The Wizard of Baghdad

I saw this movie as a 7 year old and thought it was great. I was not worried about plot and great acting. As a child I saw it as fun. Pre Harry Potter Magic, good vs evil. If you are going to judge it as an adult, pan it all you want, but if you see it a a film a child might enjoy, you might get a totally different point of view. Your children might enjoy it more than "Citizen Kane" or "On the Waterfront". There are a lot of great movies out there, and I could care less if Dick Shawn's acting wasn't perfect or the script was terrible. I wanted to be entertained and as a child I was. I really don't think this was a movie made for an adult audience. Who cares if you could see the wires or they used co2 to simulate clouds. It was the 60's. Star Wars had not changed the way we looked at special effects. Like the old Flash Gorden Serials or Superman of the 40's. They were what they were, and kids loved them.

Cheap, shoddy, lamebrained Sam Katzman production (now there's a redundancy) with Dick Shawn a genie assigned to unite two lovers and help them overthrow the usurper who now rules Baghdad. Shawn is an acquired taste, and you won't acquire it by watching him in this. He hams it up to the extreme with his hipster routine (it worked a few years later when he did it in "It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World" and "The Producers" but it doesn't work here at all) and opens the film doing a painfully embarrassing and flat-out stupid song-and-dance number called "Eenie Meenie Genie," and further embarrasses himself later on in an even more idiotic number where he sings, jumps and pirouettes in front of the assembled court. The performances by such usually reliable character actors as John Van Dreelen, Vaughn Taylor and Don Beddoe reflect their apparent embarrassment at being stuck in this picture (if you've noticed the word "embarrassed" being used a lot in this review, it's intentional), the direction by the usually competent George Sherman is almost nonexistent, the sets appear to be made of cardboard, the "action" scenes are laughable . . . in other words, the entire picture is a dud. Avoid it.

I saw this film in 1964 during a re-run at the local cinema in Bangalore, India. I was 9 years old at the time and thought that the film was great fun. That's it; it is basically a juvenile film and should be seen as such, not deeply analyzed from an adult perspective.

Oddly enough, I remembered two scenes from the film that helped me to track it down 50 years later. First was the sequence where the boy prince escapes in a basket and is wounded in the process. Second, the wrestling scene where the prince, now a strong young man, flattens the Caliph's court wrestler in a bout. Good memories from a bygone era!

I'm sure it's a delight for little children, especially since there is a wise talking horse, a flying carpet, a prince and a princess, and a tiny Aladdin appears for a few moments. I wanted to see the movie because of the lead actor, Dick Shawn, who gave the title of the movie, which I fell in love with when I saw him in "The Producers" by Mel Brooks. The role of L.S.D. - Lorenzo St. DuBois from "The Producers" is one of the greatest comedy roles ever, an absolute delight. But in this Wizard of Baghdad, he's disappointing. Diane Baker, the princess, very young and very beautiful, an actress I have admired in so many other movies (and much better roles), she remains the only reason to watch the film. A star only for her.

This one is in trouble during the opening credits! Shawn is "flying" on a magic carpet (actually, he's sitting on something while a fog machine blows in his face) singing an inane, unfunny, embarrassing and annoying song called "Eenie Meenie Genie". He then screeches (unconvincingly) to a halt and is read the riot act by Edmonson, King of the Genies. His mission is to reunite a pair of Baghdad royals whose union will ensure the future of the city. However, the city is currently being run by tyrannical Van Dreelen and he is set up to marry the female half of the couple (Baker.) Shawn gets a flying horse (unconvincing again, naturally) and sets out to complete his mission in spite of his own buffoonery. The film is lame. That's the best way to describe it. The comedy is dumb and tired, the action scenes are mostly comprised of stock footage from another, better movie and the story is trite and routine, even for its time. The "effects" are shoddy and the characters are mostly uninteresting. Shawn (looking like a slightly shorter "Jethro Bodine" of "The Beverly Hillbillies") mugs and hams (and sings again!) to no avail. A great deal of the scenes are static, especially those taking place in rooms of the palace. The film does get a shot in the arm from the very attractive Baker and her luscious love-to-be Coe. She is decked out in far more glamorous attire and hairstyles than she was usually given in this stage of her career. He is divine. Though it's hysterical to see him lumber around like a car mechanic in his old world finery, he is so charming and boyishly handsome, it doesn't matter. His flat, monotone voice also cannot dampen the joy in seeing him stripped to the waist (along with his stuntman) and wrestling a beefy slave. He gets to wear a cute little parade of snug pants in red, salmon and avocado and exchange some amusing banter with Baker. Otherwise, this is a deadly, skippable piece of camel dung.