Giovanny The Godfather (giovannythegodfather)

Loosely serving as a sequel to the tale of Robin Hood, The Princess of Thieves follows the woodsy bandit's headstrong daughter, Gwyn (Keira Knightley), in a series of lackluster events meant to appeal to young female teens. A modern-minded lass, Gwyn rejects her father's commands to stay safely at home, having trained in archery and "boyish" skills during his many long absences in service of Richard the Lionhearted. She soon pairs up with Richard's son, Prince Philip (Stephen Moyer), whose claim to the throne ? and life ? is being threatened by Prince John (Jonathan Hyde). Naturally, Philip needs Gwyn's help, and soon, so does Robin Hood (Stuart Wilson) himself, who is imprisoned by the villainous Sheriff of Nottingham (Malcolm McDowell).

The Princess of Thieves is harmless, "family-safe" entertainment, but it's also fairly boring. There's little of the gay swashbuckling fun that made classics like Errol Flynn's Adventures of Robin Hood so energetic and thrilling. Far more emphasis is placed upon Gwyn's spirited assertions of equality and her budding romance with Philip. The appropriately named Knightley gives an enthusiastic turn as the gamine Gwyn, but chopped hair and loose clothing cannot possibly hide her decidedly feminine visage ? not even a blind man could mistake this Winona Ryder-esque beauty for a boy. Though the elder supporting players add a palpable weight to the proceedings, The Princess of Thieves feels exactly like what it is: a Disney made-for-TV movie. Rather than being robbed of ducats at the video store, try to catch Thieves like this on television for free.

`Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves" is a murky, unfocused, violent and depressing version of the classic story, with little of the lightheartedness and romance we expect from Robin Hood. It's shot mostly at night or in gloomy forests, beneath overcasts or by flickering firelight or in gloomy dungeons, which is all very well for the atmosphere, but makes the action scenes almost impossible to follow.

Among the movie's many problems: Kevin Costner plays a tortured, thoughtful Robin Hood, totally lacking in the joy of living that we associate with the character. The romance between Robin and Maid Marian (Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio) seems 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. The most colorful character is the villain, the Sheriff of Nottingham (Alan Rickman), but both the character and the performance are inappropriate for this film.

And the amount of gore is appalling in a film that will presumably be aimed at a family market.

To begin with the gore: The movie begins with a hand being chopped off, and continues with various amputations, gorings, stabbings, burnings, floggings, hangings (a small boy is one of the intended hanging victims), explosions, and falls from great heights, before reaching a climax of sorts as the Sheriff of Nottingham attempts to rape Maid Marian, and has just succeeded in spreading her legs (a graphic, floor-level shot here) before Robin Hood comes swinging in through the window to save her.

Then there is the general moral climate of the movie, in which all of the priests are seen as corrupt or drunken swine, and the Sheriff consults an old crone in a dungeon who foretells the future by reading blood and chicken bones. The leading cleric of Nottingham is a turncoat and a liar, who marries Marian to the Sheriff against her will while the castle is under siege. You know we have entered a shaky liturgical era when Friar Tuck is the most religious person in the film.

The movie casts Robin Hood as sort of a populist guerrilla, a Che Guevera with bow and arrow who lives with his followers in Sherwood Forest and intercepts the king's mail by using tunnels and camouflaged hiding places under the forest floor, Viet Cong-style.

His best friend and right-hand man is a Moor (Morgan Freeman), who he has brought back from the holy land after saving his life in prison. His biggest disciplinary problem is a young hothead (Christian Slater), who is so obviously bursting with a secret he desires to share that it's amazing Robin is able to wait almost until the end of the movie before learning it.

Much has been said about Kevin Costner's British accent, or lack of same, in advance publicity about the movie. Neither the accent nor the lack of same bothered me in the slightest. What bothered me was that the filmmakers never found the right tone for Costner to use, no matter what his accent. He isn't joyous, or robust, or comical, or heroic, but more of a thoughtful, civilized, socially responsible Robin Hood, sort of a nonpartisan saint who wants to preserve the kingdom for the absent Richard the Lionhearted.

Costner plays Robin Hood as if he were Alan Alda.

Alan Rickman, in complete contrast, plays the Sheriff as if he were David Letterman: He's a wicked, droll, sly, witty master of the put-down and one-liners, who rolls his eyes in exasperation when Robin comes bursting in to interrupt the rape. Rickman's performance has nothing to do with anything else in the movie, and indeed seems to proceed from a uniquely personal set of assumptions about what century, universe, etc., the story is set in, but at least when Rickman appears on the screen we perk up, because we know we'll be entertained, at whatever cost to the story.

