Rijndri
Load of rubbish!!
MamaGravity
good back-story, and good acting
Taraparain
Tells a fascinating and unsettling true story, and does so well, without pretending to have all the answers.
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.
vave1
The reissuing of this film on DVD is just simply remarkable. The colors , costumes and scenes are just that -a Russian fairy tale shown in its maximum glory to enjoy. As the previous comment, this is not meant to touch on reality at all, a complete fantasy from an old Russian myth. To see the Phoenix Bird with the Song of India playing in the background is stunning. For a truly magnificent experience you must see this on a high definition LCD or Plasma TV, despite not being hi-def itself. My 35" Mitisubishi tube TV just does not do this film justice. I've been inspired so much by this film that I've decided to learn the Russian lyrics to a Song of India, accompany myself on the Er-Hu and my music Teacher will accompany me on the piano for a recital. In my Theatre Company Write Act I've called Sadko my favorite SuperHero.
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.
donofrio08
Charming and naive, Alexandr Ptushko's version of Sadko maintains the ingenuity of the fairy tale through the golden touch of imaginative coloring and splendid characters ingrained in the Russian folklore, which at the same time are part of the universal lore. Add to this Rimmsky-Korsakov's magical music, and lo and behold, a dearest masterpiece to feast eyes and endear hearts. Ptushko used to work under stressing circumstances, political as well as cultural, within a government-controlled industry, where ideology ruled over imagination. However, the artist surpassed the militant many times. Sadko concedes to the nationalistic trend in tyrannies proclaiming, in this case, the 'proud of been a Russian", heard as an echo of fascistic hypes on 'selected people or race"; but it is done with such an obvious declarative tone that the imposition of dialogs and lines comes clear to the viewer. Hail to a filmmaker who conceived films as a domain for the illusive and the innocence.
