Robin Hood

[WarBlade]

I find all the condemnation here surprising. I watched Robin Hood a couple of nights ago and wound up thinking it was okay. Nothing great, but a "decent average" at least.

The only major downside is Russell Crowe in the titular role (which admittedly fails spectacularly).

People are bound to nitpick various other things, like:
- The main villain is not the Sherriff of Nottingham.
- Robin and Little John's confrontational meeting has had a significant re-write.
- Forest robbery, stealing from the rich and giving to the poor, is not really part of the story, but something that can be presumed to come later.

It was actually an okay movie for the most part.

 

[obin_gam]

I liked it

Sure it has flaws (like overused and predictable fight-scenes) but it had a nice pacing throughout and to everyone which thinks its gonna be a Gladiator 2, no its not. Far far from it. Much more calm and more political. It was nice to not have to see a fight scene every other minute. Thats the main reason why I like this. Nice pacing throughout.

Maybe it would be better NOT to see it as a pure Robin Hood-film but more of a "England in the Medieval Times where we follow an archer coming home from a war"-type of movie.

One other thing I can complain about is the lack of Robin Hood-scenes, there was aprox. *2 scenes that showed this as a Robin Hood-movie, and I would have liked to see some more of that...

*

Spoiler

The grain-to-York-robbery and the arrow pinning up the sheriffs note from the king in the ending.

 

[Rumpy Bulge Dubz]

no thank you, I could easily tell from the previews and now from your review, that we're not actually going to see much of "Robin Hood" in the movie, then what's the damn point? I don't see one

I wanna see him struggle, learning to shoot those bow and arrows to perfection, I want to see him stealing from the rich, and giving to the poor. Fighting off bad guys using nothing but archery, etc. There better be PLENTY of it

 

[obin_gam]

no thank you, I could easily tell from the previews and now from your review, that we're not actually going to see much of "Robin Hood" in the movie, then what's the damn point? I don't see one

I wanna see him struggle, learning to shoot those bow and arrows to perfection, I want to see him stealing from the rich, and giving to the poor. Fighting off bad guys using nothing but archery, etc. There better be PLENTY of it

I know what you mean, I had seriously low expectations coming in to see this one, and maybe thats why I was positively surprised by it.

The character of Robin: He's already an expert archer in the army, so he doesnt need any training at all. I had a hard time deciding if he was playful or serious. He's a down-to-earth guy and seemed quite lazy, non-caring and looking for adventure-kindaguy at times but then other times he had a little too much William Wallace-aura around him. This really seemed like a flaw in the script (failing to describe just what kind of demeanour this Robin was going to have in the film...)

He does steal, not just the thing you think he's gonna steal. As I said, the film focuses ALOT of the political problems of those times. So, I say it again, be prepared for ALOT of political talk. (Which I liked, it seemed Scott trusted us in the audience to get what they were talking about and not, like mindless fools, demanding action sequences all the time)

 

[Darkness Falls]

i agree with dubz, it just doesn't feel like robin hood from what's been shown

 

[Rumpy Bulge Dubz]

He does steal, not just the thing you think he's gonna steal. As I said, the film focuses ALOT of the political problems of those times. So, I say it again, be prepared for ALOT of political talk. (Which I liked, it seemed Scott trusted us in the audience to get what they were talking about and not, like mindless fools, demanding action sequences all the time)

ALOT of political talk?.......Hell to the NO THANK YOU. It's Robin Hood, I want a good 50% of it to be action/fighting/archery, and the other 50% to be political. There needs to be an even balance

 

[Monsieur Xavier]

Isn't it an origine story ? Robin is not yet the bandit we all know as Robin Hood ?

 

[Rumpy Bulge Dubz]

then it's not a story worth telling, and a bore to watch. Robin isn't exactly an interesting enough character to have an entire movie based on his origin. By the end of the first hour of the film you should A) start the story off B) Have some type of conflict which causes him to train in archery C) Have him perfect his craft D) Officially become Robin Hood

I want to see him training, I want to see him taking out bad guys (even as an amateur), yes, there should be "slight" action in all of this. I want to see him use his bow and arrows numerous times throughout the film as well. The second half of the movie, increase the action. (1 or 2 action scenes in the first half, 2 or 3 action scenes in the second/final half). The actual plot of the film (aside from origin) should kick in the second half and should be resolved within the hour

I don't like my movies going over 2 hours, and I don't like pointless dialog and talking that makes the movie drag. Talking and excessive dialog works in the Batman and Iron Man movies because the actors/characters make it work. There's definitley not enough (if any at all) actors in Robin Hood (from what I see) that I give a crap about, and not a big enough fan of the mythos to really give a crap about the supporting characters. I want to see Robin Hood, I want a good 3/4 of the movie to display his skills, action, fighting, good vs evil, him being heroic and sprinkle the political stuff inbetween.

 

[That-Guy]

I don't know, I'm going to reserve judgment until I see it. I do think that making a Robin Hood movie that apparently doesn't feature any of the classic scenes but yet still introduces the majority of the characters sounds a bit off, but I'll remain optimistic for the time being. I've always liked Crowe and I don't understand why so many people seem to hate the guy... I know he's done some questionable things in his personal life but I've always found him to be an amazing actor. I do understand why people are getting the "Gladiator 2" vibe from the trailers, but I still think they should at least give the film a chance before coming to that ultimate conclusion.

