Today marks the 25th anniversary of Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves, a film ten-year old me couldn’t wait to see as soon as possible. Much hype surrounded Kevin Costner’s adaptation of the swashbuckling hero to the common-folk, because he was (believe it or not) probably the biggest star in Hollywood at the time. Fresh off his Oscar success with Dances With Wolves, Costner would play the titular hero in a big, sweeping, epic take on the classic character Errol Flynn made famous some 50 years earlier.
Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves was sold as a boisterous family adventure full of adventure and “fun.” There was Costner, Morgan Freeman, and the deliciously villainous Alan Rickman. Toy companies released action figures ahead of time, because I remember having one of each. And then, the film started, and almost immediately a prisoner’s hands are chopped off…
Wait, what?
Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves is one of the weirdest, most mishandled summer “family” films of all time. Mostly because it’s anything but family friendly. For me, my mother never really bothered censoring me because she knew I knew the difference between fantasy and reality. But she had to be a little confused when the prisoner’s hands were chopped off, when an evil witch spit into a plate full of blood and bones (and later caught Morgan Freeman’s helicoptering, gigantic blade in the chest sending her hurtling back through the air), and when Maid Marian was being sexually assaulted near the film’s climax. Tonally, Prince of Thieves wanted the best of both worlds, and didn’t really get either right.
Kevin Costner is woefully wrong as Robin of Locksley. Not because he’s a bad actor – I particularly enjoy his dry delivery in most settings – but because his accent is so insanely uneven, disappearing and reappearing from scene to scene. Rumor had it that director Kevin Reynolds and Costner had arguments back and forth about Costner’s English accent and whether or not he should bother using it. Reynolds probably realized, when Costner employed the Brit cadence, that he sounded ridiculous. As a form of protest, Costner would use the accent when he and Reynolds were arguing, which was apparently often, and he would just use his own voice when they weren’t in a squabble. Sounds incredibly mature.
Aside from his shifting accent, Costner’s capable when it comes to the action, though he and Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio’s Maid Marian have little to no chemistry. Their scenes are wooden and burning with all the desire of a visit to the DMV. Then there was Christian Slater’s “pre-emo” Will Scarlett, a whiny bitch of the highest order. In fact, the Merry Men never seemed merry or particularly inspired by Robin’s leadership, because Costner’s Robin was a limp leader of men.
On top of performances coming from every which direction, Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves is an ugly movie. It’s drab and murky, and everything looks sickly and wet. This is a story adapted time and time again, and is often a high-flying adventure film full of colorful characters. Reynolds and Co. were clearly going for a more realistic take on the legend of Robin Hood, but sometimes too much reality is a bad thing. This era in the UK certainly was a drab and unforgiving environment, but in a summer blockbuster aimed at children and families, perhaps a little more vibrance in the settings and a little less darkness and macabre art direction would have been a better move.
Not all is lost with Prince of Thieves, however, because of Alan Rickman. Rickman turned down the Sheriff of Nottingham role a few times before he was finally granted carte blanche to interpret the character in any way he wanted. And boy, did he have fun with it. Here is one of the pinnacles of gleeful scenery-chewing performances, as Rickman seems almost unable to contain himself from moment to moment. His manic performances goes over the top, then find another top above that to go over. It’s wonderful to just watch Rickman seemingly try and steal the movie from everyone around him, and for the most part he succeeds in doing just that. He damn near saves the movie singlehandedly.
There are a few things that work in this incredibly weird Robin Hood tale, but more things that fail in profound ways. Prince of Thieves was a pre-packaged summer flick that delivered on none of its intended promise, and screamed of disagreements and troubled production, something that would sadly become commonplace with Costner in the mid-90s as his star began fading under the weight of increasingly costly failures. But hey, we’ll always have Alan Rickman.
Hart’s War, while a wonderfully unique and charming legal thriller, wasn’t big on complex or memorable characters save for Bruce Willis and Colin Farrell. Colin’s performance as the titular hero is notable mostly for his weakness. In fact Lt. Thomas Hart is meant to be a physically and mentally weak man compared to the more hardened soldiers around him without being a doormat. He can’t be a doormat because his ideals are stronger than theirs. That’s the movie and that’s hard. It’s simply a difficult person to try and get in touch with and Farrell did it wonderfully.
Miami Vice, the TV Show, is extremely iconic as are both the Sonny and Rico characters. Colin is not known for ‘bad boy’ action roles but his reimagining of Sonny Crockett was perfect for the film. He was equal parts classic cowboy police detective, (Dirty Harry/Martin Riggs) and believably complex human being. Not trying to make himself a carbon copy or an updated version of Don Johnson really helped make the movie and the character feel distinct and real, whether or not the actual film was any good and it was sadly mediocre.
Colin’s role as troubled writer Marty will always be a very great use of Colin Farell for its complete irony. Farrell is mostly remembered for playing rather crazed characters, but he is not one of the psychopaths in a film called Seven Psychopaths. In fact he’s played as the straight man to Sam Rockwell and Christopher Walken, both also known for playing crazy. Marty’s character makes the film with his combination ‘holier than thou writer’ and ‘overly done with this straight man’ while actually going through incredibly powerful character development.
No one liked Daredevil, even the directors cut with the complete story was mediocre. The only good thing about the movie was Colin’s portrayl of an Irish version of infamous comic book villain Bullseye. Bullseye was the quintessential psycho assassin. He was over the top: he had jerky movement, killed people for minor infractions or for minor gain and simply emoted lunacy excellently. He was the perfect antagonist for Affleck’s slightly more crazed then brooding take on Matt Murdock. Colin will forever be the king of crazy because of this role.
In Bruges is arguably Colin’s best movie as well as his more memorable role. Ray, an emotionally and mentally unstable hit man is a perfect role for Colin Farrell coming after Daredevil; except Ray is the good guy. He shot the wrong person and now he’s beating himself up for it. The film is Ray’s journey of working through his grief and deciding to move on, but along the way he’s a total wreck of a person with no idea of where his life is going or what to do. The role is acted perfectly and leaves a permanent impression of Colin’s ability as an actor.
