Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves (1991) User Reviews

Entertaining, despite it all

[reporterman2000 · 8/10 · 19 August 2003]

The summer of 1991 was a lousy one for movies; there were only a few that stood out amid dozens of crummy releases. The only movies that summer that I admired were 'Terminator 2,' 'Thelma & Louise,' and this one, which still stands as one of the most entertaining action-adventure movies I've seen.

No, it isn't a masterpiece, on any level. Yes, I realize that Kevin Costner lacks a satisfactory British accent (he doesn't even attempt one). But the movie is still a fun, rip-roaring piece of escapism, sort of like 'Raiders of the Lost Ark,' only without the special effects.

Costner may seem miscast as Robin of Locksley, but there's no doubt that he had the physicality and screen presence to convincingly hold our attention as a larger-than-life hero. He'd just come off 'Dances With Wolves,' and so it was a thrill to see him on horseback again (it still is, in 'Open Range'). I'm willing to concede that he's no Olivier, but in the action hero mold, he still cut an exciting figure.

I also enjoyed Alan Rickman's great, over-the-top portrayal of the Sheriff of Nottingham. Out of place? You betcha. Fun? Funny? Wicked? Hey, that's why we pay admission.

The sets are all dank and gloomy and wonderful. The action is well-staged and had audiences on their feet all those years ago. Sherwood Forest is appropriately dense and spooky-looking. OK, so the movie has Christian Slater in it. I didn't say it was perfect.

'Robin Hood' marked the beginning of the end of Kevin Costner's unanimous popularity with audiences. Everyone started playing the part of Hollywood bean-counter and worrying about 'Waterworld's' budget. But you know what I like about both these movies? No CGI. I am sick and tired of CGI movies. Popping the deluxe 'Robin Hood' DVD into the old player is a refreshing treat and a thumb in the eye of digital junk like 'Pirates of the Caribbean.'

Late Alan Rickman is the highlight of the film!!

[sauravjoshi85 · 8/10 · 10 June 2023]

Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves is an action adventure film and is directed by Kevin Reynolds. The film stars Kevin Costner, Morgan Freeman, Christian Slater, Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio, and Late Alan Rickman.

Robin decides to avenge his father who was murdered by Sheriff Nottingham. He joins forces with band of thieves to overcome the evils of the sheriff.

There might be some historical inaccuracies in the film but still i enjoyed watching the film and with a terrific storyline, superb execution filled with action, drama and pinch of comedy.

The screenplay of the film is superb and will keep you engaged on a major part of the film, the film indeed strays in the middle but comes beautifully on the track as the film progresses ahead.

Acting in the film is superb and Alan Rickman is the most impressive of them all and probably the main highlight of the film but is closely followed by Freeman, Costner and Slater. Geraldine McEwan as Mortiana who also was very impressive. Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio looked cute and impressive.

The climax of the film is good but could've been little more refined and extended to give the film a perfect closure.

An entertaining film which should be watched atleast once.

High camp deep in the forest.

[leotard22 · 7/10 · 17 April 2006]

Although i turned my nose up at this film when first watched fifteen years ago, a second appraisal and a few grey hairs later forces me to see it for what it truly is; a great swashbuckling comedy romp.

As the pace built, my unease at the somewhat incongruous accents dissipated and i was left to enjoy a great film with some fine performances. Notably from Michael McShane as Friar Tuck and Alan Rickman as the evilly comic Sheriff of Nottingham.

The pace of the film rarely slackens, building up to a rip roaring finish.

Enjoy.

"Because it's dull, you twit, it'll hurt more!"

[Imprimis · 1 May 2003]

Two reasons to watch this film:

1) Alan Rickman

2) Robin and Marian falling into each other's arms, oh so dramatic, and he says in a very guttural/passionate Kevin Costner way, "I would die for you." Almost as good as Kevin Kline in "French Kiss," when he runs up to Meg Ryan in the hotel and says "I want you..." giving this little hand gesture which makes it obvious to everyone except Kate that Luc has surrendered to her charms.

