Sinbad and the Eye of the Tiger (1977)
“You talked of a spell — or has he fallen victim to the plague?”
Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:
Response to Peary’s Review:
… “or are just plain dull (basketball-sized bee, a giant walrus).”
He adds that “the script is too long and lacks excitement,” with “Sinbad himself spend[ing] most of the film as a bystander.”
With that said, there’s plenty of eye candy here for those interested in seeing beautiful Seymour in one of her earlier films, and Tyrone Power, Jr.’s daughter Taryn in one of her few leading roles — and Harryhausen’s animation of the baboon is impressively realistic.
Unfortunately, British theatrical actress Margaret Whiting (who Peary weirdly asserts “sounds like a foreigner!”) is over-the-top as wicked Zenobia.
I couldn’t stop thinking about the 1939 film starring an elephant with her name (alongside Oliver Hardy and Harry Langdon) — though apparently Zenobia was an actual female leader in 3rd-century Syria.
Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:
One thought on “Sinbad and the Eye of the Tiger (1977)”
First viewing (8/10/22). Not must-see. ~but, for fans of the series, this is a rather strong entry… until it’s not.
Though this isn’t among my preferred types of cinema, I was feeling optimistic about its entertainment value until the last 30 minutes or so, when the narrative starts to become murky / weak. Logic (on its own terms) at that point appears a little up for grabs (esp. as pertaining to the generally effective witch Zenobia and her sudden impotence).
Wayne makes for an engaging Sinbad but all of the other roles except for Troughton (as Melanthius) feel perfunctory.
It’s a nice change that Harryhausen has created two creatures that aren’t villains.
Director Wanamaker handles the stronger part of the script well and there’s generally good use of background settings. But understandably there’s less he can do as the script falters towards the conclusion.