Princess of Thieves (2001) Reviewed

I would be remiss if I did not admit that my sole motivation in watching Princess of Thieves (2001) was to see Keira Knightley. I did not expect to see a masterpiece. Let’s be honest, she is usually the only redeeming feature of most of the movies she has been in, and often that isn’t enough to redeem the movie itself. This was no exception. When we noticed that Malcolm McDowell was in the cast (playing the Sheriff of Nottingham), my brother remarked that usually McDowell’s name in the credits has alone been the deciding factor in dissuading him from renting many a movie. Given McDowell’s record, I had to concede Danny Boy had a point. “What have we seen that McDowell was good in?” I asked, trying to recall. A Clockwork Orange — that’s about it. Danny Boy also liked him in Cat People. Looking at IMDb.com, I notice he was also in some early episodes of Lexx, but I still haven’t seen the first season, so I can’t comment on that.

Back to the topic (Princess of Thieves), this British television movie employed many of the wearisome clichés found in adventure movies, combined with some cartoonishly exaggerated performances (the worst offender being McDowell) [Edit: On second thought, the worst offender by far was Jonathan Hyde, who played Prince John in a performance reminiscent of Jeremy Irons in Dungeons & Dragons], and some unconvincing combat scenes. It seems as if this movie was made primarily to showcase Knightley’s charms. Charms she may have (I did mention that she was the only reason I watched it), but they are not enough to salvage this movie. [Edit: However, she is in the movie a lot, and at least it isn't Pirates of the Caribbean. This movie may not be good, but it's worth watching if you like Knightley.]

  • Writing: Poor
  • Directing: Mediocre
  • Acting: Mediocre
  • Cinematography: Fair
  • Fight Choreography: Mediocre
  • [Edit: Keira Knightley's Charms: Great]

Overall Rating: Mediocre
Swashbuckling Rank: Poor

Tags:

2 Responses to “Princess of Thieves (2001) Reviewed”

  1. Kelly says:

    Time After Time, Gordon. One of my favorite movies EVAH. We don’t diss the McDowell.

    Humph.

  2. Cuparius says:

    The flak is not unexpected, but I must admit I, too, quite liked Time After Time when I first saw it. Come to think of it, I don’t think I’ve seen it since the 1980s. It might be worth revisiting.

    I didn’t say he never made a good movie. It’s just that, well, he was awful in this one. And he is not known for his selectivity in scripts.

    Also, see the “Edit” in the original entry.

    P.S. I admit I have not seen all of his movies. Actually, I’m planning to rent a few that may or may not prove my brother’s acid test for movie quality. We shall see…