In conclusion: a terrifically unerring cheesy romantic drama/comedy, with a hint of Christian Slater bad boy and a dash of Morgan Freeman cool. If you've still got the thirteen year old girl within, give it a shot. If not, Alan Rickman's still awesome.

Awesome

[djfrost-46786 · 7/10 · 8 May 2018]

I have seen this movie over 10 times. Years later it's still stands strong. It's an awesome movie that I WILL watch again.

Rickman and Wincott Steal The Show

[FiendishDramaturgy · 7/10 · 7 January 2009]

I don't really like Keven Costner but I like him a far sight better than I do Russel Crowe, and while his movies do tend towards the "revisionist" style, there is something to be said for this version of Robin Hood. I will freely admit the Errol Flynn version is superior in story but this movie has style where it may lack substance.

Apparently, Kevin Costner does not know how to pull off a character with such depth and range as Robin Hood. Whether he lacks the ability to interpret the character or just lacks as an actor I have never cared enough to determine but his failings are upheld widely by the team of Alan Rickman and Michael Wincott who absolutely steal the show.

This is not to say that this version of the story is without merit. It is worth seeing if only for Morgan Freeman, Wincott, and Rickman. And I'll guarantee you that this version will absolutely SHINE in comparison to Crowe's Nottingham (due out 2010). Honestly, the only actor MORE wrong for Robin Hood than Kevin Costner is Russell Crowe. Oy.

All in all? This is dark and sweeping. It is fun and entertaining and I LIKE IT!

It rates a 6.8/10 from...

the Fiend :.

Modern version with certain revisionism but with load of action and romance

[ma-cortes · 6/10 · 1 November 2005]

The legendary Sherwood forest's hero Robin Locksly (Kevin Kostner) again and Lady Mariam (Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio) along with a Moor (Morgan Freeman) and his Merrie men : Will Scarlett (Christian Slater), Friar Tuck and Little John facing off a wicked Sheriff of Nottingham (Alan Rickman) and Guy Gisbourne (Michael Wincott). The story is indirectly based on historic events and developed during third Crusade , Robin is imprisoned and is serving under orders of Richard Lion Heart (Sean Connery) who fights against Saladin and conquers Acre . In route England Richard was captured by Leopold II of Austria and ransomed by his own subjects . He briefly returned England to put down a revolt against him , his brother John without Land takes over the kingdom with his underlings Sheriff of Nottingham (Alan Rickman) and Guy Gisbourne (Michael Wincott). One time evaded Robin and returned to England he'll confront against the former .

The movie has great action sequences well staged with stylish and vitality , tongue-in-cheek , adventures , romance and is pretty amusing . Although is a little revisionist about characters , personages and time where is developed the action in a dirty , gritty Middle Age, spectators partially disapproved the changes of classic canon . Seven years later to ¨Fandango¨ film , director Kevin Reynolds and Kevin Costner re-teamed but with much bigger budget . The final product looked as although the actors learn the screenplay and decided the best issue was to take a good time and amuse themselves and both managed to stage some excellent action scenes , hopefully without coming to blows themselves . Kevin Costner is fine but Morgan Freeman comes up the film as the civilized and naive Moor brought by Robin from Crusades . Special mention to Alan Rickman as an evil and crazed sheriff in a comic and sensationalistic interpretation . Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio is memorable and attractive . Impeccable cinematography by Douglas Milsone . Movie is shot on natural sets and English woods and cathedral and interior scenarios with impressive production design . Magnificent and spectacular musical score by Michael Kamen . The song ¨every thing I do it for you ¨ was nominated for Academy Award . The same year was exhibited ¨Robin Hood¨ by John Irvin with Patrick Bergin and Uma Thurman but was a flop though the critics considered a best adaptation . The classic rendition is ¨The adventures of Robin Hood¨ by Michael Curtiz with Errol Flynn and Olivia de Havilland.

Exhilarating Adventure

[scarlet caulfield · 9/10 · 26 February 2002]

I have seen Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves so many times and yet it still thrills me the 100th time as much as it did the first. I just can't ever get enough of this near perfect adventure film.

