» » The Wonderful World of Disney Princess of Thieves (1995–2005)

The Wonderful World of Disney Princess of Thieves (1995–2005) HD online

The Wonderful World of Disney Princess of Thieves (1995–2005) HD online
Language: English
Category: TV Episode / Action / Adventure / Comedy / Drama / Family / Fantasy / Musical
Original Title: Princess of Thieves
Director: Peter Hewitt
Writers: Robin Lerner
Released: 1995–2005
Duration: 1h 28min
Video type: TV Episode
Story of Robin Hood's daughter Gwyn who takes up his role after he is captured by Prince John. King Richard is dead and his son Philip is the rightful heir, but he is in France and too afraid to face John. Can Gwyn find Philip and convince him to fight John and free her father?
Episode cast overview, first billed only:
Hannah Cresswell Hannah Cresswell - Marian (voice)
David Barrass David Barrass - Cardaggian
Malcolm McDowell Malcolm McDowell - Sheriff of Nottingham
Keira Knightley Keira Knightley - Gwyn
Del Synnott Del Synnott - Froderick
Stuart Wilson Stuart Wilson - Robin of Locksley
Crispin Letts Crispin Letts - Will Scarlett
Roger Ashton-Griffiths Roger Ashton-Griffiths - Friar Tuck
Jonathan Hyde Jonathan Hyde - Prince John
Adam Ryan Adam Ryan - Conrad
Brendon Gregory Brendon Gregory - Coachman
Stephen Moyer Stephen Moyer - Prince Philip
Gaye Brown Gaye Brown - Countess Tourtelot
Luke de Lacey Luke de Lacey - Tourtelot's Courier
Peter MacQueen Peter MacQueen - Captain

Reviews: [25]

  • avatar


    Everyone fighting against Prince John have a lot of passion for their cause. It's also great that they depict Gwyn and even the aging Robin as people who have a lot of spunk. "You have egg on your beard" says Robin to John while being tortured. That's a crack-up classic. The humor was done very well in this movie and it's a shame that it's underrated. I can't remember anything else that I should praise it for but it's a shame that I didn't tape it.
  • avatar


    I saw this movie on THE WONDERFUL WORLD OF Disney, and was immediately enchanted by it. In fact, I wrote to Disney repeatedly about how I could acquire it for my own collection, and got it at a Disney store, I think. I thought the actors were all good, but I especially liked Stuart Wilson, who played Robin Hood. He reminds me of Errol Flynn, who I thought played that part best in THE ADVENTURES OF ROBIN HOOD, made by MGM in 1938. The actors who played Prince John and the Sheriff of Nottingham were quite good, and I thought Kiera Knightley and the guy who played Prince Philip were excellent. I'm glad the movie was made, because I always wondered what happened to Robin and Marian after King Richard's return. If I would be asked who should see it, I'd say anyone 12 or older, as it includes references that are sexual.
  • avatar


    This movie is truly a classic. I know that some of the actor's skills are a bit suspect, but some of them, like Keira Knightly, had began to show some of their true talent in this film. Also, the script is incredibly witty in some places, and incredibly meaningful in the next. And finally, the idea behind the movie is excellent. 10/10 for me...a TV classic
  • avatar


    Of all the made for TV Disney movies that came out recently, this is one of the best. Keira Knightley is fine as the daughter of Robin Hood, and Malcolm McDowell is fine as the sheriff of Nottingham. Like all the made for TV movies though, the film is somewhat too flat to make it a real movie, but Keira and crew do it justice.

