Ridley Scott and Russell Crowe make a great team. Just look at Gladiator. Really. We mean it, skip Robin Hood and just go watch Gladiator. This movie is so BARELY a story of Robin Hood, it hardly deserves the name, and winds up being little more than a re-tread of Scott’s previous epic work. Everyone phoned it in on this one, folks; don’t waste your time.
Your Geek News
made by movie geeks, for movie geeks.
Great review as always, guys. And I wholeheartedly agree. Honestly, “Robin Hood: Men in Tights” was better than this one.
Again, Matt, I saw “Six Reasons Why”=awesome. Great job to you and Jeff.
@CB2001: That’s fantastic, Dan, I’m so glad you enjoyed Six Reasons Why! Did you watch the special features? There’s some hilarious stuff on there… not to mention the director commentary… I’ll be sure to tell Jeff you dug it
~Matt
Matt- Not yet. Been sort of busy with Final Film Project class at Full Sail University. Not only am I working as the Art Dog for one of the three shorts being produced this upcoming month, but I am also gathering some stuff for a short I’m doing independently of class called “Bonds.” But I do plan on checking out the special features and the audio commentary track soon (possibly this Saturday, as I have nothing much to do except some prop hunting via the Free section of Craigslist and Freecycle, both I know are available in Canada. I recommend them, could be useful for props). Now, I can’t help but wonder how the next one is going to be, which I feel may be even more great.
Also, I was checking Vimeo, and I found another video that may be of interest to you and Nat. I found this trailer called “Counter Effect”, which is made by the visual effects team behind both “Battlestar Galactica” and “Caprica,” and features a familiar BSG cast member: http://www.vimeo.com/11697055
You guys make some great points. I gotta agree with you about the uninspired usage of the cast. On an unrelated note, I would guess that the Costner version had more English actors than this one. (Seriously, you can count them on one hand.)
This movie was aggravating. First of all, the whole “Ridley Scott’s version of the Robin Hood legend”? Y’know, the one that seemed to be in the trailers? I would love to see THAT movie. This is not that movie. Sure it looks great, just like a Ridley movie, but the script seemed to be out-of-order. I read that they were originally planning on doing the new twist with the Sheriff of Nottingham as the hero, but changed their minds after they had already started filming.
**SPOILER**
Mark Strong is the main bad guy, a made-up character who’s kind of a stock villain. They could’ve just named him Guy of Gisborne and it wouldn’t make a lick of difference. And by the time King John makes his declaration of OUTLAAAAAAAWW, it feels unbearably forced because it no longer makes sense for him to do so. Because of how much the story dragged, this movie made me feel its length through the whole second half. That was my only thought was “When does he become the outlaw?!!” By the time they headed into the big battle, I figured that he must become an outlaw at the end, and I no longer cared. I didn’t care much about the scavenger kids hanging in the forest either. What was the point of them?
I wouldn’t mind a sequel, if only to get the Ridley Hood movie that I expected from this one. I’m just annoyed that the couldn’t just make that movie here.
Thanks guys! Saved me some trouble. I was pretty much opposed to this just because it seems like Costner’s Robin Hood just came out a few years ago – until I got to thinking about it and 20 years ago sounds more like it. About the same time frame between Batman I and Batman Begins. I guess I don’t think people should go ahead with remakes unless they have something amazing to add to the story, which Batman Begins did and this new Robin Hood doesn’t seem to.
Thanks again!