I've always cherished films set in medieval times. There's just something about the plights of the oppressed class and the simple heroics of the man who steps forward to fight for honor and better lives for the dismal. Then there are the luxuriant castles, the dashing sword fights, the extravagant costumes, the tragically beautiful princess he's destined to fall in love with, and the evil power-hungry villain who will stop at nothing to be King.

OK, it's a bit of a cliché, but this formula makes for the perfect escapist film and one thrilling and emotional ride. No, it isn't original, but it's just got everything you'd ever want from a film.

The story of Robin Hood has been done so many times, and (unlike most of his other roles) Kevin Costner is not only believable, but actually quite good this time (well, except for the accent, but nobody's perfect).

Alan Rickman is just flawlessly devious as the Sheriff of Nottingham. Nobody could have done it better, and he also had the best lines ("Because it's dull, it'll hurt more!")

This was sadly Kevin Costner's last great film, as he went on to star in such duds as Waterworld and the dismal The Postman. Christian Slater, Morgan Freeman, Sean Connery, and especially Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio give their all, creating a truly emotional and powerful film. I don't understand why the ratings are so low.

The ending is just beautiful. I boo at the sheriff, cheer for Robin, and cry during Robin and Marian's post-sword fight embrace every time, and you will too if you ignore the cynics and give this adventure a chance.

9/10

Kevin Costner at his worst?

[coop-16 · 7/10 · 11 April 2000]

The only reason that I put a question mark at the end of my title is that I have not yet had the courage to sit through Waterworld or Postman. There are redeeming elements to this film:the fine performance by Brian Blessed, the cameo performance by Sean Connnery, a droll, if all too anachronistic performance by Morgan Freeman, and of course, the astonishing performance by Alan Rickman as Wile E. Coyote, a.k.a the Sheriff of Nottingham.However, there is one problem with this film.( OK, the clunky battle sequences and unimaginative set design also count as problematic).I refer to the black hole at its center, the self-righteous,pompous, utterly lifeless performance by the entity called Costner.Am I wrong, or did he not make his screen debut as a corpse? Never was there more perfect casting.Costner turns Robin into a "Robin of Malibu", spouting cliches about "freedom" in a sort of "californiaese".I cannot begin to express the extent of my rage at this performance, so utterly banal, so utterly insipid. Please, Kevin, quit acting and run for The senate from California!There, at least, you will do far less harm to American culture.

A watchable classic that wouldn't have been made today, could have been even better

[mgicnick · 8/10 · 4 October 2023]

Robin hood Prince of thieves looks like an expensive production shot in many different amazing locations with plenty of background actors and costumes and famous capable casting but despite all this it feels a bit rushed, not that it is a bad film but it could have been even better. That may be due to Kevin Costner being on very high demand in 1990 shooting back to back projects so there was probably not enough time to focus 100% on this one.

Still good and watchable, with an excellent Morgan Freeman, it is of course the classic story of Robin hood saving the damsel in distress Marian from the treacherous sherrif of Nottingham, and needless to say this classic folk tale would not have made it intact into a film of today. Hollywood nowadays is all about erasing and rewritting movie history for ideological reasons, case in point the small production of Robyn Hood (2023) that transformed Robin into Robyn, a black woman, so if one wants to see something that resembles the original story the only way to look is towards the past.

Medieval Magnificence

[view_and_review · 7/10 · 1 March 2020]

1991 is about the time I was regularly going to the movies. I was old enough by that time to have a little more freedom and also be rewarded with a movie by my parents. "Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves" was a movie I saw in theater and it was one of the bigger production movies I saw in theater.

RHPOT was exciting and action packed. It was an updated version of the Robin Hood story with some excellent special effects. The close ups of the arrows mid-flight was most novel. Robin Hood was already an established character, they only needed to make it thoroughly enjoyable on screen and that they did.

