The major-scale adaptation of The Thief of Bagdad produced by Alexander Korda is still to this date one of the best examples in the use of Technicolor as well as being a pioneer in the field of special effects.

Above anything else it is precisely this extreme colourfulness and photography, alongside incredible sets and costumes that make this film entertaining and so enchanting to watch.

On the other hand, mix feelings are the results that come out from their special effects, yes, it is understandable that at the time this was a film that was pushing the envelope in this technical area further ahead than any other film (it completely deserves its Academy Award in this department, the same way that it also won in photography) but looking at it now the effects feel very much outdated. Those more rudimentary ones such as the spider are great, but the ones that led the way in the use of blue screen very much show their early stages of experimentation. Maybe, because of that, the effects of the 1924 version are still even more endearing than the ones in this later film.

Next, in regard to acting, out of the main protagonists Conrad Veidt as Jaffar is clearly way above the rest, as much terrifying that the character can be (and is, thanks to his performance), he also succeeds in providing him with a deeper and more humane side to the character that gives the role many more layers and consequently makes it the most interesting one. For the rest, Sabu holds up his own considerably as the young thief Abu, but on the other side June Duprez (as the Princess) and John Justin (Ahmad) provide incredibly weak performances with zero chemistry, something required for the supposed lovers in a story. Lastly, two brief special mentions, praise for Miles Malleson as the child-minded Sultan of Basra, good comic-relief, and criticism for Rex Ingram as the Djinn, I really don’t know how to take him… Funny? Threatening? Anyway…

To summarise, an interesting watch especially for its more technical aspects despite its shortcomings when it comes to the story and acting in itself. Still, the charm both visually and exuded by Douglas Fairbanks Jr. in the 1924 version puts the earlier version ahead of this later retelling.