    Check it out.
  • avatar


    This film is not worth your time. I watched it when it premiered on TV out of a lack of anything better to do. And I remember thinking very clearly that the lead actress was strikingly attractive, but a very weak actress. Since then, Keira Knightley has proved that my initial impression might was far too hasty. In fact, her performance in Pride & Prejudice is absolutely Oscar-worthy. But her performance is not worth sitting through this mess. It is a weakly conceived, cheaply made film, and has none of the inherent pleasure of the original Robin Hood legends. The acting is, without exception, overwrought. And many of the scenes are simply painful in memory (like the bad-guy speech right when he is prepared to kill an aging Robin, which gives the secondary hero an opportunity to regain his sword. Are writers never going to tire of that scene?) Robin Hood enthusiasts and Knoightley fans alike should pass this one over.
  • avatar


    Kudos to ABC and Disney for making an MOW look like a real film. Can't believe this story wasn't told sooner. Hope it becomes a series. I could watch Robin Hood's daughter and the middle-aged merry men every week. Performances were strong. The actress who played Gwyn is beautiful and should have a long career. Way to go ABC!
  • avatar


    (No spoilers in the first two paragraphs.) Princess of Thieves (2001) takes the Robin Hood story one step forward. As the movie starts we see a very young Gwyn, Robin's daughter, waking in the morning and, as she goes about her routine, she turns into progressively older girls until we see the Gwen of this movie, Keira Knightly at 15. It was a good way to show the transition in just a minute or so of screen time. We find out that she has not seen Robin, her dad, in some time and eagerly awaited his arrival.

    What I liked about the development of the story is that young Gwen did not kick butt right away, after she decided to follow in her dad's footsteps. She made mistakes, sometimes getting others in trouble, but gradually learned how to harness her eagerness and wait for the right moments to take action. Even though she was only 15, a point dwelled on in the DVD's making of special, she was quite an accomplished actress, and held her own against the likes of Malcolm McDowell who plays the Sheriff of Nottingham, and Stuart Wilson who was Robin Hood.

    SPOILERS in the remaining comments. There is a conflict between the King's evil brother, and the King's illegitimate son, the young Prince, for the Crown. Against her father's wishes, Gwen cuts her hair short to be taken for a young boy, and sets out to save her captured dad. Along the way she and the young Prince get together, they help each other, eventually the evil brother is brought down and the Prince becomes the new King. Robin Hood, now a 50-ish man, is saved. The young King wishes Gwen could be his queen, but as a commoner she cannot. So he vows to never get married.
  • avatar


    This is not one of the best TV movies I've ever seen, but it isn't hateful. The acting of Kiera Knightley was excellent, as was Stuart Wilson(Robin Hood) and Crispin Letts (Will Scarlett). Most of the others were pretty terrible, but that's forgiving. The script needed a bit of a touch up in places, but I don't think there is even one line of Robin's that I didn't like. "You have egg in your beard..." he says to Prince John.

    The one thing that really bothered me in this movie was the sword fights. They looked as if these extras coordinated them on their own, and had about an hour to practice. They have no speed, no feeling, and I imagine that Bob Anderson would have had a fit with these.

    Apart from the sword fighting (and that annoying Pope near the end...), nothing really bothered me about this movie. If you're looking for something to watch while holding the hand of your date, avoid this movie at all cost. If you're baby-sitting several kids, or are just bored out of your mind, this movie is flawless. Other than that, it seems to be just average. I've seen better, but I've seen much worse *cough*Attack of the Clones*cough*
  • avatar


    Warning, Spoilers! ...but it was somewhat entertaining if only for the cheesiness factor. The story is one of the most predictable I've seen in a long time and the swordfights (if you can call them that) are beyond laughable, but nevertheless, both me and my SO spent an otherwise bored saturday night watching this made-for-tv drivel. People have compared this movie to the excellent "The Princess Bride" but as a slightly jaded and cynical viewer, I'd have to argue that "The Princess Bride" is a lot more enjoyable in every single aspect (swordfights - I weep when I even compare the two, dialogue, plot, characters, and just overall silliness) when compared to this movie. This movie is simply not as clever as "The Princess Bride" nor does it aspire to be, which works in some ways for its own made-for-tv charm.

