Robin Hood

Robin Hood (2010) – at AMK Hub. I’ve always enjoyed Ridley Scott’s films, especially his string of Middle-East set of epics that started with Gladiator in 2000, and followed by Black Hawk Down, Kingdom of Heaven and finally Body of Lies. His luck might have just run out finally though, because his interpretation of the legendary English hero Robin Hood has received decidedly mixed reviews, with more ‘nays’ than ‘ayes’ among critics.

In Scott’s retelling, Robin Longstride (Russell Crowe) is a common archer in King Richard Lionheart’s army. Upon the good king’s untimely demise and the subsequent wiping of his royal guard and loyal retainer Sir Robert Loxley by the French agent Godfrey (Mark Strong), Longstride agrees to impersonate Loxley to return the dying knight’s sword to his father (Max von Sydow) who resides with the Lady Marion (Cate Blanchett). King Richard’s arrogant and sniveling brother, Prince John, is elevated to king and begins enforcing murderous taxes to replenish the kingdom’s treasury – while King Philip of France acting through Godfrey plans for an invasion of England.

The title of the film is a misnomer. Because the film is about Robin Longstride becoming Robin Hood and not about the legendary character himself. But while it’s an origin story, it’s not quite like the other films recounting superhero origins like in Batman Begins or the first of Sam Raimi’s Spider-Man films. Robin only becomes the guy with the hood in the last few minutes of the film. And the film even goes on to teasingly tell you ‘so the legend begins’ just before the credits roll.

That’s where the problem really is. The film purports to ground itself with some degree of historical accuracy – like the signing of the Magna Carta or Richard Lionheart’s demise – but it doesn’t feel anything like the kind of Robin Hood film we’ve come to know and love over the years. The Robin here does everything typical of a medieval action hero and nothing of the legend. He doesn’t have very many merry men – just three of them in fact, he meets Little John over a game of chance instead of over fists and staffs over a stream, no robbing of the rich for the poor, and Maid Marion has turned into Widow Marion, and even clads herself in dominatrix-styled plate armor.

In fact, the film feels more like a Gladiator advanced by about a thousand years and set in England instead of Rome. Crowe even shows up with his same gravely voice, Maximus hair-cut and beard. You could swap the Robin Hood character in his film for some other entirely fictional persona and little else would had needed to be changed.

For want of a better descriptor, the new Robin Hood film just isn’t fun. It’s downright serious replete with a lofty theme – the Frenchies are invading England, and the only person who can do anything about it is Robin – and more subplots than you could shake a stick at. And some of those subplots are unnecessary (that scene with Prince John’s first wife before he gets in with the French hottie princess), others never resolved satisfactorily (the stupid sword), and yet others that just don’t make sense (how Prince John suddenly finds out about Robin’s impersonation of Robert Loxley). As campy as Kevin Costner’s Prince of Thieves was 19 years ago, at least the latter was entertaining, irreverent and chuckle-worthy at many places.

There’s also the ridiculous scene of French troops landing on England’s south coast at the obligatory big battle scene towards Robin Hood’s end. You’ve seen it all before – Saving Private Ryan – but you’d be forgiven into thinking that the 12th century French invented amphibious invasions using Higgins-styled landing craft.

It’s not a total loss though. Scott’s 12th century England is a feast for the senses. Lots of detail in the backdrop of everyday life during the Dark Ages, you get a terrifically thick story, and lots of characters which fortunately are distinct enough to be individually recognized. Ling at least liked the film.

—

I’m assuming that Scott had intended this film to be a prequel to a series of films. Truth is, with this USD237 million film not being quite the critical success, whether there’s going to be a sequel at all about the actual legend might now be in doubt. Crowe isn’t getting any younger either at 46, and how many of us really want to watch a 50 year old Robin if there’s going to be a second film.

All that said, Scott routinely puts out extended editions of his films. The theatrical edition of Kingdom of Heaven suffered from some of the same flaws as Robin Hood has, but the director’s cut of the former was a much more cohesive viewing experience. Here’s to hoping we’ll see the same for this Robin Hood film, and about the actual legend this time too.