Watch Robin Hood
Watch Robin Hood movie
- IMDB rating: 7.10
- IMDB votes: 17083
- Release Date: 2010
StumbleUpon
Del.icio.us
FavoritesMore information :
- Director Ridley Scott and actor Russell Crowe reunite for their fifth big-screen outing, a retelling of the Robin Hood legend featuring the Gladiator star in the titular role. A bowman in the army of Richard Coeur de Lion, virtuous rogue Robin Hood rises from an unlikely background to become a hero to the impoverished people of Nottingham and lover to the beautiful Lady Marion (Cate Blanchett). Cyrus Voris, Ethan Reiff, and Brian Helgeland collaborate on the screenplay for a costume adventure produced by Brian Grazer (Frost/Nixon, American Gangster).
- tags: Robin Hood, Robin, Hood, Director, Ridley, Scott, actor, Russell, Crowe, reunite, their, fifth, big-screen, outing, retelling, legend, featuring, Gladiator, star, titular, role, bowman, army, Richard, Coeur, Lion, virtuous, rogue, rises, from, unlikely, background, become, hero, impoverished, people, Nottingham, lover, beautiful, Lady, Marion, Cate, Blanchett, Cyrus, Voris, Ethan, Reiff, Brian, Helgeland, collaborate, screenplay, costume, adventure, produced, Grazer, Frost/Nixon, American, Gangster
Added: 4 May 2010
Vote: 73
Good Film, Very Entertaining
I saw this film tonight at a pre-screening in New York City.
So why the four stars? Well, the problem is that it is exactly what Iexpected. Yes, I deliberately went in with low expectations and cameout amused and entertainment (the point of the movies, right?). But Iguess I was hoping for something that would make this film stand outamong other Robin Hood movies/books - something unique. I found it insome areas, but it lacked in the areas where it would work best. Forexample, a positive is that this film is not a depiction of the RobinHood legend as we know it, but more of a prequel to the legend. Whathappened before he became an outlaw? Beyond that, the story, it's plot,characters, jokes, dialog, action scenes and cinematography are copiesof what has been done before.
Gladior set in England. That's basically it.
Added: 12 May 2010
Vote: 3
Robin Begins
In a crowded back catalogue of Robin Hood-on-screen, this is aworthwhile addition. It has all the action you might expect andalthough it tells the early, socio-political roots of the legend itstill has time for laughs and romance.
Russell Crowe is more than Gladiator-in-green but that's a good guideto what you get: stirring words; moral fibre; grit both in action andemotion. There's an enormous cast of familiar names gathered aroundhim. The choice performances are those of Max von Sydow as his morallyequivocal father-by-proxy back in Nottingham and William Hurt coming inas the sage but weary William Marshal. I think Ridley Scott's castingof Oscar Isaac as the headstrong King John was just right as theyoungster who cannot match his brother's Lion Heart in deed ortemperament. The only weak link for me was the Sheriff of Nottingham, anon-role in the final cut - how much of that is to do with MatthewMacfadyen's awkward, semi-comic performance (? la Jack Davenport) Icouldn't tell.
Clearly this is a carefully researched film but which sits easily inthe new aesthetic of action-adventure pioneered over the last decade byChris Nolan, Paul Greengrass and Peter Jackson. But then of course,Ridley Scott - and Russell Crowe, for that matter - got in first withGladiator (2000). It's not particularly adventurous though. Scott is amaster craftsman rather than a visionary. There's plenty ofsequel/franchise potential as well. 6/10
Added: 14 May 2010
Vote: 5
Robin Hood
The Best Movie I've ever seen and there's no doubt about it. It beginswith long awaited legend that calls himself Robin and wears no hood.But him and his friends are on a quest to stop the evil king. Althoughthe storyline may be too long the battle sequences were terrific andnot even one drop of blood was shown during the battles. Robin's wifeMarrilyn is his long awaited true love and is personal to say that it'sabout time he has found someone. The acting was brilliant for an oldenday movie and of course the villains were awesome too especially thebold headed dude. I was awaiting nothing at the start but the finalbattle was excellent especially when Robin finished the man off withhis bow and arrow. There were many funny points too especially when theman against robin hood got his finger chopped off by an arrow of Robinfor trying to hang a wanted poster for Robin. Very Recommended andnobody has the right to complain.
