Continuing my plan to watch every Kevin Costner movie in order, I come to Robin Hood: Prince Of Thieves from 1991.Plot In A Paragraph: When Robin of Locksley (KC) and his companion (Morgan Freeman) come to England and are confronted with the tyranny of the Sheriff of Nottingham (Alan Rickman) he decides to fight back.1991 was a big year for KC, I remember prior to this movie and JFK being released, I read an article called 'How Do You Follow Up A Movie Like Dances With Wolves?' and it was a great read about the pressure of following up a movie that won 7 Oscars. I think he delivered in spades in 1991, and continues his great run. I don't care what people say about his accent, KC is my Robin Hood, and both of my kids Robin Hood, for a long time, my eldest always referred to KC as Robin Hood, no matter what movie he was watching him in. He plays it a bit more serious than Errol Flynn, but he is much more fun, than the Russell Crowe version.Just like in Die Hard, Alan Rickman steals the show as the Sheriff of Nottingham, he is fun, over the top and with his sneering delivery of his one liners, he is in full pantomime villain mode, and his is the definitive rendition of Nottingham's Sheriff. I adore Rickman, and think he is an under rated actor, who only seemed to be appreciated after he left us too soon Christian Slater is fine as the jealous Will Scarlett and Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio is OK as Maid Marian, but she changes from a strong, independent woman when we first meet her, into a clichéd damsel in distress by the end of the movie.In the late eighties (starting with 'Street Smart' opposite Christopher Reeve) and particularly the early to mid nineties. Morgan Freeman could do no wrong in my book. A wonderful actor who brought a touch of class to every movie he made. Then something happened, every movie maker and studio caught on to the fact, and he suddenly became the 'go to' guy. Then suddenly he was everywhere releasing several movies a year, all of varying quality. Often he was in supporting roles. Some were brilliant, some were still enjoyable (Million Dollar Baby, Bruce Almighty and Now You See Me) some were not (Take your pick!!) and you often think "I hope he was well paid" as he clearly took this for the money. This is thankfully one of the former. Freeman plays a Azeem, a man committed to prayer, whose loyalty surpasses all others and whose level-headed guidance proves he's much more than a sidekick. He is an equal. Sean Connery pops up too as a favour to KC, and donated his salary to charity too. Michael Kamens score seems to be forgotten about, due to the success of Brian Adams song, Everything I Do (I Do It For You) which dominated charts everywhere. 14 weeks at the top of the Billboard Chart, and a record breaking 16 weeks at the top of the UK charts. Don't get me wrong, it's far from perfect, the pacing is a bit off at times, with some unnecessary subplots dragging it down a bit. But there are so many memorable moments, it doesn't matter. I don't think I will ever not enjoy watching this movie. Prince Of Thieves ended the year with a domestic gross of $165 million, ending the year, the 2nd highest grossing movie of 1991. 8/10 for this Reviewer. I almost went with a 9/10 such is my enjoyment of the movie.

