Robin Hood: El príncipe de los ladrones

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.

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.

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.

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.'

Escaping death in Jerusalem, Robin of Locksley returns to his England home with Moor companion Azeem in tow. However he finds his home burnt to the ground, his father slandered and murdered and the poor marginalised to within an inch of their lives. Branded an outlaw by the evil Sheriff of Nottingham, Robin flees into Sherwood Forrest where he brings together a group of ragtag rebels "led" by a man called John Little. 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. Of course the downside of this is that the film itself is not that good because it has his and others' names to let it carry it. The plot is well known but rather annoyingly touched with modernisms and Americanisms to the detriment of the telling (whether this be the accents, the errors or just the attitude). This also contributes to the lack of depth in the film and generally, although it looks slick, it doesn't provide anything in the way of emotional engagement – despite the fact that it spawned the manipulative and saccharine Bryan Adams hit that seemed to taint everyone's wedding back in 1992.

The direction is glossy but it cannot get to the heart of anything and Reynolds also fails to get that much out of his cast. As a result Costner simply trades on his rather stiff charm, occasionally enjoying himself but generally taking the whole thing too seriously. 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've never seen the appeal of Mastrantonio at the best of times and this is not the best of times. She is dull and pretty poor all round. Freeman is a good face but is a modernisation too far. Slater is pointless although support from Wincott, Blessed, Brimble and a few others is good if not that great.

Overall then this is a rather joyless spectacle but one that is glossy enough to perhaps do the job for undemanding viewers. It isn't that much fun and the attempts at emotional engagement are mostly cloying and sentimental. The cast are mixed but the only one able to inject life into the rather stiff material is Rickman, who easily livens his scenes but cannot carry the film. Worth a look if you are in a undemanding mood but just don't expect anything more than the blockbuster basics.