A turbaned man stands beside a curtained bed where a woman reclines
Film review

The Thief of Bagdad

1924 · Directed by Raoul Walsh · 2h 29m

In a sentenceDouglas Fairbanks treats an enormous fantasy city as though someone has built it purely to keep him from sitting down

The Thief of Bagdad (Douglas Fairbanks) is at the centre of a fantasy adventure populated by royalty, religious figures and slaves. The royal characters include The Princess (Julanne Johnston), The Caliph (Brandon Hurst), The Mongol Prince (Sôjin Kamiyama) and The Indian Prince (Noble Johnson). The thief’s companion is His Evil Associate (Snitz Edwards). The Holy Man (Charles Belcher), The Soothsayer (Tote Du Crow) and The Mongol Slave (Anna May Wong) also have their parts in a story that combines romance, adventure and fantasy.

Plays from YouTube when you press play; nothing loads from them until then.

Fi1m review

Douglas Fairbanks’s athletic charm and William Cameron Menzies’s immense sets make this fantasy adventure a pleasure. The romance is thinner than the spectacle, and 149 minutes is generous, but the physical performance remains reason enough to give it an evening.

Raoul Walsh’s The Thief of Bagdad makes a good case for building an adventure around an actor who knows how to move. Douglas Fairbanks is the attraction, and the fantasy gives his athleticism somewhere suitably extravagant to go. We recommend it, with a warning about the 149-minute running time: its pleasures are immediate, but the telling can be leisurely. There are stretches when we would happily trade some spectacle for a brisker pace.

Fairbanks also takes the story and producer credits, and the film is thoroughly organised around his strengths. He gives the thief a physical confidence that feels mischievous, with a dancer’s lightness even when the scale around him becomes imposing. We found ourselves grinning at his athletic exuberance against the towering sets, because he seems so little intimidated by their size. His evident pleasure in movement keeps the performance warm; there is more here than an invitation to admire his fitness.

William Cameron Menzies’s production design is crucial to that pleasure. The immense sets could overwhelm an actor with less presence; here, their scale makes Fairbanks’s freedom of movement funnier and more impressive. Arthur Edeson’s cinematography allows us to appreciate the performer and the surroundings together, rather than turning the scenery into something to inspect between bouts of action. We can enjoy the buildings without forgetting the person moving through them.

Achmed Abdullah’s screenplay is less successful at making the romance equally interesting. The Princess, played by Julanne Johnston, has nothing like the thief’s force of personality, and the difference matters in a film that asks us to spend so long in its company. Anna May Wong, credited as The Mongol Slave, holds the attention more firmly, even within a supporting role. Those character labels also make plain how readily the fantasy sorts people by rank and nationality. Its charm does not make that habit less noticeable.

Bill Nolan’s editing is most persuasive when movement supplies the momentum, less so when the adventure has to sustain our interest between its visual setpieces. The length gives us time to admire the spectacle, but also time to wish it would get on with things. Mortimer Wilson’s music leaves less of an impression than the physical rhythm of Fairbanks’s performance. We remember the body’s timing more clearly than the accompaniment.

Within fantasy adventure, Walsh’s film puts unusual faith in its leading actor’s physical ability. Its appeal does not depend on treating it as a museum piece, or on politely allowing for its age. Fairbanks keeps the enormous settings from becoming static exhibits, while their scale makes his confidence more entertaining. For all the leisurely storytelling, the pleasure of watching him has little to do with historical importance. Give it an unhurried evening, and allow for the romance to be the quieter attraction.

Critical consensus AI synthesised

83
Positive
5
Mixed
0
Negative
0
The AV Club
20 February 2013 · A- · Noel Murray
90

Murray regards the film as a major, still-effective spectacle. He particularly praises Fairbanks’s athletic physicality and the film’s imaginative visual setpieces.

Read the full review →
The Guardian
30 November 2014 · Philip French
90*

French presents the film as Fairbanks’s greatest triumph and a marvellous silent-era adventure. He particularly praises Fairbanks’s balletic athleticism amid the towering sets.

Read the full review →
Empire
1 January 2000 · Kim Newman
85*

The review finds the adventure exhilarating and celebrates its magical silent-cinema spectacle. It especially praises Douglas Fairbanks’s magnetic performance and the inventive direction and sets.

Read the full review →
Time Out
· GB
70*

The page presents the film as an exuberant showcase of silent cinema. It singles out the flamboyant Arabian Nights spectacle and its immense sets.

Read the full review →
The Skinny
24 November 2014 · ★★★★ · Lewis Porteous
80

Porteous considers the film one of Raoul Walsh’s greatest achievements, despite its being uncharacteristic of his work. He praises Fairbanks’s childlike charisma and singles out Anna May Wong’s supporting role as especially compelling for modern audiences.

Read the full review →

Straight answers AI written, from our review

Is The Thief of Bagdad worth watching?
The Thief of Bagdad is worth watching for Douglas Fairbanks’s athletic charm and William Cameron Menzies’s immense fantasy sets, and we score it 82. We recommend it to anyone who enjoys physical performance and grand adventure, provided a thin romance and leisurely 149-minute running time do not put them off.
How long is The Thief of Bagdad, and what is it rated?
The Thief of Bagdad runs 2h 29m. It is a romance and adventure film.
Where can I watch The Thief of Bagdad in India?
The Thief of Bagdad is not on any streaming or rental service in India at the moment. It is available in 7 other countries; change your country at the top of the page to see where. Availability is checked daily.
How does The Thief of Bagdad compare to The General?
The Thief of Bagdad offers grand fantasy spectacle, while The General is the stronger choice for ingenious physical comedy, with machinery giving its agile performer considerable trouble. We recommend Fairbanks for his mischievous freedom of movement amid immense sets, and Keaton for railway action that more readily outweighs a similarly thin romance.
What should I watch after The Thief of Bagdad?
After The Thief of Bagdad, try The Adventures of Prince Achmed (1926, Fi1m 80): Silhouettes supply the magic in another handmade fantasy of princes and peril. Then The General (1926, Fi1m 91): For more physical ingenuity, with machinery giving an agile performer considerable trouble.

Cast

If you liked this, try…

  1. The Adventures of Prince Achmed (1926, Fi1m 80)Silhouettes supply the magic in another handmade fantasy of princes and peril.

  2. The General (1926, Fi1m 91)For more physical ingenuity, with machinery giving an agile performer considerable trouble.

  3. Beauty and the Beast (1946) · not on Fi1m yetA slower, stranger fairy tale, with rooms worth studying as closely as faces.

  4. A Chinese Ghost Story (1987) · not on Fi1m yetRomance, ghosts and acrobatics make an unusually lively combination of tenderness and danger.

  5. The Fall (2006) · not on Fi1m yetElaborate fantasy settings surround a story that gives make-believe a more painful purpose.