 

[Rumpy Bulge Dubz]

we're getting the "Gladiator 2" vibe because his image looks EXACTLY like his character in that film, he looks NOTHING like Robin Hood and if you can't get the image right, it's over. Don't even make the damn thing, it's not worth it.

 

[That-Guy]

But how, specifically, is Robin Hood supposed to look? I'll agree that Crowe does look pretty much the same as he did in Gladiator, but why couldn't Robin Hood look that way? Must every actor who plays him look like Errol Flynn?

 

[redfirebird2008]

But how, specifically, is Robin Hood supposed to look? I'll agree that Crowe does look pretty much the same as he did in Gladiator, but why couldn't Robin Hood look that way? Must every actor who plays him look like Errol Flynn?

Or Hollywood could simply stop making movies about the character. Seems like a reasonable idea to me.

 

[Figs]

Does anyone else have the feeling that this movie is going to tank at the BO? For some reason I just don't see the general audience giving a **** about this film.

 

[jacobed]

Yeah they should have released it in April or something. Not the weekend after Iron Man 2, that is just a huge mistake.

 

[The Apatow Crew]

Does anyone else have the feeling that this movie is going to tank at the BO? For some reason I just don't see the general audience giving a **** about this film.

Yeah, I do and if it does make money, it will not make enough to be Number 1 and IM2 will be number 1 again.

 

[redfirebird2008]

Does anyone else have the feeling that this movie is going to tank at the BO? For some reason I just don't see the general audience giving a **** about this film.

Yes, I think it's looking at a sub-$100m gross in North America and sub-$300m worldwide. It has a $200m budget. Studios only get around half of the revenue (other half goes to the theaters), so it needs $400m to start turning a profit.

 

[That-Guy]

Or Hollywood could simply stop making movies about the character. Seems like a reasonable idea to me.

Well, leading up to this film... in the past 20 years, we've had one big budget Robin Hood movie and one parody. The big budget film was a hit, but Costner's performance has become legendary in terms of miscasting. In the parody version, the casting of Robin was spot-on (at least in terms of the aforementioned Errol Flynn appearance and mannerisms) but... it was a parody.

Then there have been a few TV versions... none of them particularly good, IMO.

So I could see why they might want to do an update. However, after reading some reviews... it sounds like this wasn't the update anyone wanted.

 

[redfirebird2008]

Costner's performance has become legendary in terms of miscasting.

Pretty much the only time he hasn't been miscast was Tin Cup IMHO.

 

[Figs]

Yeah they should have released it in April or something. Not the weekend after Iron Man 2, that is just a huge mistake.

I don't think it bombing would be because it's coming out a week after IM2. I think it just doesn't look that interesting or fun. Just a guess but I don't see a lot of the general audience going to see this in the theatre. I think it will do better on home video though.

Yeah, I do and if it does make money, it will not make enough to be Number 1 and IM2 will be number 1 again.

Yeah, I think it will hit the #2 spot but no way will it beat IM2 for the #1 spot on it's second weekend. #2 should be a lock for it since there's nothing really that great it has to go against that comes out tomorrow. The following week you have Shrek 4 which I hope doesn't do well simply because I think they've milked that crap too much. They should have stopped after part 2.

The weekend after that, Prince of Persia comes out and I think that looks fun and entertaining enough to get people's butts in the seats.

 

[The Apatow Crew]

I would laugh of that romantic Comedy Letters To Juliet makes more then this. Amanda Seyfried already had one surprise hit this year, could it be another?

You know how people love their romantic comedies.

 

[Figs]

Pretty much the only time he hasn't been miscast was Tin Cup IMHO.

I liked Field of Dreams.

I'm not ashamed to admit that although Kevin Costner isn't that good of an actor and didn't even try for an accent, I really liked Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves. One of the main reasons why I liked it was that it was fun, which this new one doesn't appear to be at all.

For some reason Robin Hood just isn't a character I want to see done super serious like this. Prince of Thieves had it's more serious moments in it and balanced that with the humour pretty well I thought.

 

[redfirebird2008]

I liked Field of Dreams.

I'm not saying I haven't enjoyed other Costner movies, I'm just saying Tin Cup is the one that stands out with him being perfectly cast. I've heard he is really good in Mr. Brooks as well, but I haven't seen that one yet. As for Field of Dreams, I love that movie but Costner's acting isn't that great.

 

[Figs]

I'm not saying I haven't enjoyed other Costner movies, I'm just saying Tin Cup is the one that stands out with him being perfectly cast. I've heard he is really good in Mr. Brooks as well, but I haven't seen that one yet. As for Field of Dreams, I love that movie but Costner's acting isn't that great.

Costner doesn't show much emotion if any and he typically plays the same character minus a few roles. The two that are a little different for him were Mr. Brooks, where he played a bad guy and Waterworld were he played sort of a loner hardass.

I do agree about Tin Cup though, that was also a film I enjoyed him in.

 

[terry78]

POTC is basically the closest we got to a Robin Hood-esque type movie made today.

 

[redfirebird2008]

POTC is basically the closest we got to a Robin Hood-esque type movie made today.

Bingo.