No Robin Hood movie can dream of even coming close to the perfection that is 1938's The Adventures of Robin Hood, but Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves ranks as my 2nd favourite movie about the famed English outlaw. If the 1938 Robin Hood is one extreme of a bright, colourful, tight wearing, saccharine induced fantasy and the Ridley Scott Robin Hood is the opposite extreme of an unnecessarily dark, gritty and overly mature version of the tale, then Prince of Thieves is the middle ground.Is the all American Kevin Costner miscast as Robin Hood? Yes. But do I care? No, not really. Costner's enthusiasm does come through in his performance and shows he has what it takes to be an action hero. Most people won't think of Costner as a screen presence, but to me he is. Likewise, realism is besides the point with a movie like this.The movie opens unexpectedly in Jerusalem showing that this is a Robin Hood movie which does thing a bit different, largely with the character of Azeem (Morgan Freeman), a black man in medieval England. Azeem represents positive representation of an Arab as well as the Arab world. He holds more progressive views on women and in one of the movie's pivotal scenes in which he hands Robin a rudimentary telescope (very similar to a paralleling scene in Dances with Wolves) which isn't recorded to have been invented until the 17th century. However the notion that an individual or individuals from the Arab world might have known about such technology isn't a too "out there" idea due to the Middle East being far more advanced society during the middle ages. I assume it's unlikely we'll see a character like Azeem in the post 911 world in which the Middle East is no longer portrayed in media as an exotic fantasy land rather than a haven for terrorists. Costner and Morgan Freeman make for a fun duo; who wouldn't want to have Morgan Freeman always by your side giving you winsomely knowledge? After all what other actor embodies dignity more than Freeman? Yes there is a big gaping plot hole when Azeem saves Robin's life as soon as they arrive in England. But do I care? No, not really.The film's message of equality between race and gender isn't shoved down your throat and doesn't come off as overt political correctness. Likewise Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio's (try saying that name three times) Lady Marian is a woman in medieval England who has a sense of self and is not subservient to anyone; not historically accurate but progressive. Plus I do love a girl in armour.However it's Alan Rickman who steals the show as the twitchy, scenery chewing mad man that is the Sheriff of Nottingham. His performance is full of little things which feel like they were improvised and his many outbursts are music to my ears. Is it just me or do classically trained actors often make the most memorable villains? Sean Connery's appearance on the other hand is one of the better uses of a celebrity cameo in a film. Just like how the characters are surprised to see Richard the Lionheart we as the audience are surprised to see Sean Connery; plus he's perfect in these kinds of roles.How can that score by Michael Kamen not evoke the adventurer in you? The music is so good that it appears Disney have been using it on their own logo. Likewise I guess I'm also the only person in the world who isn't sick to death of Bryan Adams' (Everything I Do) I Do It For You; I still jam to it now and then. Ah the days when the pop song tie in was as big, if not bigger than the movie itself.Prince of Thieves is good old fashioned swashbuckling action. The action on display has a sense of weight and physicality with the impressive large scale action sequences with even the out there moment with Robin and Azeem being fired over a wall with a catapult still feeling believable, and not a computer generated effect in sight; all practical glory.The movie does the English landscape justice; even in the drab winter weather there is still a beauty to it. Prince of Thieves features some breathtaking money shots, such as that of Robin firing an arrow with an explosion behind him filmed at 300 frames per second; or perhaps my favourite shot in the film, the romantic elevator with the sun in the background splitting the trees. Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves is film with its faults but I'm so engaged with the world and its aesthetic that I can look past them, a world in which everything feels used and lived in, one beaming with personality.

Twenty minutes into the movie I knew I was not liking it. Forty minutes in it was assured with the entrance of Christian Slater's Will Scarlett. I find it fascinating that when the English are cast into American roles in American films they are forced to speak with American accents. However, when an American film is made, set in twelfth century England, the American actors cast into the lead roles speak modern American English.This is the first time I have watched a Robin Hood movie where I was actually rooting for the Sheriff of Nottingham over Robin Hood.There was far too much white fabric, especially with regard to the wedding ensembles. White fabric was virtually nonexistent until late 18th century and then it was worn by high royalty as they were the only ones who could afford it.For me, the only redemption for this movie came in the forms of Alan Rickman, Sean Connery and Geraldine McEwan who played their roles masterfully. Mr.Freeman was also very much his character. And then there were the occasional comedic antics of Michael McShane's Friar Tuck.As I told the friend who encouraged me to watch this movie, my high opinion for the acting abilities of Mr. Costner and Mr. Slater plummeted drastically in watching Robin Hood: Prince Of Thieves.

I recently watched this to see how it held up over time and unfortunately its age is starting to show. American audiences in the early 1990s didn't get hung up on details like cultural accuracy, but today, thankfully, they are more discerning. The frivolity of 1990s film making is beginning to show through in the numerous cracks in this film, yet it still manages to be entertaining in spite of Kevin Costner not even attempting a British accent, or any of the other numerous flaws. I don't know if this is a spoiler or not but for example, at the film's climax Costner and Freeman are trying to bash through a door that has been barred on the other side. Somehow the witch character appears inside the room, then on the outside where she confronts them, then at the very end she's back inside the room hiding for the right moment to pop out and surprise everyone...all while the door is still barricaded and Morgan freeman is still bashing away trying to get in. Oh well, overall the film still manages to be somewhat entertaining (probably thanks to Alan Rickman) but if you saw this in the early 1990s you might cringe watching it now.