Prince Kassim, the young heir to the throne of Baghdad, is magically transformed into a baboon by his evil stepmother, the witch Zenobia, who wants the throne for her own son, Kassim's half-brother Rafi. Sinbad, accompanied by Kassim's beautiful sister Princess Farah, as well as the Prince himself in his monkey form, sets sail in search of a cure. This being a Ray Harryhausen film, much of the plot involves the heroes struggling against various monsters, all animated by the stop-motion process which Harryhausen pioneered. This must be the only film in which the hero gets to fight a gigantic killer walrus. The title "Sinbad and the Eye of the Tiger" may refer to the fact that, having seen off the walrus, Sinbad then has to battle a sabre-toothed tiger, although I am not sure how the "eye" part fits in.
This was the third and last of Harryhausen's films about the legendary hero Sinbad the Sailor, the others being "The Golden Voyage of Sinbad" and "The Seventh Voyage of Sinbad". It was not, however, Harryhausen's final film; that was to be "Clash of the Titans" from four years later. In the fifties and early sixties his techniques of film-making (which he named "Dynamation" or "Dynarama"), combining stop-motion animation with live action, seemed something new and exciting, opening up new possibilities for fantasy films. By the late seventies they were starting to look old-fashioned; there is little in "Sinbad and the Eye of the Tiger" (which came out in the same year as "Star Wars") to distinguish it from "The Seventh Voyage" which had come out nearly twenty years earlier.
Today, of course, films made using the "Dynamation" process have a very retro feel to them, but I have long had a soft spot for Harryhausen's work ever since I was taken, as a child, to see a double bill of "The Seventh Voyage" and "Jason and the Argonauts" as part of a friend's birthday treat. I would not rate "Sinbad and the Eye of the Tiger" quite as highly as either of those films. The acting is variable; neither Patrick Wayne as the hero nor Taryn Power has the talent or the charisma of their famous fathers, but Margaret Whiting as Zenobia makes a splendidly over-the-top villainess, former Doctor Who Patrick Troughton is good as the wise old philosopher Melanthius and Jane Seymour as Farah looks as lovely as ever. With its fairy-tale Arabian Nights atmosphere, this film can perhaps best be described as the cinematic equivalent of a pantomime, and like most pantomimes serves as very enjoyable family entertainment. 6/10
This was the third and last of Harryhausen's films about the legendary hero Sinbad the Sailor, the others being "The Golden Voyage of Sinbad" and "The Seventh Voyage of Sinbad". It was not, however, Harryhausen's final film; that was to be "Clash of the Titans" from four years later. In the fifties and early sixties his techniques of film-making (which he named "Dynamation" or "Dynarama"), combining stop-motion animation with live action, seemed something new and exciting, opening up new possibilities for fantasy films. By the late seventies they were starting to look old-fashioned; there is little in "Sinbad and the Eye of the Tiger" (which came out in the same year as "Star Wars") to distinguish it from "The Seventh Voyage" which had come out nearly twenty years earlier.
Today, of course, films made using the "Dynamation" process have a very retro feel to them, but I have long had a soft spot for Harryhausen's work ever since I was taken, as a child, to see a double bill of "The Seventh Voyage" and "Jason and the Argonauts" as part of a friend's birthday treat. I would not rate "Sinbad and the Eye of the Tiger" quite as highly as either of those films. The acting is variable; neither Patrick Wayne as the hero nor Taryn Power has the talent or the charisma of their famous fathers, but Margaret Whiting as Zenobia makes a splendidly over-the-top villainess, former Doctor Who Patrick Troughton is good as the wise old philosopher Melanthius and Jane Seymour as Farah looks as lovely as ever. With its fairy-tale Arabian Nights atmosphere, this film can perhaps best be described as the cinematic equivalent of a pantomime, and like most pantomimes serves as very enjoyable family entertainment. 6/10