    It's not horrendous by any means, but unless you're bored silly, I wouldn't rush out to see it either. My SO and I did get quite a few chuckles at several points in the movie, including the part where Froderick jumped in front of the Prince and saved his life (of course, the Sheriff happened to have only one arrow) and of course, the priceless "You got egg in your beard" line by Robin. Sure they had to use almost every medieval cliche in the book (including the worst kiss I've ever seen), but at least I didn't pay to watch it. The cast was overall mediocre and the plot would amuse those under 12 or anyone who is gullible enough to believe two guys can escape unnoticed in the night and find a canoe and THEN go across the English Channel without oars. Overall 4/10
  • avatar


    I'm not sure what to call this ending. I think the accepted HappyEnding would be something along the lines of Gwyn and Prince William getting married and living happily ever after. Unfortunately, the film did too much work to make Froderick entirely too likable and didn't do enough character building for the handsome prince. So instead of the accepted HappyEnding being what I wanted to see, instead I badly wished that SINCE Gwyn and Prince Charming couldn't marry, then over time, she "settled" for Froderick, who in my opinion was much more steady, sensible, handsome (except for the hairdo), and would make a much better husband.

    As it was, Disney settled for neither ending, leaving me rather frustrated - that is, only as frustrated as I get from watching a movie that didn't do a whole lot character-building-wise, or plot-wise for that matter.

    Overall, it's a movie that I can show to my kids and not be ashamed, for which I'm thankful - goodness knows there's few enough of those movies out there... buuuut, as far as entertainment value and real, true, honest-to-goodness quality goes- yeah, look elsewhere.
  • avatar


    This is one of the first movies in her early career as an actress. I thought it was well acted and the plot was pretty good. I won't watch it again, for myself it was just a one time thing. I think it would appeal to kids and to families more than to adults. I was a little disappointed with the ending.

    *Major Spoiler* She doesn't end up with the prince and I really wanted her to. I think they were going for a more realistic ending but honestly, life is realistic enough. I don't need "realism" from fictional movies. In the movies the girl is supposed to get the guy and vice versa. If you invest your time in a movie then you should get the happy ending. So no I won't watch it again.
  • avatar

    Arabella V.

    Laughable historically inaccuracies, poor script, laughable acting and hilarious story make this movie barely worth 2/10. In particular I would love to know how ~40 peasants with pointy sticks and a goat managed to defeat the king's army without casualties. Also how did they get from Nottingham to London with no horses so quickly (did they all ride on the same goat). I suspect the notorious prisons of the Tower Of London weren't actually made of cardboard and you couldn't really escape by getting a good run-up at the doors. Etc. Etc. Etc. Malcolm McDowell has made many poor movies in the past and this is no exception.
  • avatar

    Best West

    I enjoyed this film. It's really good for a TV movie. I think that Hallmark might of had a hand in this show. The DVD is not very good so I recomend that you see it on VHS. The set and costumes are well done to the way the book is set.
  • avatar


    The only reason why I watched this throughout the whole thing was because of Kierra Knightly because, out of all the other actors and actresses, Kierra Knightly was the only one that seemed to do a very decent job. It was not one of her best works, but she still somehow made it seem very believable just like any other movie I have seen with her in it, but everybody else just made it look like a bunch of animal crap that people just step into by accident and get disgusted with it after you stepped into it :P.

    There was not enough dialogue between Gwyn and Prince Phillip for there to be any kind of relationship whatsoever, there was no spark between them! I do not understand why Disney has to make the main girl character go with someone who is rich and handsome all because he is a prince. It's like they just HAVE to put the girl with a prince when there is was not enough dialouge and not enough spark between them! If anything, Gwyn should have been with Froderick because I could feel the spark between them more than with Gwyn and Prince Phillip because Froderick seemed to be more of the better man and more of Gwyn's type: brave, intelligent, and protective while, on the other hand, this was Prince Phillip's character: naive, cowardly, spoiled, and idiotic.

    Kierra Knightly's character had a slight development where in that one scene where her father and Will get captured, and Gwyn realizes how stupid it was to have followed her father, but she remained strong to get her father and Will back just so she could save the kingdom. Everybody else, not so much. Prince Phillip's character development, though, changed so quickly that you probably would not have the time to figure out why he decided to be so brave all of a sudden! And both Prince John and Sheriff of Nottingham are not bad guys, in my opinion, they seem more like spoiled little princes just trying to get what they want when their mommies won't let them have what they want.

