MovieChat Forums > The Thief of Bagdad (1940) Discussion > sikh turbans, hindu gods......most cultu...

sikh turbans, hindu gods......most culturally incorrect movie ever


when the setting is of arabia, why are they using the cultural cliches of india?

reply

They aren't using the cultural cliches of India.

Sikhs aren't the only people that wear turbans.
The Sultan collects mechanical toys, they can come from anywhere in the world

Steve

reply

And from what I understand of history, there was a lot of trading between Muslim countries and India and China. (Think the Silk Road.)

Not to say that there aren't innacuracies in this movie. I'm sure when it came down to it, they went with whatever looked the best. It is a fantasy after all, not a historical epic.

"A bit of musicality, PLEASE!" Strictly Ballroom

reply

Actually Sikh turbans are very different from the turbans worn by Muslims, and the turbans in The Thief of Bagdad more ressemble those of Sikhs. The key difference is in the peak- Sikh turbans tend to have a high centre peak, while Muslim turbans are more flat across the top.

I can accept the Hindu-goddess-like silver maiden because, as mentioned above, the Sultan collects toys from everywhere in the world. I assumed part of the allure of the maiden was her exotic appearance to the Sultan; I never thought she was meant to be from his own culture.

If the poster was referencing the temple of the All-Seeing Eye, I assumed given the incredible journey to get there & the description of it being 'on the highest peak of the highest mountain' that it wasn't in Arabia.

Ultimately there are some definite cultural inaccuracies in the film, but then that's what you get in most films, even today with unprecendented global culture. Interestingly, in the dvd commentaries (Criterion) there is some mention of the story's inspiration from the tales of Scheherazade & One Thousand and One Nights. That collection was derived from Middle Eastern, North African and Indian sources, so maybe that's part of the cultural 'confusion' in the film? Whether that or just another instance of filmmakers drawing a somewhat muddled picture based on misunderstanding of a culture, I can still forgive Thief of Bagdad because it's not intended as a cultural lesson. It's a great fantasy. People who are intrigued by the depictions in the film will be inspired to do their own research & discover the real culture, so I'm not too worried.

reply

This kind of stuff was pretty run of the mill for Hollywood's "Arabian fantasy" films.

reply

You have the wrong country.

I see nothing wrong with the mixture of cultures considering the expanse of the Persian Empire at various times in history. Cities like the ones shown would be crossroads of trade and definitely show many influences. Go to New York City, and I imagine you'd find dozens of cultures and styles represented. It would be the same in that time period. I see absolutely nothing wrong with "The Thief of Bagdad", especially with its fantasy setting.

~~MystMoonstruck~~

reply

[deleted]

This would be far from the most culturally incorrect movies ever. Check out Sindab for a start (Never the less those films are great to).

This film was made in the 1940's where naive artistic license was perhaps at it's highest. Also it is not unknown for cultures and countries within the same area to trade off images. Look at the Egyptians and the Greeks, or the Greeks and the Romans.

reply

Looking for historical & cultural accuracy in a flim such as this is utterly beside the point. It's a fantasia, a Western fever dream of the Exotic. It has the wonder & beauty & excitement of an intense, vivid, Romantic dream. That's what they set out to make, and that's what they delivered to the audience -- and what fun it is, too!

reply

For the time, it is not too inaccuate. Actually many of the ''Indian'' influences can actually be Iranian. Iran is often seen in the US as ''Arabic'', but they are Aryan (or Indo-Aryan, a subset of Indo-European) and are thus culturally related to both the majority in India (Indo-European > Indo-Aryan)and Europe (Indo-European > European), and the ethnic Hindus did, infact, migrate from Iran. The close proximity of Iran and the India subcontinent also meant that many uniquely Indian artistic movement and architecture influenced Iran at later dates too.

Baghdad is in Iraq. However, the Iranian (or Persian) Empire owned Baghdad for centuries.

If you are sick of the ''I love Jesus 100% signature'', copy and paste this into your profile!

reply

It's interesting to see how many people here have assumed that this was a Hollywood movie
It wasn't, it was a British film. Although there were a few scenes filmed in the Grand Canyon.

What was that about cultural sensitivity?

Steve

reply

Yes, it is a UK film, hence actors like Miles Malleson and it being produced by Korda.

If you are sick of the ''I love Jesus 100% signature'', copy and paste this into your profile!

reply

That's what I said above: The wrong country was cited, which happens far too often. Hollywood takes a lot of flack for films it didn't do!

Other countries' studios are just as guilty of what Hollywood is accused of.



*** The trouble with reality is there is no background music. ***

reply

Beyond the people, the landscape itself seemed inaccurate. The film seems to tell you it's all happening in what we now call Iraq, yet the landscape looks like it belongs to Utah and Colorado (and IMDb says is Arizona).

reply

Most of the landscape was just paintings (hanging miniatures) or on the back lot of the studio in Britain. Only the scene with Abu, the Djinn & Ahmad in the canyon (filmed in the Grand Canyon) and the Land of Legend (the Painted Desert) were filmed in America. Most of it was filmed in Britain

But it can't be culturally incorrect or geographically incorrect - because it's all fantasy

Steve

reply

Many of the 1001 Nights have their roots in India. There's an old Sanskrit tale called Baital Pachisi, which is a series of stories within a story, and is considered a forerunner to the Nights. So bits of Indian culture aren't as out of place in an Arabian Nights film as you may think.

"You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!"

reply


HELLO! Beside the fact that this is a total fantasy, and I'm saying this with a smile... Bagdad is in IRAQ. I just love it as a thing of beauty and wonder...colour and starshine, and I thank Alexander Korda every time I see it.







"I do hope he won't upset Henry..."

reply

punjabiknight:

The DJinn takes Abu to a Hindu Temple, on the top of the world.

Back in Basra, Allah is mentioned many times.

reply

Indeed. And the only other major Indian feature so the Kali statue, which is a priceless ''toy'' which was probably from Indian itself.

Formerly KingAngantyr

reply

The setting is not Arabia.

The home of the characters is in Baghdad, the present capital of Iraq, and the capital of medieval Caliphs and sultans. Another setting of the movie is Basra, an Iraqi seaport. And a lot of the movie happens in distant lands where the characters travel.

As far as I know not a single fictional location in this movie is in what would become Saudi Arabia, or in any other country in the Arabian peninsula.

reply

Though culturally, aren't most Iraqis considered to be an Arabian Arab people?

reply

Genetically most Iraqis are mostly descended from the people who lived within the borders of modern Iraq before the first Arabs ever invaded and/or colonized Iraq. Most Iraqis should have only a tiny minority of ancestors who were invading Arabs about 1,350 years ago.

Since converting to Islam usually involved adopting Arab culture, and since most Iraqis are Muslims, most Iraqis are culturally Arabs.

reply

Because movies of the 1940s were terrible at cultural accuracy, although exciting and entertaining.

reply