Robin Hood (No men in tights)

A weekend after be disappointed by a blockbuster billing, I found myself again purchasing a ticket for an opening weekend film. This time it was for a tag team that had produced the great Gladiator as Russell Crowe and Ridley Scott paired up for a new version of the classic legend of Robin Hood. As a big Gladiator fan and an enjoyer of historical pieces, I was optimistic about washing the previous weekend’s bad taste from my mouth.

Robin Hood throws you right into the action as English crusaders are attempting to seize and plunder a French castle. The opening battle sets the tone for the superb action throughout the film ( with one exception that I will address later). While the Gladiator gore is absent in this PG-13 film, the fighting sequences seem realistic and are very engaging.

The plot in this one differs greatly from that of the story that most of us grew up with. The film attempts to tell the back-story behind the one who robbed the rich to feed the poor (Side note: I asked on of my old history professors about the historical accuracy of the film and he informed me that it is riddled with inaccuracies). Other than the title character one of the first that we meet is King Richard the Lionheart. His portrayal as a somewhat drunken unsure ruler is different from that of popular lore (and dare I say history). He jumpstarts Robin’s opposition to the crown when Longstride tells him of his own personal opinions on the morality of the crusades. In a time when negative feelings towards Islamic Holy Wars are prevalent, this depiction of Richard and his role in the plot exposition undoubtedly are meant to remind people of the atrocity of the crusades and act as a critique of Christianity through comparison.

Robin Longstride (Crowe) is portrayed as a peasant crusader fighting for political ideals. His character is endearing and his aged appearance gives a maturity to his conquest. He teams up with a couple of fellow peasants including the classic character of Little John (Kevin Durand). After a bit of good fate befalls them, Robin finds himself on a journey to pursue his word and honor. Meanwhile, Prince John attempts to rule the country with and iron fist and an ill-advised friendship. The two plots come colliding together in a traditional epic battle scene (for the sake of refraining from spoiling the movie, I have extremely simplified the plot, but know that it is well produced and carefully mixes history with legend to move the story forward).

Crowe is great as title character (he also produced the film) but I was pleasantly surprised by his love interest, Marian Loxley (Cate Blanchtette). With the exception of her battlefield entrance (aforementioned only problem with battle scenes) she is very good. Her portrayal of Marian gives more depth to her character than most of the others have. Other than the main two, the only notable performance is ______ as Prince John, who effectively makes you despise the womanizing dolt of a monarch (dolt is my history prof’s word, not mine).

Other than the exposition and Marian’s battle segment, I really enjoyed this movie. Its inviting adventure to ensure freedom from taxation warms this red-blooded conservative’s heart. No doubt my naïveté towards the historical imprecision biased my enjoyment of the pseudo-historical story, but as they say, ignorance is bliss. The great action drives the film as swordsmen and archers skillfully and admirably wield their weapons. The story creatively constructs a believable prequel of sorts for the well-known legend. Don’t be surprised if Scott and Crowe tag team again for a would-be highly anticipated sequel/ I for one would be there again opening week with faith that this creative duo could sidestep the all-too-common sequel disappointment.


4 out of 5 Stars

Thanks for checking out our blog. Feel free to send us comments and suggestions at clawandnussreviews@gmail.com Also don't forget to join the Twitter. As always tell your friends about us!!!!

-Nuss