The only major player who finds the right tone and voice for all of his scenes is Morgan Freeman, as the Moor, who finds humor when it is needed, courage when it is required, and somehow even survives being given a running joke that has to be carefully nurtured from one end of the movie to the other. Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio does what she can with Marian, but must have been confused when the screenplay gave her a thoughtful, independent woman in the earlier scenes, and then turned her into a cliched damsel in distress at the end.

The costumes look as if they have things growing in them.

The treehouses in Sherwood Forest permit Robin and his men to engage in a key battle scene that looks like a cross between "Tarzan" and the savage tribesmen at the end of "Apocalypse Now." (This battle deserves greater analysis. In it, hired Celtic mercenaries attack Robin's band and are all but destroyed, after which they only then use their fire catapults, and all but destroy Robin's side, after which, for the later assault on the castle, Robin hardly seems to have lost a man.) The music is your standard rum-dummy-dum false epic dirge kind of stuff. The editing is desperate. The most depressing thing about the movie is that children will attend it expecting to have a good time.

Marlon Brando is Vito Corleone, also known as "The Godfather", who is head of one of the most powerful mafia families in America. Don Vito is a fair but ruthless man who runs much of his business by doing favours and expecting favours in return. The Corleone family are drawn into a bitter and violent war with other mafia families over their refusal to participate in the lucrative but dangerous drug trade. Don Vito is shot but the attempt on his life does not succeed - he is seriously injured rather than killed. While Don Vito is in hospital, control of the family passes to his eldest son Sonny (James Caan). Sonny is a hot-head, and with his contributions the war continues to escalate. Don Vito's youngest son is Michael (Al Pacino). He has stayed outside the family business, and his father had aspirations of him holding some legitimate position of power, perhaps through politics. When Don Vito is shot, however, Michael returns home to do what he can to help the family through the crisis. He protects his father against the killers trying to finish what they have started. Michael starts to show promise in this violent world. He takes his revenge against those trying to kill his father, shooting them during a meeting at a restaurant. Ultimately, Sonny is shot and now it is Michael who finds himself with all the responsibility. It may not be possible for a film to be faultless, but this certainly comes close. The ensemble cast are wholly convincing, and there are a string of well-known names involved who weren't at all familiar until this film. The story progresses at perfectly measured pace, moving almost gently between moments of calculated violence. The cinematography and direction are picture-perfect, with immaculate attention to detail. Every aspect of life in those turbulent times is faithfully recreated with great accuracy. "The Godfather" is a credit to all involved.

This second part to the epic tale of the Corleone crime family stars both Robert De Niro as young Vito Corleone and Al Pacino as his son Michael, in two separate storylines set in different times. Michael's story starts after the events of "The Godfather". Now becoming an ever-more-capable crime boss, he is attempting to expand his family's influence in Las Vegas, Hollywood and revolutionary Cuba. Problems emerge when there is an attack on Michael and his family, and it appears that the family were betrayed by Michael's older brother Fredo (John Cazale). There are also the inevitable conflicts with other crime bosses to deal with. Michael has been trying to make the family business legitimate, which is what his wife Kay (Diane Keaton) wants, but that is not easy. And now Michael has to find out who really was behind the attack on him Looking back into the past, Vito's life before the events of "The Godfather" is that of an immigrant trying to make good. Family business in Sicily when Vito is a small boy results in the killing of the rest of his family. The boy immigrates to America, though it is hard to see how he could survive - he is a sickly child on arrival. However, even as a boy Vito is resourceful and learns to get by. Soon he is being noticed by many of the people in his ghetto neighbourhood - they know him as someone who can do almost any favour for those prepared to do him a future favour in return. It is extremely rare for a sequel to be as good as the film on which it is based, especially when that film may be one of the greatest ever made, but "The Godfather - Part II" very nearly does so. The twin threads of Michael and Vito's stories, which could have been confusing, are each distinct and coherent due to strong direction. The two stories are both interesting, and fill in the background to the Corleone family as well as show the changes life has wrought on Michael. Like its predecessor, it is beautifully made with immaculate attention to detail, and once again the strong cast give the story depth and substance. It may be that "The Godfather" pips this one to the post, but only by the narrowest margin.