Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves Review

      Robin Hood of Nottingham is a popular figure in English folklore. From the 20th through the 21st century, many films have been made about the outlaw icon. Each film is another interpretation of many. The main tale of Robin Hood is generally known by everyone. Robin Hood steals from the rich and gives to the poor with the help of his gang. The role of Robin Hood has been played by many notorious actors such as Frank Sinatra, Russel Crowe, and Kevin Costner. Costner's portrayal of Robin Hood came in the the 1991 film Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves. Other notable actors in this film included Alan Rickman and Morgan Freeman.
      From what I have noticed, this film seems to be liked and hated at both extremes. Watching the film as a twenty-year-old man (and with the maturity of a twenty-year-old man I'd like to think), I found it to be a bit corny; from Robin Hood's American accent, over the top fighting scenes, and the use of a Bryan Adams song in the love scene. I could see why many people would enjoy the film. Many people grew up with this film and have a personal attachment, there are many Kevin Costner fans out there, and he was at the high point of his career when this movie was released back in 1991, and I could see history fans and historians finding some satisfaction in this film as well.
      Of course, Robin Hood is a fictional character. As I watched this film, I began to wonder if this film held any historical ground. It was not until the first major conflict in the film until I saw what historical grounds the movie held; it was in the weaponry, armor, and structures. Many of the weapons we discussed appeared in the movie. Robin Hood, obviously notorious for his archery skills, shot a long bow as tell as he was. The rest of the characters were seen using crossbows, lances, and of course swords. The story was set late in the 12th century so we should see broader swords and padded armor. If any armor was being worn by Robin Hood and his gang, it was padded armor. Chain mail was seen on soldiers and their helmets were correct from what we studied. (the Roman based helmet with the nasal guard) From what I could see of the structures in the film, many aspects of what we studied were built into the set. The castles appeared to be built of stone. The walls were tall and had arrow loops throughout. If there were any other historical accuracies, it was how the chivalry in war was held. MILD SPOILER ALERT When Robin Hood's gang fell to the Sheriff of Nottingham's forces, they did not simply kill them, but held them captive. Each conflict was strategically planned and acted out. Even though the story was not based on actual historical events, it was a delight to see these historically correct aspects.
      If there are any themes to this movie, it is to stand up for what you think is right, aka justice. The Sheriff of Nottingham was basically bullying the area and Robin Hood and his men stood up to him. Of course Robin Hood had more motivation than anyone with the goal of avenging his father's death. (who was killed by the sheriff) The director made the sheriff out to be an awful human being through creepy attempts to wow Maid Marian to stabbing his own cousin. It would be inhuman for the viewer to not want justice served to the Sheriff. Watching the movie today, it seems a bit out-dated. Despite, the period accurate weapons and armor, it comes off a bit corny. (In my opinion) Though I like the fable and story of Robin Hood, this movie did not fit well with me. Maybe I'd like more if I had a connection to the film like I saw it when I was younger, but today I can't take the film too seriously.