Robin Hood

Robin Hood (2010)
Directed by Ridley Scott
Length:140 minutes
Rated PG-13 for violence including intense sequences of warfare, and some sexual content





I have voiced my frustrations with director Ridley Scott's films in past blogs (see Body of Lies), mainly over his lack of consistency. For every great film Scott directs, he delivers one to two terrible films. I will admit, my initial perception of Robin Hood was DOA, especially considering the tremendous amount of turmoil and turnover encountered during production. But I wanted to give one of Hollywood's legends the benefit of the doubt. While the film certainly does not reach the heights of success reached by classics like Alien or Gladiator, Scott's latest effort is a decent medieval war epic with a fresh perspective on a classic tale.

If you aren't familiar with your 13th century English history as well as the basic Robin Hood tale, you may be a bit lost. Scott's rendition of the noble thief takes a much different turn than any previous attempt. Russell Crowe (The Next Three Days, State of Play) plays the titular hero, an English archer named Robin Longstride. Longstride? I thought Robin was usually Robin of Loxley from Nottingham? And this is where the differences begin. Without going into too much backstory, Robin assumes the identity of Robert Loxley of Nottingham, a noble, in order to gain passage back home from the Crusades. Soon Robin is pretending to be Sir Robert amongst the people of Nottingham, even taking Robert's widowed wife Maid Marion, played by the always talented Cate Blanchett (The Last Time I Saw Michael Gregg, Hanna). You may be wondering how someone could simply assume another's identity, but the movie will do a better job of explaining this detail than I can. Soon Robin is caught up in the potential battle between the French and newly crowned King John who faces potential civil war at the hands of his barons.

The film covers a lot of ground and can admittedly be a bit hard to follow at times. Understanding the political power plays between King John of England and King Phillip of France can be a bit confusing; but if you have some semblance of a working knowledge of European history, you should be okay. Additionally, the Robin Hood tale may be tweaked, but the traditionally important characters are still present - Little John, Friar Tuck, etc. The film does add a few too many layers to the mix by adding a group of orphan boys (a la Peter Pan) that raid Nottingham. The inconsistent stories or confusing plot could be attributed to the fact the screenplay was changed mid-filming on several occasions.

The battle scenes are the true strength of the film. Scott's talent as a director is on full display as epic battles between the English and French consisting of archers, horse fighting, and swordplay all capture the carnage of the battlefield. The fights feel well rehearsed and flow smoothly, truly creating the perfect vibe needed for a film of this type. The actors also do a solid job of supplementing the action with their performances, blending dialects and mannerisms appropriate to the times.

If not for the twisting attempt at a history lesson, Robin Hood may have outperformed expectations. Ultimately, however, the film falls a bit flat. The action is solid and the acting decent, but a confusing story dooms the film to mediocrity. While I can't say I hate the film, I certainly don't love it. Robin Hood is worthy of a rental, but anything beyond a single viewing is simply a waste.

Final Rating: 3 out of 5 stars

Favorite Quote:
Friar Tuck: "So why do they call you Little John?"
Little John: "What are you tryin' to get at? I'm proportionate (in reference to his penis)!"