvement.