One of the best films of the Silent era, right from the start: the stunt where Fairbanks gets to a balcony by means of a rope, a donkey, and a sleeping fat man is still one of the funniest in movies. It is also perhaps the most distinctive-looking film ever made. There's a lot of Art Nouveau furniture and jewelry out there but this is the only Art Nouveau movie, from the palace walls and gates down to the little vial the Thief uses to put a potion on a rose (which is itself stylized). Every set, prop, lamp, and costume is a work of art. Even the swords and pikes look original and eye-grabbing. (Get that mural in the Mongol palace! Just a throwaway detail.) Fairbanks spent a vast sum on this film, and it shows. According to film historian Kevin Brownlow, Fairbanks had been highly impressed by the German studio films he'd seen on a trip, and this one has that same designed, all-of-a-piece look.<br /><br />It has some low points. Like most silent films, it moves slowly by modern standards. The brief monster sequences were not very good even for 1924. And things drag a bit when the Thief starts romancing the princess. On the plus side it's got Anna May Wong, already a beauty, as a traitorous lady-in-waiting. At 16 Wong already knew to act with her eyes, rather than with her arms, like Johnston (the princess) does. <br /><br />Most people who've seen a "Thief of Bagdad" seem to have seen the 1940 version and the cartoon "Aladdin" but missed this one. That's a shame. The 1940 version is very good (it has dazzling color and a great Genie) but, like most films that are made by a committee of directors, it looks and plays like a film made by a committee. I prefer this Fairbanks version, corny acting and all. It's less sappy and more vital, and it looks more original. The dialogue written for the 1940 film is filler; it adds little to the pictures. This is exactly the sort of story Chaplin had in mind when he worried that talk in movies might turn out to be a handicap.