    Here's one question, though, before I am to close this review: Exactly how in the hell is Prince Phillip, a prince of France, the son of King Richard, a king of England? Did he screw a French princess while he was there? If he did, that would have brought disgrace and shame to his name, and not to mention, the princess and the baby would have their titles revoked and been sent into exile! If Disney thinks that the King and Queen would have shown sympathy for their daughter all because she "loved" King Richard, they might as well think again! Gosh, Disney, how stupid can you get?!?!?!?! Why don't you look back in the history book, so that you can actually make these things more historically accurate!

    If you want a good, historical accurate movie, don't watch this! If you also want a very good and entertaining movie, don't watch this, not even for your kids! I would not even let my kids watch this piece of crap!
  • avatar


    ** out of ****

    I'm still not sold on the talent or starpower of Keira Knightley, the teenage British actress who took audiences by storm in 2003 by appearing in three critically acclaimed films, Bend it Like Beckham, Pirates of the Caribbean, and Love, Actually (of the three, I only found Beckham truly enjoyable). Princess of Thieves, apparently her first lead role (which she received probably because of her resemblance to Natalie Portman), is a decent outing as far as Disney television movies go (which are usually total crap), but it could have been one corker of a swashbuckler.

    The film tells the "what if" tale of Gwyn (Keira Knightley), the headstrong daughter of the Prince of Thieves himself, Robin Hood (Stuart Wilson). England is in a current reign of terror under the rule of Prince John (Jonathan Hyde), who has usurped the throne in his brother's absence due to the Crusades. News of the true King's imminent death arrives, leaving the throne in the hands of his son, Philip (Stephen Moyer). But Prince John and the Sheriff of Nottingham (Malcolm McDowell) conjure a plan to murder Philip, thus leaving the kingdom to John's hands.

    Robin Hood is assigned to escort Philip to safety in England, a task Gwyn is eager to take upon herself, but is promptly refused by her father. Upset, Gwyn dresses in masculine clothing and sets out to prove she has what it takes to match any man in battle. Matters are further complicated when she bumps into Philip, who poses as a valet to keep his true identity hidden and safe.

    Princess of Thieves is a TV movie, meaning I should probably go a little easier on it when it comes to aspects involving production values and special effects. But I can't ignore what I see, the movie clearly suffers from a lack of budget. Faraway shots of castles are obviously painted backgrounds and Prince John's army appears to consist of approximately two dozen individuals, not exactly a number that would set fear into the hearts of enemy soldiers.

    But when it comes to matters of acting and pure entertainment, the film is mostly on decent to solid foot, with the lead performers mostly impressive and the film moving at a fast and perfectly watchable pace. It's a movie you could gladly show your kids, who will probably adore it, and you yourself could also watch along without too much fidgeting.

    It's no surprise the best performances are delivered by seasoned thespians Malcolm McDowell and Stuart Wilson, but Keira Knightley is also competent as Gwyn, even if she remains an actress of very limited range. Still, she's got the rebellious, "kick ass chick" down. Knightley looks well over twenty in this picture, even though her actual age was probably closer to fifteen (wonder if she'll always look six years older than her real age) and I can't even begin to fathom how she could possibly pass for a boy when her looks are so feminine.

    It's unfortunate Knightley has no discernible romantic chemistry with lead Stephen Moyer, who's kinda bland at first, but is also occasionally charming as the handsome Prince Philip. Would you be surprised if I told you the movie includes a pointless subplot that's mired in teen movie cliché, with Gwyn's goofy-looking best friend sporting a crush on her even though her affections are for the prince. Would you also be surprised if the goofy best friend decided to take an arrow meant for the prince even though they were standing twenty feet away from each other, meaning the prince also had ample time to avoid this arrow he saw being aimed at him (lots of trees for him to hide behind)? To put it simply, they should have just excised this "love triangle" portion of the story entirely.

