Robin Hood Reboot: Avengers Style

Were the Moors black though? I always thought their complexion was like the modern day Middle Eastern/North African Arab.

Moors are technically North Africans of Berber and Arab descent but Medieval and early modern Europeans variously applied the name to Sub-Saharan Africans, Arabs, Berbers and Muslim Europeans.
 
I still am really disappointed that we're getting a dark gritty Robin Hood origin. I mean why? We just got that in 09 and it didn't work.

I wish we could get a Pirates of the Caribbean, Guy Ritchie Sherlock Holmes fun type Robin Hood movie. Hell even the tone that the new Guy Ritchie King Arthur seems to be going for seems a better fit for Robin Hood then King Arrhur
 
Has Will Scarlett ever been older than Robin before?


Eh, who cares... this sounds like sh** anyway.
 
Don't give a **** about this, but Dornan is bae, so hey. :o
 
New “Robin Hood” To Be A ‘Period John Wick’

By
Garth Franklin -

Thursday, February 2nd 2017 4:24 am
http://cdn3.darkhorizons.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/new-robin-hood-to-be-a-period-john-wick.jpg
With “Robin Hood” having been told on screen so many times, it comes as little surprise that the last big-budget studio attempt at a more gritty version of the character – namely Ridley Scott’s 2010 effort – flopped at the box-office.
That didn’t deter Lionsgate though from announcing “Robin Hood: Origins” which will shoot this year. Directed by Otto Bathurst and penned by Joby Harold, it has been described as a “Batman Begins”-style gritty and serious origin story for the fictional Sherwood Forest hero and his band of merry men.
The obvious question with the project is one of “why bother?” and Collider effectively asked just that this week when talking to the film’s producer Basil Iwanyk. Beyond the great casting of Taron Egerton as Robin, Ben Mendelsohn as the Sheriff of Nottingham, Eve Hewson as Maid Marian, and Jamie Foxx as Little John, what in the world is the appeal?
“Exempting the killer cast, I feel that it captures the adventure and the fun and the spirit of Robin Hood, but because it’s the origin story – it’s a kid going off to war thinking he’s going on a great Crusade, and realizing it’s all bulls–t and coming back with some PTSD and realizing he’s been lied to, and coming back to kind of a fractured society that doesn’t really accept him and realizing, ‘Okay the super rich are getting richer, and the poor are getting poorer.’ You could describe that now.
What Joby Harold, our writer, was able to do is make it feel very allegorical and very contemporary, and feel youthful but not youthful in a young adult way, youthful in a kind of, the anger, the energy, what people when they were 25 feel, without it being pandering like ‘Look, we’re the young version of the movie!'”
Iwanyk also says the stunt work was inspired by the stunts in the Keanu Reeves-led “John Wick” – albeit with quivers not bullets:
“The images of Robin Hood, the imagery we have, the production design, the stunt work that we’re doing—a lot of it was inspired by the John Wick stunt work. The stuff we’re doing with the bow and arrow, it’s the same thing that Keanu does with the gun. The costumes, it just feels different than any other Robin Hood we had.”
The producer also says that it was director Bathurst who was the one who convinced Ben Mendelsohn to come onboard right after the shoot of “Rogue One: A Star Wars Story”:
“Otto [Bathurst] is a star, our director. He’s a closer. Because that cast is sprawling. Jamie Foxx and Ben Mendelsohn and Taron Egerton, those are different muscles to flex. And Ben, who did not want to play a bad guy, after meeting Otto was just like ‘Oh my God this movie’s gonna be great. I’m all in.’ We had him right when Rogue One made a gazillion dollars so it was the last thing he wanted to do, but Otto closed him.”
“Robin Hood: Origins” is currently targeting a March 23rd 2018 release.
 
