Raul Faust Well, I was a kid insanely in love with 1994's "The Return of Jafar". I watched thousand of times with every relative that came into home. Last weeks I was surfing channels on cable and saw "Aladdin and the King of Thieves" passing, which made me wonder: "Have I ever seen that picture?". So I decided it would be a good idea to watch this, you know, just in case. I can state this movie is very creative, with some eventual funny lines-- mainly coming from Genie, I admit it. There are some nice songs to entertaining the spectator instead of telling a never ending story. Sometimes the relationship Aladdin has with his father looks too shallow for a children movie, but it doesn't spoil the movie's overall quality. Princess Jasmine sometimes is forgotten and she barely comes up in the screen. Director makes some metalinguistic scenes with reference to other Disney movies, providing an old spectator like me (I'm 21) a nostalgic feeling. All in all, this isn't as great as 1994's installment, but does its job.

jerekra Most of the time when straight to video Disney Sequels are made you can understand why the film was not released in theatres. However in the case of Aladdin and the King of Thieves I feel that this film should have been released in the theatres.Aladdin and Jasmine have their wedding interrupted by an attack by the Forty Thieves. Soon Aladdin learns that his father is the King of Thieves. He brings his father back to Agraba hoping that he will reform, however Aladdins father has hopes of finding the ultimate treasure no matter the cost.The artwork for this film is way better than in The Return of Jafar. Also the story is excellent and action packed.One of the main reasons why this film works is the return of Robin Williams. He is as hilarious as ever as the Genie, and actually I think that he is much more funny in this film as opposed to the first Aladdin film. Genie is hilarious in this film and that is the major reason this film is great.Also I like how Aladdin's father is in this film. A great idea and I think that this somewhat is similar to the third Indiana Jones film. Not only is the idea similar but the fact that they got the actor who played Sallah in the Indiana Jones Trilogy (his name escapes me) makes the idea work all that much better.Also there is a good villain in Suluk, a sort of huge evil guy with a sharp claw thing on one of his hands.I guess the one flaw might be the lack of great songs. If they had improved on that a little this film would have been perfect. But I would rather there be great humor, action, and story than a few great songs.If they had improved the artwork a little, and added some awesomer music this would have been a great film to release in theatres.Of all the Disney sequels that have been released straight to video, this is BY FAR the best. I recommend this film greatly.

dreamsnebulosa Weell, after seeing "Return of Jafar" I wasn't expecting so much for this movie. A few reviews saying "King of thieves" was better than "Return..." decided me to saw it and...wow! what a great movie!. As an Aladdin fan, I loved this one, mainly because its good plot and the good animation. "King of Thieves" has a good script, good songs, and our loved characters are back after that very bad movie between the original and this one. Aladdin and Jasmine are such a sweet couple! And I can't forget Robin Williams! He's back too and it's a delight.Now, I'm going to forget once I saw "Return of Jafar". This one will be the only sequel of "Aladdin" in my mind.

D_Burke You really can't review "Aladdin and the King of Thieves" without comparing it to its 1992 theatrical predecessor, or even the first direct-to-video sequel "The Return of Jafar". As an earlier reviewer on this site has mentioned, this movie is not as good as the original Aladdin, but much better than the second one in both story and animation.Having Robin Williams come back to reprise his role as the Genie was probably what made this movie above average. As talented a voice over artist as Dan Castellaneta is, he just couldn't fill Williams' shoes (or his lamp). So it was a pleasant surprise to have Williams back as his manic self with all his authentic, gut-busting gags and various celebrity impressions.However, that being said, having the Genie present a lot of the time created some fairly noticeable improbabilities and definite plot holes. For instance, when the 40 thieves raided Aladdin and Jasmine's wedding in the beginning, the Genie could have stopped all of them and sent them all to jail. I had the impression that the Genie's powers were infinite, so he was definitely capable of doing that. On the other hand, it wouldn't make for an interesting movie if the Genie magically solved everyone's problems. It still didn't seem right that the Genie just stalled during those climactic scenes, though.But with every problem the Genie didn't magically solve, there came a plot that was slightly more complicated than expected, and that's a good thing. The complicated plot made the story far more intriguing, and it added a great deal more depth to Aladdin's character. Caseem, Aladdin's estranged father, was also a great addition to the cast, and his character was equally appealing.Although we didn't see too much of Jasmine in this movie, she appeared to be a much stronger character than even in the original Aladdin movie. I commend the Disney company for making her a strong, supportive companion to Aladdin without making her appear to be a damsel in distress. In fact, the part where she punches one of the thieves for "ruining my wedding" was an excellent touch.The animation itself could have been better, but it was above average for a direct-to-video sequel from the 1990's. With just a little bit better animation, it could have easily been released to theaters. I don't think that was Disney's intent, though. So for what it was worth, it's an above average movie, and Robin Williams made the movie all the better by returning as the Genie.