User: MosHAdded: 11 May 2010
Vote: 19
Solid but nothing really special
This isn't the Robin Hood we know; it's Gladiator mixed with Bravehartkind of Robin Hood. Like every other British historical epic, itinvolves the royal family who do their throne heir thing, fightingagainst the French and the wonderful peasant life with a proper knightin charge. I'm sure they are important topics but the movie presentsthem in the same exact feel that has been done to death in other moviesand on TV. This movie just feels like a TV episode rather than a movie.
Well, the only way to really tell that it's a big budget movie isbecause of the battles. However, the battles looks like it was done bythe same company that did Saving Private Ryan.
Robin Hood is exactly like you'd expect a character in English historyplayed by Russel Crowe to be; not the playful archer Robin Hood ingreen but a somber cerebral sword wielding, chain mail gray RobinWhatisHisName. Apart from that, it's a solid movie but a veryworkmanlike movie. Solid in every way but without any brilliant momentsor ideas.
Added: 13 May 2010
Vote: 4
Straight to Blue Ray
I trust this director to produce a quality and enjoyable film and thisis the impulse that took me to the cinema yesterday. Alas, what anerror. In short, acting is very good quality, I thought Crow was a goodRobin Hood and his face fits as well as Gibson did to Mad Max andCrow's supporting cast was excellent (William Hurt is back to form). Iliked the fact that the castles had straw covered floors and there hadbeen a serious attempt at historical accuracy.
The negative points are lots. Although the script was good and the plotnot that bad it was poorly executed on film. It did not make that muchsense and silly mechanisms were used to get the viewer from one sceneto the next. I also hold the opinion that other location directors didan awful lot of the work on the film as Scott's flourishes were few andfar between. A lot of the issues are the result of a low budget.Frankly it felt like the BBC had a hand in the production as the filmquality and the type of actors brought in are regularly on the small,British only, screen. One answer to this problem is that as a prequelthis is nothing more than the bland concrete foundation to a serial andthe next one (which no doubt stole a vast amount of the budget fromthis) will be absolutely tremendous. The final battle at the end was solame that it looked like a reenactment for the History Channel and hadnone of the majesty we expect from Scott and Co.
Overall, I agree with some of the other reviews - this is solid but hasnothing more to add to the genre. With Crow on board for the sequel itcould be stunning and I fully expect it to be what I thought this was.Get it on video just before the next one comes out but don't actuallywaste your cash.
Added: 17 May 2010
Vote: 14
don't go!!! wast of time and money..
i will make it short and to the point. the movie is the worst i haveseen so far and I'm a movie addicted. i have seen some bad movies butthis is the first time i wishes that the movie will end after seeingjust 1 hour of it.
1) the plot have holes in it, look like they took a few shoots and justpaste them together with nothing to connect them.
2) non of the character own your love or make you even a bit care aboutthem.
3) the "battles" in this movie are just well.. pathetic. the only 2"action" there is
a. a attack which made me think of the holocaust (mad me real sad.. ihope i will be the only one that will have that resemblance).
b. a 30 on 30 war.. (should i say more?!)
4) the love emotion in the movie are out of context and seems unreal orsome may say pathetic.
5)the kings both English and France one come out as pathetic or justhorribly stupid..
i could go on and on.. to make it short this movie was a totally wasteof time.. made me unhappy.. and well after the 10 first second whichweren't bad it just got worst in each moment.. till may only wish wasthat it will end..
some may say it like king Arthur in which they tall the story of the"real" story and not the tale.. but i say if the "real" thing is thatbad (not like king Arthur movie which was far..) i rater not know the"real" story..
so just don't go.. please don't.. (i usually don't post a review butthis time i had because it just so bad).
thanks for reading..