So bad it's laughable

[mp3dude4 · 1/10 · 29 November 2003]

The worst Robin Hood movie ever made. Bad acting, horrible direction and an overblown script are the film's only good features. Kevin Costner plays the same part he always (Waterworld set in old England) does at the same level of talent (none).

This film provided a lot of material for "Robin Hood, Men In Tights" to skewer a couple years later. In fact, don't watch Men In Tights without seeing Prince of Thieves first.

Great entertainment.....

[Estella · 27 February 2000]

Wow, this film seems to have annoyed some people. What a fuss about it being historically inaccurate, or that Azeem found the Chinease invention of gunpowder etc etc. WHO CARES! Don't nit pick at a film like this and you'll enjoy it. As for Kevin Costner not having an English accent, I don't really care, since it's a lot better then the other Robin Hood movie that was made in England, and was unlucky enough to be released at the same time. (I think it was simply called 'Robin Hood') OK,so Robin Hood IS supposed to be English, and yeah, Kev Costner could at least have tried an English accent, but if we're going to go that far, then they may as well have got an English actor instead of an American one, but somehow, I don't think Costner could have been bettered. He makes an excellent Robin Hood. Alan Rickman is brilliant as the hilarious Sherrif of Nottingham ('Shut up you TWIT!')It's great fun, and one of those film to watch with your feet up and a big bar of chocolate.....

Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves

[CinemaSerf · 7/10 · 26 August 2023]

I've always been a fan of the baddie in films - and this film really belongs to Alan Rickman's "Sheriff" with a good supporting effort from Geraldine McEwan as his harridan witch cohort. They bring almost all of humour and menace. The bulk of the rest of the film is a pretty run-of-the-mill vehicle for Costner, Freeman and Mastrantonio - and moves along well enough as a pretty formulaic, very freely adapted, costume drama. Brian Blessed hams marvellously in the few scenes he has and the score works well into the fabric of the movie. Sadly, the writing and direction are nothing special. Errol and Basil have little to worry about.

Terrible acting

[kevinsimons-23096 · 6/10 · 23 October 2021]

Kevin Costner was just terrible here. The acting was SO bad. I couldn't tell if the blind guy was supposed to be comedic relief or if he was serious half the time. It had some decently filmed shots. No great fight scenes. Super corny. I was ready for it to be over 2/3 through. The only good thing about it was the inspiration for Men in Tights haha.

Better than I remember

[dawnsacks-01578 · 7/10 · 31 May 2020]

I remember watching this movie years and years ago when it first came out. Thought it was pretty good. Just watched it again in 2020. Better than I remembered and worth watching just for the magnificent great and crazy performance by Alan Rickman. Not too bad acting that may be the really crappy accident or should I say non-existing accent of Kevin Costner. Much more enjoyable movie than I remembered it being

Now this is a great movie!

[TheLittleSongbird · 9/10 · 8 August 2009]

I really liked Robin Hood:Prince of Thieves, I found it enjoyable and beautifully filmed. It is true, Kevin Costner's performance in the title role mayn't be to everyone's tastes, least of all mine, I found him too American plus I personally preferred Errol Flynn, who was born for the role. I just didn't think he was right for the character. But the performances from everyone else more than compensates, Alan Rickman, a great actor was a revelation as the villainous sheriff, and Geraldine McEwen almost unrecognisable as Mortitiana. Morgan Freeman and Sean Connery are excellent too, and Mary Elizabeth Monstratonio is very radiant as Maid Marian. There are also some beautiful camera-work, and some splendid set pieces, like the fight in Sherwood Forest. The script wasn't that bad, I particularly loved the Sheriff's "Do you mind Robin? We've just got married!" The music by Michael Kamen was beautiful and quite rousing. All in all, maybe not as good as the Errol Flynn film, but this is actually very enjoyable. 9/10 Bethany Cox

Alan Rickman was an acting god

[acedj · 7/10 · 18 November 2019]

I would have loved to give this movie a higher rating, but the fact that Kevin Costner playing a British character and not being able to speak with the appropriate accent knocked off a few stars. This is the story we all know and love, the story of Robin Hood, the man that steals from the rich and gives to the poor, told in its own unique way. This movie is cast with some of the best actors of the time. Kevin Costner is Robin with Mary Elizabeth Mastrontonio as Maid Marion.They throw in Morgan Freeman and Christian Slater for good measure. But it is the late, great Alan Rickman that steals the movie. His flair and inflections and facial expressions make this movie. His Sheriff of Nottingham is perhaps my favorite iteration of the character in all the various forms I has seen him. This is a great retelling of a classic story.