    As a swashbuckling adventure, Princess of Thieves is mostly a failure, with terribly choreographed battle scenes that are miniscule in scale. And because the movie is aimed at kids, the running time is well under ninety minutes, resulting in a rushed feeling throughout the film, particularly in the second half, with the Sheriff inexplicably in the rebels' hands in the blink of an eye (all this happening off screen) or the sudden appearance of the rebel army outside the enemy castle gates. There are still a handful of enjoyable moments within all the action, particularly the scenes involving archery. I especially liked the archery tournament, even if its outcome was blatantly predictable.

    But it's hard to ignore what a movie this could have been. With several more million dollars, larger and more convincing sets, full-blooded sword-clashing battles, and more intense romantic chemistry, this could have been one hell of a medieval adventure. But this is Disney, and any film made directly by this studio has obvious limits and expectations that have to be met, even if they hinder the simmering potential. Princess of Thieves is adequately disposable entertainment, but for a truly fun, funny, and romantic tale of a dashing prince falling for a beautiful commoner, see the far superior Ever After instead.
  • avatar


    Laughable storyline, unconvincing plot, very poor production and the actors are not invested in the movie.
  • avatar


    I've not seen this film. I only wanted to commend the reviewer kelley-8 who, in a review posted on 1 September 2001 - at the very least a full year before Keira Knightly made her breakthrough in Bend it Like Beckham, said "The actress who played Gwyn is beautiful and should have a long career." I was so impressed reading this. Of course, Knightly went on to become a famously successful Hollywood actor as Elizabeth Swan in Pirates of the Caribbean, but also got to play famous literary roles such as Anna Karenina and Elizabeth Bennett (in Pride and Prejudice). For such brilliant insight, someone should buy that man (or woman) a drink or six. :)
  • avatar


    If you are planning for a Saturday morning movie to watch in bed while eating breakfast, then this is your movie.

    The plot was simple and interesting, Keira Knightley was cute and convincing and the location were they shot was beautiful. I live in Bucharest, Romania and it was so easy and fun to determine all of the elements from the scenes that you can find only in this rustic country. There were some really old and amazing ruins from some medieval cities and then the forest and the Black Sea.

    The sword fighting in the movie was a mess, not convincing, not real at all, those men had no idea how to hold a sword, neither did Keira. She also, had no idea how to hold a bow, though she was more convincing. I can't believe she was 15 and that was her first lead role. It seems that she's been a star since forever and she didn't aged a day.
  • avatar


    We rented this movie because my 5 year old daughter liked the DVD cover featuring a "girl with the arrow". She had trouble following the storyline on her own - but I watched the movie with her and answered her questions. With the combination of a female heroin and lots of action, she really enjoyed the movie. Her 10 year old brother (who loves more advanced movies such as "Lord of the Rings") also enjoyed the movie.

    It's exactly what I expect from a Disney movie - interesting characters, lots of action and a simple plot line.

    A good family movie.
  • avatar


    While not exactly a brilliant masterpiece, this movie is solid, steady entertainment. The basic elements of a Robin Hood setting are there, but with a "daughter of Robin Hood" -approach to give a little variation to the theme.

    Even though it's a "new" plot, they've kept a lot of familiar Robin Hood -themes in the film, including an archery contest and the same old villains - what would a Robin Hood -story be without Prince John and the Sheriff of Nottingham, after all? And just like her father, Gwyn steals from the rich and gives to the poor, and desires justice and fairness to the people. All the classical elements are there, but with a little "girl power" in the mix.

    There's also a rather nice father-daughter dynamic going on, with Robin trying to shelter his daughter from the dangerous life he lives. Gwyn, on the other hand, won't have any of that nonsense, and is more than willing to prove that she's "just as good as a son". The movie doesn't really explore medieval gender roles all that deeply, though - Gwyn dressing as a man is made slightly fun of, but there's no shock nor any disapproval of what might have even be considered sinful back then. The clothes may be medieval, but the attitudes are rather modern, and in that sense this is a rather typical adventure film, that doesn't let historical accuracy get in the way of a good story.

