Develiker terrible... so disappointed.

Reptileenbu Did you people see the same film I saw?

WillSushyMedia This movie was so-so. It had it's moments, but wasn't the greatest.

Humaira Grant It’s not bad or unwatchable but despite the amplitude of the spectacle, the end result is underwhelming.

katesibly Absolutely love it!!! Could watch it again and again

Aodhanrooney As enjoyable and watchable as a film adaptation of the legend of Robin Hood is supposed to be made out to be, this film is woefully underdeveloped and silly! Featuring a cast, majority American, whom can't even pull off decent English accents in their featured Nottingham roles, makes this movie, it's characters and it's purpose, foolish and disturbing. The accents of Christian Slater Michael McShane aren't great and nevertheless their character development, As well as Little John's, is not great nor is their presence of any importance as it's supposed to be in the great tale of Robin Hood. 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. Their performances are noteworthy and excellent and give some greatness to this woefully failed tale of one of greatest known tales of all time.

jwiley-86292 Dear Sheriff of Nottingham: MARRY ME.In all seriousness, Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves possesses reasons to watch all the way through. Besides what I referenced above, there is the look of the film, which feels enough like the romantic middle ages that you're content living in its environment, even if you're not interested in the plot. I barely was. Robin and Marian aren't the most dynamic couple in film history, alas. Good Lord, Costner's acting is awful. But it makes me laugh, so there's that. The screenplay is nothing to write home about either. Robin: "What do we need that the forest cannot provide?" Me: "Antibiotics?" The story focused on the wrong character. No one ever stood a chance against Mr. "Cut your heart out with a spoon." Rickman singlehandedly bumped my rating up to 7 with one of his best performances. The extended cut restores scenes with Rickman which were removed allegedly because Costner didn't want to be upstaged. It's entirely possible. I like Mortiana, too. Unlike with LOTR, I genuinely wish I could appreciate the whole of this film rather than the parts. If you personally do, you are not as picky as I, for which I commend you. It is good if you want to relax for two hours.

sme_no_densetsu "Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves" was a blockbuster success in 1991, a time when Kevin Costner's popularity was at its apex. Even at the time, though, his casting as the quintessentially British folk hero raised eyebrows. Twenty-five years later, has the movie stood the test of time or is just another disposable Hollywood romp? The answer lies somewhere in between.Everyone knows the gist of the Robin Hood legend: a dashing thief who steals from the rich and gives to the poor, in love with the beautiful Maid Marion and pursued by the wicked Sheriff of Nottingham, the story has all of the ingredients for an old-fashioned swashbuckling adventure. Pen Denham's screenplay plays fast and loose with the legend, which is probably a good thing given all of the earlier versions of Robin Hood on film & television. While certain elements of the screenplay may be somewhat anachronistic or otherwise questionable, on its own merits the story is an entertaining one that captures the spirit of the character.Kevin Costner's portrayal of the title character is a sore spot for many viewers but I must admit that he does have a certain rogue-ish charm, even if he doesn't bother to attempt an English accent. In any case, he was fortunate to have some fine support from the likes of Morgan Freeman, Alan Rickman & Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio. In smaller roles, Michael McShane (Friar Tuck) & Michael Wincott (Guy of Gisbourne) make a particular impression.When it comes to Kevin Reynolds' direction, though, I'd have to say that I wasn't particularly impressed by it. Competent but with rarely anything of particular visual interest, the movie pales in comparison to the Technicolor splendour of the gold standard of Robin Hood movies, "The Adventures of Robin Hood". The Michael Kamen score is similarly undistinguished, though the theme song (performed & co-written by Bryan Adams) is admittedly rather good as far as rock ballads go.All in all, "Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves" is a pretty good popcorn movie but not an enduring classic on the level of "The Adventures of Robin Hood". Costner's performance may be problematic but it doesn't derail the entire movie. A standout performance from Alan Rickman (along with some other good work in supporting roles) propels the movie more than adequately.(By the way, I recommend the extended cut over the theatrical version of the film. It may add 12 minutes onto an already fairly long movie but it includes some material that fleshes out the characters a bit more.)