Clevercell Very disappointing...

Wordiezett So much average

SpunkySelfTwitter It’s an especially fun movie from a director and cast who are clearly having a good time allowing themselves to let loose.

ActuallyGlimmer The best films of this genre always show a path and provide a takeaway for being a better person.

Woodyanders Brave and noble sailer Sinbad (the hopelessly wooden Sergei Stolyarov, who sports a wicked pointy Van Dyke beatnik beard) wants to bring happiness to the poor people in his land. When he discovers out that giving folks money and material goods doesn't do the trick, Sinbad decides to go on a perilous journey to find the fabled Blue Bird of Happiness. Boy, does this radically doctored American version of a popular Russian fantasy film possess all the right wrong stuff to qualify as an amusingly inane yukfest: we've got stiff acting, cruddy dubbing, ripe narration, an agonizingly poky pace, a drawn-out and meandering narrative (it takes over thirty minutes for Sinbad to finally embark on his quest!), infrequent and ineptly staged action scenes, a few inspired goofy touches (you gotta love Sinbad's laughing horse and the creepy singing bird lady), laughably lousy (not so) special effects, and a groan-inducing cornball climactic message. This honey hits its gloriously gut-busting campy zenith when Sinbad swims underwater and pays a visit to the legendary kingdom of Atlantis, which comes complete with a hearty king and a bitchy queen, a giant cheesy puppet octopus, and an equally tacky hand puppet catfish. Another hilarious sequence occurs when various foolhardy souls participate in a test to prove they got the correct tough stuff to be members of Sinbad's crew: Most of these dudes take a slug of hard liquor and get punched in the chest by Sinbad while one especially crazy guy wrestles a bear! And let's not forget the cringeworthy moment with Sinbad forlornly warbling a horrendous song next to a lake. An absolute kitschy hoot.

bensonmum2 I'll skip the normal plot synopsis and get right to it. Besides, anything I could write about the plot would hardly matter as the American bastardization of Sadko that I watched appears to bear only a passing resemblance to either the original Russian movie or the classic Russian folktale on which it was based. First off, I wonder whose bright idea it was to turn the character named Sadko into Sinbad. Let's see, Sadko is a poor Russian musician – Sinbad is an adventurous Middle-Eastern sailor. A lot of similarity there, huh? Secondly, I really have to wonder if the Russian version of the movie included anything about a quest for a bird of happiness. I say this because in the end the bird hardly seems to matter at all. It's almost as if the idea of the bird was added to the American version to give some sort of justification for "Sinbad" going to sea.Beyond the problems of Americanizing this Russian movie, I have problems with the bits of the original Sadko that seep through. As I stated in my recent review of The Sword and the Dragon (aka Ilya Muromets), I'm not a fan of this style of Russian movie or acting. "The Sword and the Dragon seemed to be filled with such broad overacting that it became absurd. I realize that the movie was made over 50 years ago in the Soviet Union. I understand that the movie is filled with messages and other pro-worker propaganda. And I appreciate the importance of the film as a relic of the communist system. But none of that means I have to actually like the movie." If you change the title of the movie, this quote accurately reflects my feelings on The Magic Voyage of Sinbad. And even though I realize that my appreciation of the movie might be improved if I were to have the opportunity to see the original film, I doubt the change would be drastic.Like many others, I saw The Magic Voyage of Sinbad through Mystery Science Theater 3000. I enjoyed this episode much more than the previously mentioned The Sword and the Dragon episode. Overall, some very funny riffs. I'll give episode #505 a 4/5 on my MST3K rating scale.

holly Sadko (not Sinbad, ugh) is a hunk of a poet with a harp. He's got two girls in love with him: one is a nice village girl with a weird pigeon habit, and the other is the Princess of the Sea.... Clearly the thing to do is get out of town quick, so Sadko trades 3 goldfish for 3 boats (they were magic goldfish) and sets sail to find the Bird of Happiness. Along with a small army are Uncle Klepto, Big John, and Timmy the brash young mascot of the group -- these are not their actual names but they might as well be. The heroes are so cliché they're almost iconic.Sadko and Co. spend the rest of the movie traveling to exotic places and getting into trouble with the locals. They battle Vikings, and play chess with the King of India. They bet a laughing horse for the Bird of Happiness and discover her true nature is not what they thought. They fight and are heroic, and on the return trip a storm threatens to sink the ships, so Sadko goes to the bottom of the sea to soothe an argument between King Neptune and his wife by entertaining them with his harp. Although the Princess loves Sadko she knows he prefers the pigeon girl. She helps him get home again on a speedy seahorse.This is a very nice looking film. The story is fantastical without being too familiar. There is plenty of Russian flavor to make it semi-exotic to American tastes, and the Russian folk dancing is amazing. The special fx are charming and obvious, like stage tricks. When Sadko lifts a magic fish the light rays emitting from it are actually hundreds of metal wires sticking out of the fish! Most of the exotic locations are drawings, but the India sequence is full of elephants and dancing girls and over the top temples. The Bird of Paradise is satisfyingly surreal in a way that just wouldn't happen now with CGI. The final act in Neptune's Kingdom is a campy delight.I rate it 8 out of 10. I'd originally seen the Sinbad version and I had to turn the sound down. It was that bad, and obvious the visuals were from a better movie. I'm glad I saw the restored Russian version because the visuals are much clearer and the original soundtrack is pleasant with strong music and the deep serious voices of the men. The story also made a lot more sense. Highly recommend! Would love to see more of this kind of film.

sulaykamara The original Russian version with subtitles is one you should consider watching than the English dubbed version of Sadko called the ''magic voyage of Sinbad''. Not to say the English version is not worth watching but how can one make more of a masterpiece when it is already an acclaimed masterpiece and doesn't need any salt and pepper (re-dubbed & re-cut) to spice it up. The result can be devastating if you've already seen the original (Sadko 1952).There are good and bad comments about this film, thanks to the re-dubbed version. I'm sure everyone that has seen the original version (sadko) will give it at least an 8 out of 10.Someone made a comment that the film is goofy because Sinbad wasn't wet when he visited the great kingdom at the bottom of the sea and how did he manage to hold his breath that long. Well... the film is a fairy tale, not a documentary or reality show...nothing is real and it would have looked goofy if they were wet. As a matter of fact the underwater scenes are a feast for the eyes and a big step in special effects during its time (1952). This film should be treated with more respect. I'm sure if these critics see the original(sadko 1952), their views will be totally different. And I think ''the magic voyage of sinbad'' should not be credited with ''SADKO''. Little is known about sadko while magic voyage of sinbad was well advertised 10 years later. That explains the reason why sadko suffers the bitterness of its good for nothing sequel, magic voyage of sinbad 1962. Like I said, ''SADKO 1952'' is a classic and a masterpiece nothing more or less.