Added: 15 May 2010
Vote: 10
Sucking the enjoyment out of a classic
Went to see the new movie of Robin Hood and I will just come out andsay it the movie was a dreck and bored me to death..Problems are allover the place.. First problem the casting Russell Crowe is horrid helooks like he does not care and he seems to bring his thuggish offstage persona to the screen and i am not paying good money to see thatcrap..Second problem Cate Blanchett gosh she is has no charisma what soever and the sight of her would send me to the woods for good for shecomes off as a bitter and mean spirited person too great idea ofcasting two stars that have no intangibles that one would want to careabout their characters..Third the direction is bland and the way I seeit if it ain't broken why fix it the robin hood movie was alwaysentertaining and fun and have a certain "it" quality best shown byErrol Flynn in 1938 yet Scott has basically put up a picture that isnot entertaining not fun and a chore to watch..We go to movies to beentertained and not to be bored!!!!!!!!!!Fourth the backdrop was drearyand depressing and i know it is chic now for adding new spins on moviesfor realism but in this case it took the life out of the movieentirely! If you want to see a good movie about robin hood i noticedlast week TCM had the definite Robin Hood movie with Errol Flynn watchthat instead of this drivel and see what film making truly is and alsowhat giving the paying customers what they want to see that is actionand romance for this movie. For Crowe, Blanchett, Scott and the rest ofthe cast could not carry Flynn's quiver and this movie was a simplyawful experience.
User: xebec_royAdded: 12 May 2010
Vote: 8
Robin Begins
Ridley Scott's version of Robin Hood is poor man's Gladiator.MakeMaximus a more composed,a bit less passionate, and a much less intensesoul with sidekicks ready at his beck and call and you will get RussellCrowe's version of Robin Longstride a.k.a Robin of the Hood.It's onlyfair to say that Russell Crowe is repeating himself once toooften.There are even hints of Captain Jack Aubrey in Russell's Robinfrom another one of his previous ventures 'Master and Commander - theFar side of the world'. The movie gives a sense of deja vu at best.Wehave seen it all.The ambushes in the forests, the medieval shipsthrough the rough seas, the fights on the beaches, English countrysidesand castles in all their glory and countryfolk working in the day andfrolicking at night with no need to bathe. And then there's thefight.Add to all this bits of debatable history with a hint of crusadesand some dollops of French to add authenticity and you get Robin allready to fight for the downtrodden.
If you are looking for your favourite Robin Hood characters and theirexploits which you have read as a kid, the movie does'nt have much instore.Friar Tuck, Little John, the Sheriff of Nottingham all are therebut not as you might have known them or wanted to see them.It's a RobinHood prequel,this movie.
Some of the scenes are spectacular no doubt, but it all seems sofamiliar.Anyways,no worries.We're all seeing too much of movies thesedays.
Added: 12 May 2010
Vote: 22
A definite must see!
Won pre-screening tickets to see this in downtown San Francisco.
Me and my girlfriend were so excited to see this and it did not let usdown one bit.
Russel's acting was excellent-as expected- and the rest of the actorsdid a great job. The plot was well thought out and actually surprisedus with some nice twists and turns.
The chirography for the action scenes were perfectly shot and justdownright epic for the most part. The score of the movie was wellplaced and well paced. Definitely led up to the action sequences anddied down where it needed to.
10/10 GO SEE IT! :D
Added: 12 May 2010
Vote: 15
overly moody in a bad way = YAWN
The concept and character of Robin Hood has been done to death on thesilver screen. Yet, here we go again. Like the character, this moviedoesn't know what it wants to be. It is advertised and sold as a pieceof summer popcorn entertainment, but tries to be a complex "Gladiator"type film at the same time and ends up being neither. It's overly moodyin a bad way. I always like Russell Crowe and he did the best he couldgiven the material but that doesn't really equal anything special. WasI expecting too much given this cast and director? I haven't been thisdisappointed since Crystal Skull hit like a bad punch to the gut.
It is burdened with a dialogue-heavy, action-light dark tone that doeslittle to develop the characters. How is this smart in any way? Thefirst hour is a meandering, repetitive mess. Its only redeeming qualityis the fact that Russell Crowe is a great actor in any setting. Too badeven that can't save this movie. I can't believe I'm writing this but Ienjoyed the Costner Robin Hood movie more than this one. Who wouldathunk it?
Added: 12 May 2010
Vote: 12
Not a true epic that it could have been, but still very enjoyable nonetheless.
