Robin Hood Reboot with Taron Egerton/Jamie Foxx

[jmc]

Because class warfare, the rich oppressing the poor, and the poor trying survive in a world run by the rich and powerful arent unique to any single time period. Stories like robin hood and King Arthur can take place in a futuristic setting as easily as a medieval setting. Or on any planet populated by sentient species. And the magic of king Arthur can exist alongside scifi tech or be replaced by scifi tech.

It's the same for a bunch of other timeless legends and myths. They all contain universal ideas, characters, plots and themes that can be transplanted to other worlds and times. Pretty sure Joseph Campbell wrote a famous book about this.

I understand the themes work in anytime, but that doesn't mean Robin Hood is the right story for that time setting. It's medieval folklore. Taking it out of that environment smacks of trying way too hard.

 

[Deck Rickard]

Just calling this movie “Robin Hood” doesn’t do it justice. They should have really leaned into the aesthetic they’re going for.

Sherwood Forest Hooligans: The Nottingham Riots

 

[Alien Anal]

It’s not. They are just wearing modern day clothing for some reason.

Do you actually know or just an educated guess?

 

[Deck Rickard]

I don't know, but my guess is the idiots who made this movie probably think people dressed like that in 1199.

 

[Loden Greatstorm]

I don't know, but my guess is the idiots who made this movie probably think people dressed like that in 1199.

Exactly.

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

That's definitely not why Firth was brought back

Seeing as how Firth was part of the most talked about moment in the film and was the more interesting and engaging of the two "heroes" in the movie... Yeah, they brought him back because Taran couldn't hold a movie by himself and this movie likely will be no different.

 

[Flint Marko]

Seeing as how Firth was part of the most talked about moment in the film and was the more interesting and engaging of the two "heroes" in the movie... Yeah, they brought him back because Taran couldn't hold a movie by himself and this movie likely will be no different.

They brought Firth back because Firth was awesome, not because Taran can't hold a movie by himself. You just made that up. You're honestly one of the only people I've heard say they didn't care for him in Kingsmen, which is fine, but don't start connecting dots that aren't there.

 

[Deck Rickard]

Yeah, I liked Taron in Kingsman. The second one was such a mess of a movie, it didn't know what it wanted to be. I think they brought Firth back because 1. he was great in the first one and 2. they didn't know what to do with the movie as a whole. Channing Tatum and Jeff Bridges, featured so heavily in the marketing, were nothing more than glorified cameos. Halle Berry barely has anything to do either. Also, it was really irritating how they kept ramming Fox News down your throat the whole time. There were some good things; I really enjoyed Juilanne Moore's villain, Pedro Pascal is great, and Elton John is hilarious. But the movie was a bit of a trainwreck. EVERYTHING looked fake, from the Statesman headquarters to every single large crowd shot to those stupid robot dogs.

 

[scarlet-witch]

I'm excited for the Double Toasted review of this.

 

[Deck Rickard]

I can't wait for the Honest Trailer.

 

[DarkKnight88]

Between producing Red Riding Hood and this, Leornardo DiCaprio should stick to acting.

 

[Deck Rickard]

Ugh... I didn't know he had anything to do with either of those movies.

 

[Vaibow]

I really do feel they will go with the 'it's actually 2078' and that the nation was ruined due to war and had to go back to basics again...

Thing is, Robin Hood, the idea the concept, it's timeless as others have said and it could relayed to a futuristic setting, but this just looks like ti had a budget of $40.

Living in trees, hiding out in the wilderness, using the elements to survive, that's what i loved as a kid... the way people were scared of the forest.
This just looks like a straight to DVD sequel to the fith element.

 

[DarkKnight88]

I'm surprised they simply didn't name the movie Hood.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

Why would anyone think Robin Hood could work in a futuristic setting?

Remember Rocket Robin Hood?

 

[sueb1863]

Rickman was great but it was like he was from a different movie. His acting style was nothing like anybody else's in the film.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

I don't mean to take anything away from Rickman's performance, because I do think he was great, but he doesn't really have a lot of competition for being the best version of the character since it was one of the few adaptation where he's actually the main villain. Usually he ranges anywhere from top henchman (ex. Disney version, Men in Tights) to minor stooge (ex. Flynn version, Crowe version).

 

[Schlosser85]

Rickman was great but it was like he was from a different movie. His acting style was nothing like anybody else's in the film.

I have mixed feelings. This is completely true, and it is like he's from another movie....but also like he's from a more entertaining one we want to spend more time in.


It's kind of like Gary Oldman in Leon/The Professional (although that's a considerably better overall movie than Prince of Thieves, IMO). Oldman just blows in and does some wacky scenery-chewing shtick, disappears, pops up again later and chows down on scenery, etc.



Johnny Depp in Once Upon a Time in Mexico. They're all like their own movies-within-a-movie unto themselves where this eccentric actor is obviously just doing his own random thing and being allowed to be as wild as he wants.

 

[dark_b]

[YT]tdR_GU3Hi9U[/YT]

 

[gwynplaine]

I don't mean to take anything away from Rickman's performance, because I do think he was great, but he doesn't really have a lot of competition for being the best version of the character since it was one of the few adaptation where he's actually the main villain. Usually he ranges anywhere from top henchman (ex. Disney version, Men in Tights) to minor stooge (ex. Flynn version, Crowe version).

(Fought your avatar twicet

 

[Loden Greatstorm]

This is going to bomb so, so hard...

 

[sueb1863]

[YT]tdR_GU3Hi9U[/YT]

Thanks for sharing that, i agree 100%


They keep trying to make Robin Hood into something it isn't and ignoring why they're popular stories in the first place.

 

[Dr.]

[YT]tdR_GU3Hi9U[/YT]

Some interesting arguments in this video. But a couple of minor nitpicks:

I’d say Scott’s Robin Hood (2010) was reasonably popular (more so in foreign markets). So the notion that audiences were totally turned off by a “dark and gritty” interpretation is a bit of a misrepresentation. To be sure, the movie was very expensive to make - and so failed to turn a profit.

And while Borman’s Excalibur did make it into the black, it wasn’t exactly a box office juggernaut. And I’m skeptical of the notion that as a (more-or-less) faithful adaptation, it represents a formula for modern success. Thing is, the King Arthur legend is, in many respects, a dour tragedy: the “love” story between Lancelot and Guinevere arises from marital infidelity; and the titular hero dies in the end. Mythic, archetypal stuff. But not really feel-good, tentpole material.

But I do agree that a ready familiarity with certain classic characters shouldn’t be mistaken for popularity.

 

[DarkKnight88]