Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves

Plot synopsis:
Robin of Locksley – an English nobleman who joined Richard the Lionheart, King of England in the Third Crusade – is imprisoned in Jerusalem along with his comrade, Peter Dubois. Facing the amputation of his hand by the Ayyubid prison guards, Robin escapes with Peter, saving the life of a Moor named Azeem in the process. Robin, Peter, and Azeem escape through a sewer and into an alley, but Peter is shot and mortally wounded by an archer. Before making his last stand against the approaching guards, he has Robin swear to protect his sister, Marian. Robin returns to England with Azeem, who has vowed to accompany him until Azeem's life-debt to Robin is repaid.
In England, with King Richard still away (in France), the cruel Sheriff of Nottingham rules over the land, aided by his cousin, Guy of Gisbourne, the witch Mortianna, and the corrupt Bishop of Hereford (Harold Innocent). At Locksley Castle, Robin's father, who is loyal to King Richard, is killed by the Sheriff's men after refusing to join them.
Robin returns to England to find his father dead, his home in ruins, and the Sheriff and his men oppressing the people. After telling Marian of Peter's demise, and while fleeing the Sheriff's forces afterwards, Robin and Azeem encounter a band of outlaws hiding in Sherwood Forest, led by Little John. Among the band is Will Scarlet, who holds a belligerent grudge against Robin. Robin ultimately assumes command of the group, encourages his men to fight against Nottingham, and trains them to defend themselves. They rob soldiers and convoys that pass through the forest, then distribute the stolen wealth among the poor. One of their early targets is Friar Tuck, who subsequently joins these Merry Men. Marian begins to sympathize with the band and renders Robin any aid she can muster. Robin's successes infuriate the Sheriff, who increases the mistreatment of the people, resulting in greater local support for Robin Hood.
The Sheriff kills Gisbourne for his failure to prevent the looting of several convoys, and hires Celtic warriors from Scotland to assist his forces in assaulting the hideout. The Sheriff manages to locate the outlaws' hideout and launches an attack, destroying the forest refuge and capturing most of the outlaws. He confines Marian when she tries to summon help from France. In order to consolidate his claim to the throne, the Sheriff proposes to Marian (who is Richard's cousin), claiming that if she accepts he will spare the lives of the captured outlaws. Nevertheless, several of the rebels are due to be executed by hanging as part of the wedding celebration. Among the captured is Will Scarlet, who makes a deal with the Sheriff to find and kill Robin in exchange for his freedom.
Will meets back with Robin and a handful of his most trusted aides who survived the assault by the Celts. Instead of attacking Robin, Will informs him of the Sheriff's plans to marry Marian and execute Robin's men. Will continues to display anger against Robin, which motivates Robin to question why Will hates him so much. Will then reveals himself to be Robin's younger illegitimate half-brother; Will's mother was a peasant woman with whom Robin's father took comfort after Robin's mother had died. Robin's anger toward his father caused him to separate from her and leave Will fatherless. Despite his anger, Robin is overjoyed to learn that he has a brother, and reconciles with Will.
On the day of the wedding and hangings, Robin and his men infiltrate Nottingham Castle, freeing the prisoners. Although Robin's band originally planned to free their friends and retreat, Azeem reveals himself and his willingness to fight the Sheriff, inciting the peasants to revolt. After a fierce fight, Robin kills the Sheriff but is attacked by Mortianna, who charges with a spear. Azeem slays Mortianna, fulfilling his vow to repay his life debt. Tuck kills the Bishop, burdening him with treasure and throwing him out a window.
Robin and Marian profess their love for each other and marry in the forest. Their wedding is briefly interrupted by the return of King Richard, who blesses the marriage and thanks Robin for his deeds.

Tags: comedy, murder, cult, atmospheric, historical fiction, good versus evil, action, romantic, historical, entertaining

Review:
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.
Two reasons to watch this film:1) Alan Rickman2) 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.
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.
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.
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 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.
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 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 .
I've seen several Medeval era films, but none of  them are as fun to watch as Robin Hood-Prince of Thieves.
the acting is just okay, and the costumes are over exageratted.- however this films gives you a good classic story, great stunts,very good action sequences, good specail effects,an excellent music score, and several scenes of comic relief.
I recommend this film to any one between the ages of 8 years old to 80 years old - you're gonna love it.(If you liked this film also see a movie called "First Knight"-1995 an action adventure/love story about Sir. Lancelot of Camalot)I give Robin Hood-Prince of Thieves 5 out of 5 stars- A perfect film for your family, everyone in your household will love it-and so will you..