Ridley Scott brings another new version of Robin Hood to the table withprevious series and films. This I found was meant to be a much darkerversion of Hood and a new take. I was really looking forward to thisand thought it would be as truly epic like Scott's other film withCrowe's Gladiator, but it falls short somewhat. The difficulty in doingthis I thought particularly with Russel Crowe playing Robin was thefact that the character is British and Crowe was American. He tried topull off the British accent and he did at the start quite well, butshortly and for the remainder of the film, he just fell back to hisAmercian one. It's only a small gripe but it does take away a smallpart of the authenticity of the myth of Robin Hood. Saying that Crowe'sperformance is good and he settles into the roles gracefully withcomposure. Cate Blanchett as Maid Marion was okay. She had a good innerfiestiness but I found her to be a bit cold to be honest. I envisionedher to have more warmth, but that's just my interpretation.
The others actors in this film and I'm surprised to say that Crowewasn't the best actor in this but I found Mark Strong's acting asGodfrey to be very good. He was a menacing villain, but the person whostole the show for me was the unknown actor who I haven't heard of asOscar Issac who played King John. His acting was excellent and heperfectly portrayed the King John I've seen in previous versions. Hehas a great future ahead of him.
As to far as the romantic element in the film between Robin and Marion.There is little chemistry between Blanchett and Crowe. However I can'tblame Ridley Scott too much as he never has been a director with astrength for the romantic elements. The script and dialogue was decentenough for an action film with some good laughs of comedy, but thescript felt a bit dry and rusty and could have had more wit andinventiveness.
The biggest strength I would say for Scott is the action sequences,which were co-ordinated well with plenty of excitement though I didthink the action climax was a bit abrupt. What he has done perfectly iscapture the essence of the story surrounding Hood, as there is plentyof exploration surrounding the story and the scenery and costumes of13th century England is encapsulated beautifully. Overall this isn'tthe true epic it should have been and I was slightly disappointed eventhough all parts of film departments performed well in terms of actingand action etc. It could have been bigger as I was expecting more.However I'm not going to put this down too much as this is a terrificachievement by Scott and is still a very entertaining film to watchthat hasn't made the story of Robin Hood tiresome. The way it endssuggests the possibility of a sequel. I look forward to it if they'reis one and I recommend going to see this on the big screen. RidleyScott's vision of Robin is different and refreshing in a way and worthyof viewing.
Added: 13 May 2010
Vote: 3
Disappointing, could have been so much better!
I went into this movie with an open mind, I find often that if youenter with anything more you are in for a fall!
Although not entirely awful the film wasn't particularly inspiring andas previous reviews have stated you shouldn't expect the bog standardtale of robin hood and his merry men!
The most irritating part of this film was perhaps the accent of croweas hood. By the end of the movie I believe he is meant to have a broadYorkshire style accent, however in parts he phases between Ringo Starrand a generic irish accent, later on he finds his feet and is able togive a more believable portrayal. I don't normally get too hung up onaccents as they make no difference to the story. However when acharacters accent changes during the movie it is difficult to focus onmuch else.
I went with 3 other people who also were uninspired by the wholeproduction. There were great part having the whole audience laughing,however it seemed to struggle when striking the balance between actiondrama and comedy.
SUMMARY: I would maybe benefit from another watching, I enjoyed theaction and the drama. The construction of the story was very good,however I simply could not get past the accent and this spoiled mymovie experience!
Added: 14 May 2010
Vote: 3
Better than Kingdom of Heaven, Worse than Gladiator
Keep in mind that this isn't the story of Robin Hood that we all grewup with; this is the prelude to the story we grew up with. "The StoryBehind the Legend." Robin Hood is truly epic in every way.
The acting was perfect. I couldn't have asked for a better performancefor any of the actors/actresses. You will love some characters and hatesome and your opinion will change throughout the movie about some ofthe characters. However, very few of the characters were introduced ina way that I understood them, they were just fleshed out as the moviewent on.
The battle scenes were epic, but they were lacking the brutality thatmade Gladiator's battles so much more epic. Sometimes I felt that theexact sword slashes were used multiple times, but overall the battlesfelt intense and exciting.
