5 reviews
Now I always thought that a "Kadi" was a fellow who carried golf clubs, but no - it appears he is a man in Bagdad who has an harem of beautiful women. It's all going swimmingly for "Hassan" (John Boles) until the arrival of the disruptive "Kyra" (Paulette Goddard) who is abhorred by the way the women are treated and takes the unheard of step of complaining to the Caliph himself (MacDonald Parke). To add to his miseries, his ungrateful wretch of a godson - "Ezar" (Richard Ney) - proposes a wager that could indicate that women are every bit the equal of men - and he drags in the wily "Zohara" (Gypsy Rose Lee) to prove his point. What now ensues are a series of standard "Arabian Nights" style escapades with lots of veils, flowing dresses, and mischief as the poor old men are continually hoodwinked by their far more savvy antagonists. It's quite a breezy film with little effort made by anyone to enhance the rather basic look of it all. Wobbly sound stage sets and some truly wooden acting help to deliver the completely forgettable dialogue that passes eighty minutes before it ends and you forget all about it. It's not terrible, it's just a very light-weight attempt at comedy that has long since lost any punch it ever actually had.
- CinemaSerf
- Nov 26, 2022
- Permalink
- mark.waltz
- Mar 5, 2013
- Permalink
Hollywood made several very kitschy films in the 1940s-50s which were supposedly set in ancient Baghdad. A few, despite their cheesiness, were still quite enjoyable such as "Cobra Woman" and "The Thief of Bagdad". Most, however, were more like "Kismet"...all glitz, lousy writing and actors who looked nothing like Iraqis. Unfortunately, "Babes in Bagdad" falls in the latter group...lousy writing, glitz and actors who bore no resemblance to anyone from the region.
The film stars Paulette Goddard, a pretty big star in the early 1940s but whose star had almost completely faded by the 1950s. In fact, she was offered so few roles that perhaps she was lucky to score the lead in this one. Supporting her are Gypsy Rose Lee, the famous stripper, and John Boles in his last movie.
When the story begins, the newest addition to Hassan's harem is Kyra (Goddard). She should be thrilled to stay there and live a life of leisure but she quickly bores of the place and hatches a plan to appeal to the Caliph to free them...a 20th century notion that really didn't make any sense here. He isn't predisposed to do anything...but Hassan's son makes him a bet...one you know he'll end up winning by the end of the film.
As I mentioned above, this isn't a very good film. Mostly, it's poor because it is so little like ancient Bagdad and because it's awfully boring. Also, this might sound a bit mean, but it's hard to imagine Goddard being THAT alluring considering her best years were long behind her. Overall, a film so dull and unexciting I wouldn't even venture to call it a time-passer.
By the way, although the movie was filmed using 'Cinefotocolor', all the color had long ago disappeared from the print. This might explain WHY I'd never heard of Cinefotocolor until this movie.
The film stars Paulette Goddard, a pretty big star in the early 1940s but whose star had almost completely faded by the 1950s. In fact, she was offered so few roles that perhaps she was lucky to score the lead in this one. Supporting her are Gypsy Rose Lee, the famous stripper, and John Boles in his last movie.
When the story begins, the newest addition to Hassan's harem is Kyra (Goddard). She should be thrilled to stay there and live a life of leisure but she quickly bores of the place and hatches a plan to appeal to the Caliph to free them...a 20th century notion that really didn't make any sense here. He isn't predisposed to do anything...but Hassan's son makes him a bet...one you know he'll end up winning by the end of the film.
As I mentioned above, this isn't a very good film. Mostly, it's poor because it is so little like ancient Bagdad and because it's awfully boring. Also, this might sound a bit mean, but it's hard to imagine Goddard being THAT alluring considering her best years were long behind her. Overall, a film so dull and unexciting I wouldn't even venture to call it a time-passer.
By the way, although the movie was filmed using 'Cinefotocolor', all the color had long ago disappeared from the print. This might explain WHY I'd never heard of Cinefotocolor until this movie.
- planktonrules
- Apr 17, 2024
- Permalink
This movie has a bad script and bad sets, yet Gypsy Lee Rose and Paulette Goddard still hit their comedy beats and look gorgeous. There's an interesting comedy here somewhere but it doesn't land with the bad script (and white washed casting). I'm surprised this wasn't more of a musical. There's only one dance sequence and the cinematography is very poor so it's not even worth it. I guess it's simply bad because they tried to do this on the cheap without putting the money into better casting, better sets, better dance numbers, and better filming.
I do like the discussion of women's equality in a 1952 movie delivered with the stars try humor. They deserved better.
I do like the discussion of women's equality in a 1952 movie delivered with the stars try humor. They deserved better.
- kmontgomery-98515
- Sep 24, 2022
- Permalink
Put Paulette Goddard and Gypsy Rose Lee together and you gotta admit that sparks will fly. Although Miss Lee is more suitable for this kind of high jinx, Miss Goddard does hold her own. Add John Boles as the Hassan and his son, played by Richard Ney (Mrs. Miniver) with Sebastian Cabot in a smaller role and look for Christopher Lee as a slave seller. I thought this was a riot. All the actors seem to play with tongue in cheek, which is Miss Lee's forte. Now mind you, John Boles, Stella Dallas fame and Richard Ney are distinguished actors. But here they let loose and along with Miss Goddard have a romp. Fun all the way through. And Paulette and Gupsy Rose make lovely Harem ladies.