An Analysis of The Thief and the Cobbler (Richard Williams, 1995)
Based and inspired by Arabian Nights and other 13th-century folklore, The Thief and the Cobbler (1995) directed by legendary animator Richard Williams follows the parallel stories of a shy cobbler named Tack and a nameless kleptomaniac thief. Tack falls in love with the beautiful Princess Yum Yum of the Golden City after she saves him from the wrath of the grand vizier Zig Zag. Together, they must save their kingdom from death and destruction by retrieve the 3 golden balls that protect the city after the thief's failed attempt at stealing them, causing them to fall into the hands of Zig Zag who plans to marry princess Yum-Yum and rule the city.
While the story itself can be described as a relatively conventional hero's journey, it is the film’s troubled production history and context that has garnered particular notoriety. Once holding the record for the longest production of an animated film, The Thief and the Cobbler faced multiple challenges from the long-term struggle to find funding, and multiple script and story changes, to Williams having the film taken away from him so that it might finally be completed. This tension stemmed from Williams' need for total control over the film and his unwavering pursuit of perfection. In turn, the final film was rushed to be complete and met massive box office failure, only grossing $669,276 internationally compared to the film's $25 million budget. Given Willams’ need to showcase his mastery of animation and inability to compromise on the film, there are suggestions he ultimately sabotaged his film in the pursuit of creating his own magnum opus. In this blog, I will analyze how Williams' goal of perfection and pursuit of excellence ultimately doomed his masterpiece, forever making the film known as “the greatest animated film never made '' (Schreck).
One of the The Thief and the Cobbler 's more notable qualities that make it a masterpiece of animation also, in turn, hindered its production time and critical and commercial success. Throughout the film, Williams designed scenery and characters with multiple complex shapes, patterns, and movements. Almost all sequences, scenes, and backgrounds incorporated extremely detailed patterns into their design. This was separate from the amount of complex secondary animation in the actions of the characters and moving elements in the film. No scene shows this better than the scene where Tack chases the Thief through the palace to retrieve Princess Yum-Yum’s shoe. Here, we are shown massively different and highly complex backgrounds of checked black and white patterns. These background shift perspectives, and camera angles, and even simulate old optical illusions such as the impossible trident. The patterns in the background throughout the sequence bend and move as the camera changes angle and perspective following Tack and the Thief, shifting the complex patterns to show the volume and structure of stairs, rails, and complex geometric tiles on the walls (Fig. 1).
Patterns and checkerboards are notoriously difficult and time-consuming elements to animate as patterns need to be drawn repeatedly, precisely, with each frame of animation in a truly laboured task. However, Williams insisted on using patterns and other complex shapes because he wanted to showcase his full skill as an animator. These patterns can be identified as a signature for Williams in his work, even using the checkerboard patterns in the opening scene of Who Framed Roger Rabbit. Williams refused to remove these patterns or change the design of his film because he pursued perfection. He was extremely strict in his vision and notably had outbursts when other animators differed from his vision. This is supported through a comment by Stephen Cavalier regarding Williams' time as the animation director on Who Framed Roger Rabbit. “Williams’s tantrums were often a result of people not following his instructions… If people took initiative, he was likely to be all over them” (quoted in Pallant 2021, 3). This inability to stray from or modify his original vision led to Williams forcing his team to redo multiple scenes multiple times to fix and modify things he deemed imperfect or not good enough for the final film. This massively ate into production time and caused several film financiers to drop out because of Williams' habit of exceeding deadlines with little final product to show.
There are suggestions too that Williams also had a habit of “over-animating'' certain elements of movement throughout the film. Over-animated means an overuse of the principles of overlapping and secondary animation, the principle in animation to add secondary movement to help enhance the main action of a scene. Going back to the chase sequence, we can see this principle displayed in the scene in which Tack stops himself from running in the opposite direction and correcting himself. In the brief five seconds, the viewer is bombarded with imagery of Tack’s limbs overlapping as he turns, objects such as spools of thread fall from his person, and even the aforementioned complex moving background animating as Tak moves. While all these actions do work in providing the context of Tack adjusting his movement, the scene is arguably too detailed and over-animated for such a brief section of the film.
Scenes with this extreme amount of action and movement are present in many forms throughout the entirety of the film (Fig. 2). These details are too plentiful for a viewer to fully take in at first glance and can sometimes cause a nauseating effect. As scenes like this, replete with an extreme amount of animation, are consistent throughout the film, the time to finish these scenes was extremely extended. Again, Williams refused to stray from his vision because this film was meant to be a showcase of his animation skills. His refusal to waver from his vision put further time strain on the project's production. This stubbornness ultimately forced Warner Bros. studios to take the project from Williams to be rushed to completion under producer Fred Calvert (Abrams).
After The Thief and the Cobbler, Williams retired from working on animated films. He would refuse to talk about the film for years after its release. From then on, he focused on teaching the next generation of animators through successful master classes (Wit). Eventually, in 2002, Williams released the now highly popular The Animator’s Survival Guide. This book would go on to be one of the most famous and useful books about animation, becoming almost a requirement to read to anyone who wishes to learn it. Even after Williams’ passing in 2019, his teachings and techniques are still being studied for his mastery over the art form. He’s one of the greatest animators in history, even if his ambition is what ultimately sabotaged what may have been his animated magnum opus.
**Article published: December 20, 2024**
References
Abrams, Simon. 2019 “The Story of Richard Williams and His Unfinished Fairy Tale, The Thief and The Cobbler.” Roger Ebert (August 20, 2019), available at: www.rogerebert.com/features/the-story-of-richard-williams-and-his-unfinished-fairy-tale-the-thief-and-the-cobbler.
Pallant, Chris, 2021. “Review: Ross Anderson, The Making of Roger Rabbit: Pulling a Rabbit out of a Hat (Mississippi: University of Mississippi Press, 2019),” Open Screens 4, no. 1, available at: https://openscreensjournal.com/article/id/6940/.
Dudok de Wit, Alex. 2019. “Richard Williams (1933-2019), a Director, Animator, and Educator Who Pushed the Art of Animation Forward.” Cartoon Brew (August 20, 2019, available at: www.cartoonbrew.com/rip/richard-williams-1933-2019-a-director-animator-and-educator-who-pushed-the-art-of-animation-forward-178418.html.
Biography
Sara Douglass is a student at the University of Texas at Dallas, Harry W. Bass Jr. School of Arts, Humanities, and Technology with a concentration in animation, focusing on studying traditional 2D animation techniques and pre-production design. Earlier versions of this text were developed with the help of Dr. Christine Veras and peers from the Animation Studies course.