I can't wait for the

Robin and Marian: and you thought 50 shades of Grey was kinky

or

Prince John: Trump's early days
 
82tLigI.jpg

No mud. No pitchforks. And definitely no “guys in tights running around swashbuckling.” Director Otto Bathurst (Peaky Blinders) knew he would need to lay down a few ground rules if he was going to blow the cobwebs out of Sherwood Forest. But hold on to the hero: “You don’t become a legend for 800 years if you’ve just stolen a few bags of money from rich people to give to the poor,” Bathurst told EW on the Budapest set in April. “In my mind, Robin Hood was this sort of seriously militarized anarchist revolutionary, a freedom thinker and a truth seeker. And the more I got into the story, it just became startling how utterly relevant it is to what’s going on in society now.”
His Robin, 28-year-old Taron Egerton, agrees: “I was approached not long after the first Kingsman movie had come out, and my initial response, to be totally honest, was ‘Why?’ [But] Otto told me he wanted to do something entirely revisionist, something that can’t be tied down to a medieval universe. The first act of the movie, these scenes crusading in Syria, were written like something from The Hurt Locker. It was fantastic, and that was enough to convince me.” Also on board: Merry Men Jamie Foxx (Little John) and Jamie Dornan (Will Scarlett), and The Knick‘s Eve Hewson as Maid Marian. And Ben Mendelsohn steps into the Sheriff of Nottingham’s boots — a role that for many is still defined by the late Alan Rickman in 1991’s Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves. “I ain’t gonna be outdoing him,” he admits. “That performance is a delightful tour de force, and I knew and loved the man. But I get a kick out of [sharing it], and I think he would have too.”
Foxx, for one, is already a Mendelsohn superfan: “He’s venomous. So good. There are some people that can just whup your ass. Him, Samuel Jackson, Viola Davis: ass whuppers.” And he says he too felt galvanized by Bathurst’s vision, freed from the constraints of period-perfect accents, costumes, and soundtrack cues. “I wanted to be part of it because it’s hood, not Robin Hood. He’s making it new and interesting, and it gives it weight.” Though one early promise might have been broken, Egerton admits with a laugh: “I did initially say the only thing I wouldn’t do was wear tights, and the pants did sort of get tighter and tighter… Let’s just call them jeggings now.”
bRL9rI6.jpg
 
Someone should do an Avengers style movie with Taylor Kitsch’ John Carter, Skarsgard’s Tarzan, Hunnam’s King Arthur and, inevitably, Edgerton’s Robin Hood.
 
You can't call something period John Wick and act like that's some meaningful hook that's going to make a $300 million franchise. Just like King Arthur being a period Guy Ritchie movie didn't make that film some amazing success.
 
This has a lot more potential than the Ridley Scott Robin Hood movie did, mainly because of Mendelsohn.
 
I'd rather have the guys in tights running around swashbuckling than yet another gritty, dark, angsty, angry Robin Hood movie.
 
Why do they have to take such awesome stories and adventures and make them dark and gritty and thinking it’s some revolutionary concept to use on classic and historic icons. Do we really need a Robin Hood that is suffering front PTSD? Is there something wrong with fun swashbuckling movies? Say what you will about Prince of Theives but it was fun and adventurous. It had some great moments and I loved the film. I made another thread about this a few weeks ago about needing more Swashbuckler films. More movies on the high seas and more fun takes on classic characters like Robin Hood, 3 Musketeers, Zorro, etc. I’m excited for James Wans Aquaman, his exact description of his movie was a Swashbuckling adventure film
 
I'd rather have the guys in tights running around swashbuckling than yet another gritty, dark, angsty, angry Robin Hood movie.

At least it would be different. What was the last serious take in that style? The Errol Flynn version?
 
Yeah, probably, though I think the Disney TV show had the same attitude. I just don't get why they want Robin Hood to be an angry, brooding hero. He doesn't have to be moody and dark to be interesting or exciting. Flynn's version struck the right balance of being both fun and serious when it needed to be. The original tales called them the Merry Men for a reason. They weren't the Angsty Men.
 
Im not a big Mendelsohn fan despite him apparently now being the go-to guy for bad guys lately.
 
I can take a bit of "doesn't this seem familiar?" stylistic design and construction for the film when they're talking about making the Crusades like the War On Terror or trying to put more hood in Robin Hood. And honestly, provided they keep Robin as a mouthy and rebellious guy, it could kind of make sense to make it more of a "street wise" film, or at least it makes more sense than King Arthur did.

But the real risk of the movie is over investing money and style choices while hoping for. A big payoff. If this film wants to be John Wick as Robin Hood, than it needs to have the same economy as John Wick, and be targeted at making a good movie firsthand a possible franchise second.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Staff online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
202,288
Messages
22,080,019
Members
45,880
Latest member
Heartbeat
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"