    Keira Knightley does a delightfully energetic performance as the tomboyish and almost recklessly fearless Gwyn, and adds a lot to the freshness of the film. If you intend to watch this film because you're a fan of Keira Knightley, I doubt you'll be disappointed. The actors in general are giving solid, although maybe not the most memorable performances.

    If you're looking for an entertaining, sort of harmless "feelgood" adventure movie, and are a fan of medieval type of settings, this is the movie for you.
  • avatar


    I didn't expect much from an unpublicised Disney "sequwl" type movie, but I'm glad i took a chance. Having enjoyed Knightley's acting in several other films, and curious as to her performance in the lead, I settled down with the kids to watch it.

    What we found was charming, fast paced film full of the usual Disney comedy, twists and heroics. Keira's boyish enthusiasm from Bend It Like Beckham is evident here too as she runs about with the Merry Men. The other most impressive roles were the villains, whose over the top yet convincing performances add to that Disney feel.

    i'd recommend any kids to watch it, or even an adult in need of a bit of fun.
  • avatar


    The Princess of Thieves is a family movie and as such we enjoyed it for its lack of blood, less than fearsome fight sequences, and general lightness. As the director says on the DVD, 'this is melodrama.' Since Robin Hood is a legendary character, it seems appropriate that any film about him not take itself too seriously.

    Anyone over the age of twelve will deem this film banal and simplistic, but for young movie viewers, this film is perfect fit to their sensibilities. We saw many parallels with 'The Princess Bride', another charming melodrama with more comedy. Watch this film with three unjaded, young girls and see how charming this film can be. The plot is not too complicated. The production values are good enough. Plenty of action while the story never drags. Granted, 'The Princess of Thieves' is not as memorable as 'The Princess Bride', but the intended audiences are different.

    We could use more good, light family movies like The Princess of Thieves.
  • avatar


    I enjoyed watching this movie. It is well made with an interesting script and good acting performances. Kiera Knightly, especially, is wonderful to watch.

    Scriptwise it is fairly formulaic. Basic themes are: teenage coming of age, taking responsibility and the danger of the misuse of power.

    The thing that really grated was the scriptwriters wilful lack of knowledge of the powers of English kings.

    Watch it, it's amusing entertainment but of little enduring value.
  • avatar


    I mean, they fight like lads. Even a girl will keep a sword more strongly than this. There is a scene where a wood door is blown away with one foot kick. Peter Hewitt (I) must never have seen a wood door or he must think that in good old England, the wood doors must be something like todays done-in-a-day houses in US.

    Now, don't get me wrong, I like the story and all. I appreciate the fact that it's not a bloody movie. But it could use a director who knows his work better than this one.
  • avatar


    It's 1184 Nottingham, England. During reign of King Richard the Lionheart, a girl is born to Robin and Marion. Sheriff of Nottingham (Malcolm McDowell) would have placed a price on the son's head but is unconcerned about a girl. Gwyn (Keira Knightley) grows up under the tyrannical rule of Prince John for his absent brother King Richard. Her father Robin of Locksley is often away and her mother Marion is pass. Richard is gravely injured and heir to the throne Prince Philip (Stephen Moyer) is coming from France. Robin and Will Scarlett go off to aid Philip. Gwyn sets off to help dressed as a boy helped by friend Froderick despite her father forbidding it. Robin and Will are captured while Gwyn runs into Philip pretending to be a servant.

    This should a lot simpler. Instead there is a lot of political intrigue. It's also way too serious. The material is treated like a Shakespearian play. The production is pretty good considering this is a TV movie. Keira Knightley is great at such a young age. Stephen Moyer is too old especially acting opposite Keira. The chemistry is about what one expects from a 30 year old with jailbait Keira. It's a little creepy. Even Froderick is annoying in his puppy love mode. Keira is great though.