Alan Rickman Saves a Somewhat Middling Action Movie!

[gab-14712 · 8/10 · 24 December 2022]

Here we go with another adaptation of Robin Hood. The Robin Hood tale has been told many times over and over. The edition that made the biggest bucks at the box office is Kevin Reynolds's Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves. In my opinion, it barely squeaks by with a passing grade. There are moments of fun and lots of adventure. The action is pretty good and well-choreographed. It is certainly more graphic than I have imagined it would be. Most of the performances, especially those from Alan Rickman and Morgan Freeman, are good. I also consider Michael Kamen's score to be magnificent and one of his most epic, lushest scores. Even to this day, Bryan Adams's ballad "Everything I Do (I Do It for You) remains a popular, soulful hit. Unfortunately, there are some glaring issues. After Kevin Costner delivered an emotional engaging performance in Dance with Wolves, he delivers the complete opposite here. His accent would be right at home in LA, certainly not in medieval England. In addition, the screenplay is really silly. In fact, Rickman was allowed to come up with his own lines because he found the screenplay loathingly bad. I hope someone taught the screenwriters how to write good dialogue because many lines had me unintentionally laughing. I did like this version's interpretation of the legend. Robin Hood is portrayed as more serious, more socially conscious unlike the earlier Errol Flynn versions.

Pen Densham and his producing partner John Watson originally came up with the idea to create a version of Robin Hood who learned to be a more socially conscious person while imprisoned during the Crusades. The studio felt the screenplay was screaming with magic and was fast tracked into production to avoid clashes with dueling Robin Hood features. After all, the first one released is usually the winner as in the case of this feature (at least financially). Reynolds and Costner originally worked together on a smaller film seven years previously. Reynolds also assisted Costner during the challenging buffalo hunt scene in Dance with Wolves. Costner was going to turn down the film unless Reynolds was at the helm because he was more suited to direct the epic action. Production was quick because of Costner's hectic schedule. Most of the film was shot on location so the audience got to see some great shots of some English forests along Hadrian's Wall. A quick shout out to Douglas Milsome's exceptional cinematography. Sadly, Reynolds left the project at the tail end because of studio interference, which also explains the poor editing choices. The studio wanted to cut some Rickman scenes because they did not want him to overshadow Costner. I mean, didn't that happen anyway?

Robin Locksley (Kevin Costner) fighting for Richard the Lionheart (Sean Connery) in the Crusades returns to England after escaping from a dungeon along with his intelligent Moor friend Azeem (Morgan Freeman) who fights alongside Robin to pay off a debt. Robin learns that his father has been murdered by the evil, corrupt Sheriff of Nottingham (Alan Rickman). He flees to the Sherwood Forest where he vows to go after the Sheriff. With the help of his merry men that includes the likes of Will Scarlet (Christian Slater), they aim to take down the Sheriff and his political ambitions.

Costner has had better roles. Even if his accent is not bothersome, his performance just feels...off. He has no romantic chemistry with Marion (played good as possibly can by Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio). It felt like they were familiar with the story and had to fall in love because that is necessary. The supporting cast is where the performances shine. Freeman fit right in with the tone. He used humor when appropriate and is a good friend to Robin Hood. Rickman outdoes everyone when he plays the villain, isn't that right? First in Die Hard, and now here. Rickman's interpretation of the Sheriff of Nottingham is the best part of the movie. He was evil....yet he was also hilarious. I am glad he got permission to create his own lines because they were much needed.