I would highly recommend this to anyone, especially Ridley Scott fans.This was 2 1/2 hours of fun that you will not forget for a long time.Better than Kingdom of Heaven, but worse than Gladiator (which reallyisn't saying much considering how great Gladiator is).
Added: 17 May 2010
Vote: 2
Very good film!
This film strives away from the story we all know about robin hood andis set before the time of the merry men and stealing of the rich togive to the poor!
This time around I think history played a bigger part in the film asthe film is set in England in a time leading up to the signing of theMagna Carta charter and Ridley Scott has successful adapted hisportrayal of Robin hood around this.
This film was great fun to watch and Robin's friends Will and LittleJohn gave this film a bit of comedy. The action is fantastic and keepsyou on the edge of your seat wondering what is going to happen next.
I think that the people that didn't like this film compare it too muchto gladiator and because of this it gets slated by some critics.
In conclusion I would highly recommend this film
Definitely a must watch...
Added: 13 May 2010
Vote: 8
A Nutshell Review: Robin Hood
My experience with the cinematic legend of Robin Hood is just modestlymade up of clips from the Errol Flynn film, and that of the Prince ofThieves directed by Kevin Reynolds and starring Hollywood's It kid atthat 90s moment Kevin Costner, a film memorable only for its BryanAdams ballad that played during the end credits, Alan Rickman as ahammed version of the Sheriff of Nottingham, and that American accent.Then there's Disney's foxy animation, Sean Connery's veteran Robin Hoodand Maid Marian that I caught on television, and a made-for-TV moviethat hit the screens here titled Robin Hood with Patrick Bergin in thetitular role, and Uma Thurman as a feisty Maid Marian.
The thing with legends is that there's enough bandwidth for differentinterpretations because there can be nothing definitive about it otherthan the underlying concept, which to the mythos is Robin of the Hoodand his Merry Men's robbing of the rich to give to the poor, who haveto put up with ever increasing taxes in England as ruled by well, anunpopular king whose identity depends on where the tale is set. InBrian Helgeland's story, it takes on epic proportions of politicalintrigue involving betrayal in the English court and a French king everlooking to conquer the English Isles through an insider set to incitean uprising and civil war before crossing the Channel with an army, andin some ways the opening resembles Ridley Scott's film of 10 years ago,Gladiator, which also starred Russell Crowe.
Beginning with one of the limited action sequences in the film (yesit's true this film's more talk than action), the premise can also beconsidered to follow up directly from Scott's earlier effort Kingdom ofHeaven, which dealt with the Crusades. Here, King Richard the Lionheart(Danny Huston) is leading his knights back on a retreat to England toreclaim his throne, and amongst his soldiering ranks are archers RobinLongstride (Crowe) and his men Will Scarlet (Scott Grimes), AllanA'Dayle (Alan Doyle) and Little John (Kevin Durand) with whom Robinbefriends through a sleight of hand game, rather than the iconicmeeting in Sherwood Forest through a challenge of skills at a river.
And like the Gladiator format, we see how Robin steps up to assist inthe capture of castles and land, before a new coronation takes placewhich spells trouble eventually for Longstride as he goes up against ajealous monarch, who condemns Robin Hood's to an outlaw status in duecourse. But in the meantime, Robin Longstride decides to abandon theerratic King Richard, and not before long will stumble upon thementioned huge conspiracy against his country. So it's up to thereluctant hero and his men to interfere and interrupt corrupt regimeswith the very glossing of that involving religious leaders, pluscrossing swords with chief villain and friend of Prince John (OscarIsaac), Godfrey (Mark Strong).
So where's the usual nemesis the Sheriff of Nottingham (MatthewMacfadyen) you may say? He's still featured in the film albeit in asmaller role, and Helgeland's story being set in the formative years ofRobin Hood means whatever we know of Sherwood Forest and the adventuresof Robin and his Merry Men, has not even begun yet. This allows forRidley Scott to bring his vision of the sword and sandals epic andapply it on this English legend and I think probably the first tofeature the skilled archer using a warhammer charging into battle.Expect violence, though most happen off-screen. Compared to the lastbig budgeted Robin Hood film Prince of Thieves, Ridley Scott's visionand version is a lot grittier, with so much dirt and grim in everyscene to highlight the impoverished conditions in the aftermath of themuch funded Crusades, that it makes the other version look like a rompthrough a forested theme park with fancy pulley-lift rides.