As his popularity grows, Robin becomes a massive thorn in the side of the Sheriff, forcing him to take harsher action.Younger viewers coming to this film on television may not appreciate that this film was made at a time when the presence of Kevin Costner was a bonus and indeed almost a selling point.
Yes, I know this sounds like crazy talk from an older man who has seen too many movies to be good for him but it is true and Robin Hood is a fine example of a so-so film that was built partly on his star power.
Rickman effortlessly dominates the film by chewing the scenery in each and every scene  his colourful performance makes Costner (who can be good) look as stiff as a board.
I don't like action films, i don't like hack and slash but i love this.For me every actor does a reasonable job and Alan Rickman is outstanding as the sheriff of Nottingham, the lack of a credible English accent is not a worry to me and the flexible use of locations is also not a problem.
Despite the fact the crew had so many obstacles while making the film.Robin of Locksley (Kevin Costner) returns to England from his crusades with a Maori warrior Azeem (outstanding Morgan Freeman) and finds out that the evil sheriff of Nottingham (superb Alan Rickman) has taken over his fathers lands.
If you liked "The Adventures of Robin Hood" starring by Errol Flynn you will also enjoy this timeless story about the man who stole from the rich and gave it to the poor!The film making was a struggle right from the start.
If you can't find that go to the 1922 Robin Hood starring Douglas Fairbanks.There is only one reason to watch this film and that is Alan Rickman as the scenery chewing Sheriff "I'll upstage everyone" of Nottingham.
Hint to the screenwriters - Robin Hood is a classic legend, you should be picking which bits to leave out, not stuffing new things into it.All the other actors in the film had about as much impact as blancmange..
Maybe some day there'll be a good, modern Robin Hood movie that measures up to the Flynn version and truly revives the legend for a new generation.
Poor Morgan Freeman has to also suffer the indignity of reading from the purile script.The writer's have done away with the charm and daring of the Robin Hood character and turned it into a battle/pause/battle film.Rickman is superb although I'm not sure how he got away with his OTT performance - it verges on a panto villan..
The real death knell of this film lies in the obvious fact that no one connected with this film has any idea about the mythos behind it, and I suppose that extends to myopic fans who think this is such a "great job." It's not even a good movie; it is an exceptionally bad Robin Hood movie..
The man has nothing more to offer than a well-known face to slap onto the billboards, and possibly a bit of sex appeal for all the 40-somethings out there.It felt like the character of Robin Hood was being compromised in order to not strain the already-limited acting skills of Kevin Costner.
Said other things include charisma, some sort of dry wit (at least a little playful sarcasm every now and then), and an honest, believable affection for the Maid Marian.The relationship between Robin and Marian seems, to quote the great Roger Ebert, "inspired more by necessity than by desire, as if both of them had read the book and knew they were required to fall in love." Give Kevin Costner a bow and arrow and disguise him in leafy attire, and he still has the same detached indifference, impossible to have any feelings for (and that goes for both the audience and co-stars).But this movie wouldn't work even if it wasn't for Costner.
It's fun to look at, yes, but it's so far off from the dark, brooding atmosphere of the rest of the film that it becomes distracting.Alan Rickman plays the Sheriff of Nottingham as if he's drunk and acting to save his life all at the same time.
Rickman is completely absurd, driven crazy by Robin's elusiveness, but it's obvious that he's having fun and ultimately, it works really well.Sean Connery is fun for the last 30 seconds as King Richard, and Morgan Freeman acts well in the role of level-headed, yet slick Azeem.
The movie is passable, but the legend of Robin Hood is a better story than this film lets on.
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.
only Kevin Costner could act with American accent as robin hood (who is English) and, after all, being convincing and absolutely perfect!
New technology!The `arrow-cam' shot is ludicrous, Azeem's `you saved my life, now I am your servant' schtick belongs in a sitcom, Alan Rickman's sheriff is possibly the hammiest villain I've seen in my life, the geography of Nottingham Forest is anyone's guess (it becomes Nottingham Field when the plot requires) - and, as a general verdict, most items of Robin Hood mythology are still there, but twisted ALMOST beyond recognition, into something hideous.
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.
Sean Connery has a cameo, too.But come on, Morgan Freeman in a Robin Hood film?