I thoroughly enjoyed Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves. Outside of Rickman's magnificent villainous performance, this version is rather forgettable. But it is fun to watch in the two plus hours on screen. Stay for the supporting performances, the action (especially the final action set piece), and Michael Kamen's awesome orchestral score. If only the screenplay was not dumb and Costner had a better lead performance, this might have been a classic. Might have been! Oh well, this is still plain ol' dumb fun.

My Grade: B-

Alright me old cocker!

[hitchcockthelegend · 7/10 · 15 April 2010]

One of those films that is used as a stick to beat Kevin Costner around the head with, Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves was made for $48 million and went on to make a Worldwide profit of $343 million. That's the sort of stick beating I wouldn't mind taking occasionally! A very loose telling of the Robin Hood legend, Costner's movie is well known to have had production problems. Rushed and with more producers than number a five-a-side football team, the film went on to infuriate purists with its historical, geographical, linguistic and technical gaffes. And that's before we talk about the multitude of accents on offer. So to enjoy Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves you really have to be undemanding as regards any of the afore mentioned issues. To which the film then becomes an enjoyable old fashioned swashbuckling yarn driven by two great, yet differing, acting performances.

Forget Costner, he's adequate in the role of the infamous green tighted one, this is Alan Rickman {Sheriff of Nottingham} and Morgan Freeman's {Azeem} movie. True, Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio as Marian Dubois adds a touch of class, and Michael Wincott's turn as Guy of Gisborne is a nice line in villainy. But Freeman has the quality to give his character some worth, while Rickman runs away with the movie by playing Nottingham as a diabolical sulky git, it's very pantomime in execution, and Rickman is clearly having the time of his life with the role, but it's priceless entertainment. "Call off Christmas", one of the funniest moments of the 90s.

It's one of those films where if someone said to me they thought it was the worst film of the modern era I could understand and sympathise. But then I'd point to the box office takings, Costner swinging thru windows and splitting arrows, and of course Rickman's delicious performance. Hey, sometimes you just got to ignore a lot to have a good old time regardless. 7/10

The length works

[ericstevenson · 7/10 · 31 July 2018]

I thought that this was the longest Robin Hood movie ever made. I then heard there's an extended version of 2010's "Robin Hood" that's over 150 minutes. Whatever, it's the longest version I've seen. We really do see an all star cast here with Kevin Costner, Morgan Freeman, and Alan Rickman. I keep seeing Alan Rickman in more things. It's hard to believe I never heard of him before Harry Potter.

We get a lot of great action scenes but the characterizations are good. I will admit it looked a bit dim. Maybe it was just the version I was watching. It was cool to see such classic figures like Maid Marian, Little John, and Friar Tuck gradually introduced in this well paced film. I even felt we learned something about medieval times and the role of religion in that period. Not as good as the Erroll Flynn version, but still nice. ***

Weak film, strictly for Alan Rickman fans

[ajk77 · 5/10 · 3 June 2003]

This film proved inadvertedly funny through basic improbabilities, eg the whole Morgan Freeman role, Robin riding from Dover to Nottingham in a day, and managing to get ambushed en route at what is obviously Hadrian's wall. The UK half of the cast respond by sending up the whole thing on a grand scale, with Alan Rickman outstaging Kevin Costner so greatly that you actually hope the Sheriff will win for once.

The result is a funny film, but not the one Kevin Costner intended. See only if you are keen on Alan Rickman.

Swashbuckling Medieval Adventure at its Finest...

[Chiron1987 · 7 July 1999]

Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves was one of the best films of 1991, a triumph even over the special effects hype of Terminator 2: Judgement Day.

Despite the critics' complete and utter distaste for the film, I found it fun, well-acted, and fast-paced. Great performances abound including Morgan Freeman as the Moorish warrior Azeem, Alan Rickman as the hysterical Sheriff of Nottingham, and Kevin Costner as our stalwart Robin of Locksley.

There are great action sequences including the battle against the hired Celts and Nottingham's soldiers and the final confrontation at the climax of the film.