Scott and Crowe is one of the enduring director-actor partnerships inHollywood these days with this film marking the director's fourthconsecutive collaboration (A Good Year, American Gangster, Body of Liesand this) with Crowe, who seemed a little pudgy as a much older man intights, though the finale did make him look the part a lot more. Sincethis is something of an origin story in itself, we see very little ofhis interaction with his motley crew which leaves plenty of room to doso in a follow up film, and the focus is on establishing RobinLongstride as a hero, exploring his past, and his romance with thewidow (gasp!) Maid Marian, played by Cate Blanchett.
Yes, Maid Marion's married, and possesses plenty of spunk just like UmaThurman's 1991 version, and a tinge like Eowyn from Lord of the Ringswho's equally adapt with armours and weapons in battle. The Sheriff ofNottingham takes a backseat in the hall of infamy, and Mark Strongsteps into the villainous lead, cementing himself as a dangerousstereotype in playing evil characters, here as an adviser who exploitsthe name of King John to stir trouble, dressed in a billowing blackcape like Darth Vader, and has a half Joker-ish scarred mouth no thanksto Robin Hood. Oscar Isaac almost steals the show toward the end withhis desperately comical turn as a King under siege, and luminaries suchas William Hurt and Max von Sydow complete the star-studded lineup.
And whatever you do, don't shortchange yourself by walking out of thecinema hall when the end credits start to play - you're treated to astunning animated (and bloody too I may add) sequence that recounts thelast 2 hours in reverse chronological order ending with the Crusades,and what more, aurally enjoy the hauntingly beautiful music by MarcStreitenfeld as well.
Added: 12 May 2010
Vote: 4
Not a brilliant battle plan in my opinion... ...but the film's good anyway
Ridley Scott's take on the old familiar story is mistitled - calledsimply "Robin Hood", it should be called "Robin Hood - The Origin." Thefilm finishes with the stage finally being set for the Robin Hood storywe are familiar with.
And that's one of the reasons why I really enjoyed this movie - I hadno idea where it was going, and I was constantly interested as aresult.
I'll be brief. The film looks great - very convincingly mediaeval. Evensequences which must have been effects shots didn't look like it. Theperformances from a large and starry cast were all excellent, even ifsome of the accents were a touch uncertain. The story was alwaysinteresting, the script was workmanlike if not sparkling. And theaction set-pieces were well staged.
On that note, though, I have to spoiler one major hole - the battlestrategy for the French invasion, noted by King John as being a goodplan, was actually about the worst plan possible. The French had chosento land on a beach overlooked by cliffs with a single track leadingoff, and rocks at either end. The obvious strategy was to positionEnglish archers along the cliff top raining arrows down, which theydid, and then hold the other forces at the top of the track toslaughter any French who tried to make their way, maximum 4 abreast,through the narrow exit (it worked for the 300). But no, let's gallopeveryone down to the beach and charge. Duh.
And while we're at it, where would Marion have learned to fight like aknight while wearing full chain mail?
Added: 13 May 2010
Vote: 5
Robin Hood: The Origin of Robin Hood
2010's 'Robin Hood' tells the story of Robin Longstride before hebecame the prince of thieves or whatever they call it. This movie tellsthe origin of Robin Hood. So, it tells the origin of Robin Hood.
The story is amazing. There are so many links between the charactersthat sometimes, I might be confused. Basically, it's about the originof Robin Hood. In his origin, there are a lot of unexpected events inthe story. There are many characters that I thought wouldn't appear inthe film. So, the story is good, very good.
Now, to how well the movie was presented.
The beginning of the movie starts with a battle. It was exciting andgood. It built tension and a big amount of tension. Well, after thebattle, the movie focused more on the drama. The drama sectionsintroduced many other characters. The drama section also startedbuilding tension but slowly.
The battle at the end was enjoyable. It was long enough to satisfy youand was pretty much exciting. There were maybe thousands of warriorsfighting and it was awesome. That was the most exciting scene of themovie.
