Robin Hood

[RomaVicta]

What a bloated mess. A lot of sequences strung together trying to be about five other movies including: The Return of Martin Guerre, Braveheart, and, get this, Saving Private Ryan (opening sequence).

They go overboard on making Marion a strong character (she takes up the sword at one point) and there are a few too many musical numbers (gleeful Dark Ages parties with singing and dancing).

They also pretty much throw all previous versions of the story out the window.

Ridley Scott shoots beautiful period pieces, but he's clueless without a solid script.

 

[YoLaDu]

thanks RV, good to know. I was probably going to avoid that movie regardless. Was not a fan of Gladiator, nor most of Ridley Scott's catalogue; figured this was going to be a mess as well.

Alien, Blackhawk Down and Blade Runner are the only three films he has directed that i thought rose above mediocre. And those are all 10 and 30 years ago.

 

[uisge beatha]

In reply to:

---

---

 

[RomaVicta]

We're knights of the Round Table
We dance when 'er we're able

And now for something completely different.

I'm surprised there is so little response to a thread about this movie. It looks like it did okay at the box office. Anybody else seen it?

 

[Joe Fan]

I saw it. Seemed that they were deperately trying to set up a sequel.

The female lead brandishing a big deadly weapon has become proper etiquette for Hollywood. They started it, now they cant stop it. Forget that the sword probably weighed almost as much as she did. And her charging into battle against a heavily armored French Army beside a pack of feral boys who wore no armor while riding shetland ponies was completely over the top. (or were those chihuahuas?) They had to have laughed when they filmed that. Twas Monty Python-esque

I do admit to enjoying the sweeping imagery of medieval England and France, especially when they came up river to 12th century London.

Nontheless, Crowe seems kinda old to just be at the beginning of his career as Robin Hood running through the forest (in tights).

 

[Perham1]

I've also heard bad things about this Hood version.

It's kinda supposed to be a prequel, per some reviews.

That, and Crowe is a tool.

 

[MaduroUTMB]

I enjoyed it, and thought that Scott did a good job of fitting it to real historical events.

 

[texas_ex2000]

In reply to:

---

---

 

[RomaVicta]

Master and Commander is good, too. I think Scott freely admits that story is not his thing. He is often called a production designer director because of the visual richness of all of his films even the bad ones.

 

[texas_ex2000]

Master and Commander got a well deserved Best Picture Oscar nomination. Great movie.

 

[Third Coast]

Hard to believe it's been 30 years since Alien.

 

[LonghornsWin]

Agree with OP.

This was tedious. Maid Marian was more like GI Jane and it was pretty boring overall.

Pretty yes, good movie, no.

 

[YoLaDu]

Master and Commander was directed by Peter Weir.

 

[RomaVicta]

I believe Peter Weir is a pen name used by Ridley Scott. Same guy. I'm absolutely sure of it. I can't believe you didn't know that, Yo.

 

[FAST FRED]

I saw it.

Worth a rental for its depiction of Medieval life and warfare, if you'd dig seeing that on screen.

Not otherwise very memorable, IMHO.

I think the screenplay and entire movie compares to director Ridley Scott's "Kingdom of Heaven," offering similar favorable and failing features.

Great attention is paid to period detail and there's lots of exciting action, but the story in both these films is confusingly told, IMO.

If you go to be entertained and watch the pictures, you won't mind that so much, but if you go as a history buff with an analytical mind you'll probably be bothered, as I was, by Scott's storytelling style.

The back story of how Robin Hood came to be is the subject here, suggesting that a sequel could be coming that's set more in Sherwood Forest.

And more wenching would have been good.

Just my opinion.

 

[SWHorn]

It wasn't bad. "Mildy entertaining" and "I wasn't bored" are fair assessments.

I concur with Fast Fred.

 

[Texanne]

The best version of Robin Hood, IMO, is the Disney cartoon, in which Robin Hood is played by a very foxy fox.

 

[Lake_Travis_Horn]

It was a decent movie, certainly not great. And it wasn't about Robin Hood. They took some of the character names, but they made up their own story with little actual correlation to the legends.

 

[Murphy'sBoy]

Go see Errol Flynn As RH at the Paramount on June 26-27 instead

 

[FAST FRED]

That one from 1938 is still my favorite Robin Hood flick.

The sword fight between Errol Flynn and Basil Rathbone is one of the best ever, even though much of it is shown only as shadows on the wall.

I've watched it many times since first seeing it as a kid and I've decided it could have used more wenching too.

Why you'd ever make a Robin Hood flick for adults without enough wenching is beyond me.

The Disney "Robin Hood" cartoon is very good as backstory for kids who've not yet begun to wench.

I enjoyed watching it with my three young ones.

Sir Walter Scott's "Ivanhoe" is another movie story worth a good remake, IMHO.

This time do it with Scarlett Johansson in the Joan Fountaine role as Rowena and Anne Hathaway or Penelope Cruz in Elizabeth Taylor's role as Rebecca and with LOTS OF WENCHING.

At least that Showtime miniseries "The Tudors" got the wenching part right.

BTW, 1938 through 1943, when I was born, were great moviemaking years.

Check it out:

The Link

Many of those films are still great and have, indeed, started entire genres of cinema.

And few of them, IMHO, should have ever been or ever be redone, reimagined, paid homage to, inspired, been copied or remade to waste my movie viewing time without including A WHOLE LOT MORE ON SCREEN WENCHING.

JMO.