How dare he justify taking it away on he grounds that Williams doesn't deserve to be considered an auteur! Any filmmaker who follows their creative vision is an auteur.
As for Calvert, it's possible the WIP has all the thief mumbles due to them being added by the CBC, not him. Also, I'm guessing Ed Carroll did the original vocal effects for the thief since you can hear them in the workprint. I really think that with warts and all, Calvert really did a decent job since the released version is somewhat like the workprint (at least most stuff in the Princess cut can be re-edited back to its workprint editorial form). He could have done better, but I'm guessing the CBC breathing down his neck didn't help. Some changes made no sense at all like cutting out the dolly shot before the thief/Tack chase, just a few frames for that whip pan down while Zig-Zag is taking down a flag, and Mighty One-Eye's demise. It's sad how the workprint was partially responsible for it being taken out of his hands...
The banana leaves flying sequence is VERY important because it adds character development to the thief - he's non-stop thieving in the film until he starts flying.
But Ebert's inane comments just show that all he cares about is being cheap and film isn't art. Malcolm X is an excellent movie and Spike Lee had to get direct support from other people (Bill Cosby and Oprah Winfrey) to finish it. And it wasn't even an expensive movie!
I just hate how the cost was made such a big deal when Williams was producing more complex animation than Disney, who spent twice as much on Aladdin!
By the way, in a more ironic sense, I never would have thought the original Star Wars trilogy would be released on DVD. I would have bet money that an official "Thief" restoration would hit DVD before that. Oh well.