DeniReview: Robin Hood (2010) - Russell Crowe
May 22nd 2010 05:35
Category: Adventure
Rating: ** out of 5 stars (2/5)
This movie was such a bore! It took me 3 days to finish watching it. Ridley Scott is one of my favorite directors, Russell Crowe is a great actor and Cate Blanchett is the next Meryl Streep as far as I'm concerned but those three were not enough to save this film.
I think it's a huge mistake to tamper with a "legend" that has already been imprinted in our minds as the charming terror of Sherwood Forrest who robs from the rich and give to the poor with the aid of his merry men. This has been our impression of the folk hero since as far back as we can remember. The Kevin Costner version, at least, got the essence of who Robin Hood was supposed to be and it was at least a fun watch, although not great. This was the reincarnation of Gladiator. The Robin Hood we grew up with is notably absent.
Sure this movie wants to establish how the legend began and I understand that, this is pre-legend! I thought it clever in that regard, how he obtained the moniker "Robin Hood", etc. etc. I liked it but, well what can I say, it was just not enough. I would have been happy if we were given some glimpses into the man he was to become. Robin Hood was not some muscle-bound machismo warrior, what made him interesting was his wit and intelligence - here, he's just all brawn.
In this movie Robin is an archer, a commoner, in the Third
Crusade with his comrades, Will Scarlett (Scott Grimes), Alan A'Dale (Alan Doyle), and Little John (Kevin Durand). King Richard has been killed in battle and on their return home after spending 10 years fighting abroad, they come across an ambush of the King's Royal Guard by Sir Godfrey (Mark Strong) an English traitor, who had been ordered to assassinate the King - after discovering the King is already dead, Robin and his men chase Godfrey and his goons off and Robin takes the identity of the slain nobleman. He promises the dying Robert Loxley that he will return his sword to his father in Nottingham, thus the legend begins.
King Richard's brother, now King John (Oscar Isaac) stirs up trouble by raising taxes and Sir Godfrey, unbeknownst to the new King has a secret allegiance with France, causes trouble which leads to an invasion on English soil by the French. Robin Hood must gain the aid of the English Barons to take arms in another war that leads the movie's climactic ending.
Yeah yeah yeah, a fantastic battle scene - nicely choreographed, Russ whacking people with a sword - great! Brilliant! It's all well and good and the movie is beautifully shot, Ridley is excellent with the direction but still this could have been a story about anyone. I was so disappointed in Cate Blanchett's interpretation of Maid Marion - I guess it's not her fault. Maid Marion is a widow, who was married to Robert Loxley, the man whose identity Robin has taken. Don't get me wrong, Cate played her with the grace of the brilliant actress she is, but Maid Marion is not some dignified stately widow who rarely smiles. Because of the change in character, this eliminated any fun moments of flirtation and verbal repartee between her and Robin, that could have easily made those slow moments in the movie more enjoyable as we see the love story blossom between these two.
Oh well, it was a good attempt to give the "legend" of Robin Hood some depth instead of continuing on with the light-hearted legend we are accustomed to and I'm all for that but there should be a balance and we must still be able to recognize the folk hero we've come to know and love. I can only hope that there will be a sequel that will even out the serious tone of this movie.
I would recommend waiting for the DVD. I'm sorry to say this was a huge disappointment.
Crowe as Robin Hood
I think it's a huge mistake to tamper with a "legend" that has already been imprinted in our minds as the charming terror of Sherwood Forrest who robs from the rich and give to the poor with the aid of his merry men. This has been our impression of the folk hero since as far back as we can remember. The Kevin Costner version, at least, got the essence of who Robin Hood was supposed to be and it was at least a fun watch, although not great. This was the reincarnation of Gladiator. The Robin Hood we grew up with is notably absent.
Sure this movie wants to establish how the legend began and I understand that, this is pre-legend! I thought it clever in that regard, how he obtained the moniker "Robin Hood", etc. etc. I liked it but, well what can I say, it was just not enough. I would have been happy if we were given some glimpses into the man he was to become. Robin Hood was not some muscle-bound machismo warrior, what made him interesting was his wit and intelligence - here, he's just all brawn.
In this movie Robin is an archer, a commoner, in the Third
King Richard's brother, now King John (Oscar Isaac) stirs up trouble by raising taxes and Sir Godfrey, unbeknownst to the new King has a secret allegiance with France, causes trouble which leads to an invasion on English soil by the French. Robin Hood must gain the aid of the English Barons to take arms in another war that leads the movie's climactic ending.
Oh well, it was a good attempt to give the "legend" of Robin Hood some depth instead of continuing on with the light-hearted legend we are accustomed to and I'm all for that but there should be a balance and we must still be able to recognize the folk hero we've come to know and love. I can only hope that there will be a sequel that will even out the serious tone of this movie.
I would recommend waiting for the DVD. I'm sorry to say this was a huge disappointment.
| 95 |
| Vote |
Add To: 
subscribe to this blog
