Review of Robin Hood (2010) by Hector P — 08 Jan 2013

I don't really know what Ridley Scott and Russell Crowe were trying to do with this film. Since the last Robin Hood film of any note was the 91 Costner version there was certainly room for them to bring their own grittier slant to the story with Scot's usual visual panache.

Instead we get a muddle of a story that is doing its best to distance itself from any other version of the legend. In essence we have a prequel to the story most of us know (or if you like, the first 20 minutes of the Costner version strectched over 2.

5 hours!) and this Robin isn't even a Loxeley, he's only pretending to be one. What!!! I would forgive this different take on the legend if Scott had bothered to make a tight film with visual grace but there are so many characters included here and the film is so padded out that the viewer is in danger of getting confused and, more tragically, bored.

The visuals that Scott is know for are absent here, apart from a well shot battle scene on the beach at the end that is reminiscient of 'Gladiator'. Crowe has been pulled up on his accent work and whilst it isn't too constant I've heard a lot worse from Hollywwod stars in other films.

Blanchett is a more earthy Marian but it works for the film and both her and Mark Strong are the best things in the film. By the end of the film we've reached the most interesting part of the story for most viewers but this is where Scott chooses to end it.

Maybe he thought he had a potential trilogy in the making, with the middle story being the 'fun' hero-making and the final part being the death of Robin. Unfortunately this film doesn't do enough to deserve a sequel.

A misfire from the usual reliable Scott/Crowe partnership.