Political correctness aside (and trust me, there's plenty) it's simply LIFELESS...ironically appropriate given that Kevin Costner's voice never fails to put me to sleep.Overall you could do much better - go watch the original Michael Curtiz version (one of the greatest ever and certainly the best Robin Hood film adaptation), the Disney cartoon (aw come on it's entertaining) or the Mel Brooks version.
Sort of like a Brit playing Davy Crockett, methinks.A lot of people like to go on and on about how this is a great version of the Robin Hood story because it's "realistic" (which is a ludicrous statement in its own right, but beside the point).
Rickman's Sheriff of Nottingham is the only bit of "Prince of Thieves" with any life or color at all, which serves only to make him stick out like a sore thumb.Belive me, the Errol Flynn version is the way to go..
This emphasis on tragedy and drama is probably there to offset the fact that since Kevin Costner can't even begin to swash Errol Flynn's buckle, and comes across more like a social worker who is good at archery, the film had to take the emphasis off of the great fun and energy of Robin Hood himself.The one saving grace of this film is Alan Rickman as the Sheriff of Nottingham.
Compare this story to Errol Flynn's Adventures Of Robin Hood and you see just liberal the movies became in the modern era.
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 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.
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.
ROBIN HOOD: PRINCE OF THIEVES, in my opinion, is an excellent film adaptation of a classic tale.
Lieutenant Mountbatten, now His Royal Highness The Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, was the son of Prince Andrew of Greece and a great-great-grandson of Queen Victoria."So we have a plan that leads nowhere; we have the key villain in a great story removed for no good reason resulting in a breakdown of the plot; we have a character that does not belong in the story added in for no great effect; and we have Kevin Costner, whom I know is capable of great acting, delivering a sub-par performance.This adds up to: bad movie.Stick with the wonderful 1938 Errol Flynn classic..
Some people say the fact that Costner played a serious Robin Hood while Rickman played a humorous sheriff gave the film a disjointed feel, but I enjoyed the contrast.
Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves is the best adaptation of the Robin Hood of I watched , the cast is already very good , Kevin Costner does a great Robin Hood , Morgan Freeman as always look great and still have the great Alan Rickman makes a great villain , you feel anger, film photography is very good, the landscapes are good, the costumes are great, the direction is good , the action scenes are good, it's even better when you know that this movie is 1991 , the film also has a good humor, the film does not get to be so violent in battles such as the Braveheart would a movie four years later, more is understood by the fact that the release gap is great, and Braveheart has much more resources , Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves is a good film, which gives to spend time watching , and still having a great cast is very funny moments.
Kevin Costner, as Robin hood, has one very big gap in his character: the fact that he keeps speaking with an American accent.
Kevin Costner's performance as the titular hero also isn't great, nor is his lack of attempt to try an English accent, but instead we're invited to oversee the tale with Yankee Robin Hood instead.
The only great and plausible things about Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves, is the performances of Alan Rickman as the evil Sheriff of Nottingham and Morgan Freeman as Robin's sidekick Azeem.
The supporting cast, especially Alan Rickman and Morgan Freeman, steal the show from Costner, the supposed star of the film.
If you want to see a really good Robin Hood film, though, check out Errol Flynn's version from 1938!
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.
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..
Kevin Costner playing is like Julia Roberts, bad in most roles but brilliantly cast as war weary knight returning home to still have to fight against injustice and become the legend of Robin Hood.It emphasises the ignorance of times by including a Moore into the plotline.
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.
A very loose telling of the Robin Hood legend, Costner's movie is well known to have had production problems.
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.
The story is very interesting, the action is fantastic, the characters are great, the acting is well done, the costumes are very nice, the humor is perfect and the filming is excellent.The cast is very good in this film.
Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves was the -best- movie ever made,a true classic.
He is the best looking of the Robin Hoods, Kevin Costner's performance as the legendary Prince of thieves.
I saw it when it first came out on video, when i was pretty young, and loved it from "Hello." Though Kevin Costner's acting is pretty bad in this movie, it is made up for with his fellow actors (Morgan Freeman could carry this movie all by himself, though he doesn't have to).The plot is the usual Robin Hood schmeel.
if he was "Robin Hood" , i would want to be there in Sherwood Forest with Him !!!everyone in this movie did a great job, especially Alan Rickman as the Sheriff of Nottingham..
This is the only Robin Hood movie I will ever watch.
You will be entertained but if you are watching it because you want a good Robin Hood movie then turn it off and watch the Errol Flynn 30s classic instead.
"Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves" was a blockbuster success in 1991, a time when Kevin Costner's popularity was at its apex.