Well, after the fight scene, I thought there were only going to be likefive minutes until the end of the movie. But, there were still likethree more scenes after the end. That made the film start to lookboring. But anyways, the movie was good. 7 stars!
Added: 13 May 2010
Vote: 3
Another 'Gladiator' in Sherwood Forest..!
A new breed of Robin Hood from The Father of "Alien" (1979), RidleyScott. Robin Hood as we knew before was decorous outlaw and greatarcher with tight pants, to rob the rich and gave it to the poor. Iknow Scott wants his version of Robin Hood to be different. He wasdescribed with different haircut and beard. In fact, Russell Croweperformed the character precisely with his previous character in"Gladiator" (2000), only different in outfit (pay attention on hisattitude and body language). Cate Blanchett as Marion was not in badperformance. Blanchett, I monitored always gave extraordinaryperformances in almost all her films. I think for her to involve inthiz epic was a waste of talent. The famous eternal-villain of RobinHood (as we knew), Sheriff of Nottingham (Matthew MacFayden) was not infocus by limiting his proportion on thiz film. In his stead wastwo-face traitor named Godfrey played by Mark Strong. In my opinion, heplayed the best performance in overall, along with William Hurt as KingJohn's chancellor. Mark Strong had been built a great villain imageduring these couple of years, a fine Gary Oldman's substitute who alsobest known as convincing villain. The movie actually attached withunique and tremendous score. The final battle on thiz movie, Idescribed it as 'Omaha Beach's Attack' in medieval version. It's likewhat we saw on opening battle in "Saving Private Ryan" (1998), onlywith arrows and swords. The last four movies directed by Scott broughtCrowe as his main character (include thiz one). It's also the fifthsince their successful collaboration in "Gladiator". Crowe never showsa lame performance. But once again thiz is really a copy-paste fromScott's "Gladiator", same Crowe's acting, it's also about a warriorcomes home after patriotic battle and a rebellion toward greed king andsame conflicts too. Last time we saw Kevin Costner's "Robin Hood:Prince of Thieves" (1991), we brought home some memorable moments andits soundtrack still echoes until now. If can public accept thiz movieas a fair and fine movie, don't blame them (Scott and Crowe) if theyback again to offer you another typical ones with the same Scott'sdirecting and same Crowe's acting either, maybe other time with theirversion of Batman or James bond or whatever. Should we let them do iteasily?
Experience your life through movee :> See My Complete Review on JONNY'SMOVEE: http://jonnyfendi.blogspot.com
Added: 17 May 2010
Vote: 2
Ridley Scott at his best!
I just saw the new Robin Hood film in theaters and it didn't disappointme throughout. With an all star cast led by Academy Award winnersRussel Crowe and Cate Blanclett, they all did an amazing job portrayingtheir characters. The one actor that blew me away was Oscar Isaac whoplayed the arrogant and snobby King John.He put so much enthusiasm inhis part that his character looked really believable!
Some people say that the film looked somewhat like Gladiator, butthat's because Russel Crowe's in it and Ridley Scott directed it. Andin case you haven't noticed: All of Ridley Scott's films look the same!However his films never disappointed the audience and the critics.
This film takes you back to what Robin Hood was like before he wasdeclared an outlaw, just in case you get confused.
Filled with fun action, romance, and humor, Robin Hood's the kind offilm that I do recommend others to see and it's worth seeing again intheaters (if you truly loved it for the first time)!
Added: 14 July 2010
Vote: 2
A Brilliant Film Worth Seeing Twice
The new Robin Hood is a brilliantly made film with a fantastic actorand a great director. The Robin Hood we are used to seeing is no wherenear as cool as the one Russell Crowe plays. He shows Robin Hood as atough, prepare for the fight, don't mess with me type of guy instead ofthe Kevin Costner version that shows Robin Hood as a get-in-get-out,sissy. I enjoyed the film. I will say that it is similar to Gladiator.Robin Hood is portrayed as I thought he should be. The film was muchmore realistic than the cartoonish versions of the past. It bringsgreat battle scenes and great historical references from the crusades.I can't wait for the second film to come into theaters and I also can'twait for this to come out on DVD and BluRay. Ridley Scott and RusselCrowe again impress me in the film industry.
