Review of Robin Hood (2010) by Daniel C — 07 Dec 2016

Everyone and their mother knows the story of Robin Hood: a socio-economical tale of the heroic outlaw archer who steals from the rich to benefit the poor alongside a band of merry men. The actual existence of Robin Hood is far from concrete, but Ridley Scott's take on the character grounds him in history as much as possible, to middling results.

Scott's epic historical approach works best in all of the areas you expect: those being the technical aspects, of course. All of the costumes and sets are perfectly appropriate for 12th century England, as to be expected from a $200 million budget production.

The action sequences are vast and visceral, filmed in both beautiful wide angles and close-ups that make you feel the brutality of the battles themselves. The cast here is solid as well: Crowe, despite an inconsistent accent, is serviceable in the lead.

The likes of Cate Blanchett, Mark Strong, Oscar Isaac, and Max von Sydow are all good as well, and scenes shared between each of these heavy-hitters are handled well. It's the story itself that causes this film to collapse as an overall product: simply put, it's a dull affair.

The grounded historical approach, while making for a technically marvelous affair, means that the sense of adventure that the character is so well-known for is lost. There's nothing inherently wrong with darker takes on characters, but in this case, the historical approach is plodding and overlong, and could use some heart to make us feel for these characters more.

Scott is undeniably a technically incredible character: unfortunately, the narrative makes this an arrow that's missed its mark.