Finally, don't be put off by Costner's lack of an English dialect. It doesn't hurt the film at all, and is just something critics were instantly attracted to, as it is their job to find faults.

Highly recommended.

Good

[Jonbendel · 7/10 · 16 July 2022]

I like this movie if only for the cast and it's a really good cast.. Kevin Costner is obviously silly drifting in and out of a bad British accent but what the hell I've still seen this movie like 10 or 15 times since the 90s... God I need a real life... the Film was fun.

A silly but nevertheless prominent product of its era

[Semisonic · 6/10 · 25 April 2015]

The first time i saw this movie was in early 90's, not so long after the release. It was a time of video salons, so my parents rented a crappy pirated VHS copy of this film with a single-voice semi-amateur dubbing. As far as i can remember, the quality of the video and sound was all but horrible.

But i was around 10, and it meant absolutely nothing to me. After all, at that moment it seemed that i was watching the greatest movie of all time. Because it's an adventure, and not some random one but about Robin Hood! And it has magic, people in cool costumes, sword fighting, bow shooting and, the best of all, the tree houses. And not just a few of them, but a whole village on trees. Accompanied by a happy ending and a song they made so much fuss about on TV, this movie had everything that a pre-adolescent boy could've wished for.

Now, two decades later, i got a chance to re-watch Robin Hood. Except for the technical quality of the media - now the video and sound were their best - and the English language track this time, the movie had no changes. One thing that really changed was me. I'm no longer a 10-year old boy, and it implies a completely different viewing angle and perception.

The first thing i must say is that, being a boy, i hardly realized how silly this movie is. From the scene with people getting out of a manhole in the sandy street of medieval Jerusalem - yeah, a manhole in the sand, i kid you not! - it was clear that no historical accuracy or at least logical consistency is to be expected from this film. But there was still hope for it, since one doesn't need to be historically accurate or logical to be a great adventure, and the best proof is the Indiana Jones films.

Unfortunately, Robin Hood is no Indiana Jones. And definitely not because the topic it's based on is inferior, for it's not. This film had all the potential to be the landmark of its time and one of the best adventure movies of, if not all time then, at least, the 90's. But a few director's choices wasted this opportunity.

First of all, the film is too thin for its length. For your information, Robin Hood goes for more than two and a half hours. Yet for this huge screen time, we get to see not nearly enough of "robinhooding" itself. With lots of not so necessary and slow paced scenes like sheriff's hoodlums burning peasant villages or the sheriff himself running around his castle and throwing hissy fits, you might wish for a bigger lot of cool action moments. Yet there are only a handful of those throughout the whole movie.

Another thing that kinda spoils the enjoyment is the overused comedic angle. Indeed, there must be some comedy in adventure, otherwise it would turn itself into drama. But in Robin Hood there clearly was too much of it. Mostly due to the Alan Rickman's character of the sheriff. I mean, we all know that he's a great actor and can play super vicious villains like Hans Gruber. Yet in this film all he could do is buffoon around, scream nonsense and make preposterous faces. Even out of his own death he made a clown's performance. And since he's the main opposing force in the movie, it kinda undermines the value of the confrontation and transforms adventure into visiting a spooky room attraction in an amusement park: it may look scary sometimes, but you are simply 100% sure that all is gonna be okay.

Yet, with all these flaws, Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves still leaves a pleasant aftertaste. Maybe because it's a movie of my childhood, and although it doesn't live up to the impression it made back then, it's still nice to see something that you loved when you were a kid. Maybe because of the whole nostalgia about 90's that it brings, seeing all these actors so young again. After all, it's not everyday that you get to see a movie with Morgan Freeman playing an action role and swinging a giant crooked sword.

All in all, Robin Hood may be not the best adventure film of all time. But its flaws are not unique to it, they are pertinent to the way filmmaking was back then. So while the current generation will hardly rave about it, it'll never lose its appeal and historical value as one of the most notable adventure movies of the late 80's and early 90's. So, if you haven't watched it yet - give this film a try. Maybe you won't fall in love with it, but a certain degree of enjoyment is guaranteed.