...because both my time and money were robbed by Ridley Scott’s woeful representation of a classic legend.

Scott was successful in setting his Robin Hood is a grittily realistic setting alright, everyone in the film was dirty and in rags, even the royalty were not as splendorously dressed as in most such depictions. All the wealth of the country had been drained by King Richard’s horrendously expensive crusade and there was little distinction between the once wealthy landowners and a common beggar. Needless to say this is a woefully depressing and pessimistic setting and of course the last thing the people need is a newly crowned King John who sends out the tyrannical Sir Godfrey as a medieval tax-collector or in many cases - life-collector. This undesirable situation is made worse by the fact that everyone’s favourite impotent troublemakers, the french, seek to invade England after weakening the state’s position by turning the Northern landowners against the King.

One of the main reasons this fails is Crowe himself, complete with a bizarrely muddled accent - seriously, it takes real talent to speak with American, Australian and Irish accents in the same sentence. The man is far too old to be playing the titular hero at this point, which is supposed to be an origin story and we’re yet supposed to be treated to his true exploits! This is a middle-aged Robin Hood who meets a tragically frumpy old-Maid Marian played by an even more unforgivably older Cate Blanchett. The complete lack of chemistry between them does a monumental disservice to one of the most epic romances of legend. Danny Huston and William Hurt phone in their equally lacklustre performances and is heart-breaking too see poor Max Von Sydow acting like he had been kidnapped from the elderly actors retirement home and was being forced to perform against his will or he won’t get his supper. In fact out of such an overall dull cloud of a cast only the always splendid Mark Strong as Godfrey shone through like the sun itself with Scott Grimes' Will Scarlett showing some effort.

Final Verdict: Ridly Scott has crafted many movies of note, but this will not be regarded as one. Had this been about a medieval hero of his own invention it may have been worthy of something but as a Robin Hood story it can only be detested and ridiculed for such weak performances and a hopelessly disjointed plot flimsily connected to the legend. Some sporadically well crafted action scenes are present but are too tame to be enjoyed fully. Realistic to a point [not enough blood] but devoid of the expected action, adventure and sheer fun that made the legend of Robin Hood so enduring. Watch it if you simply have to or if forced but if you’re master of your own destiny – avoid.
Colonel Creedon Rating: *
3 comments:
"it takes real talent to speak with American, Australian and Irish accents in the same sentence."
I guess I have real talent, then. :)
And the balance in the universe is restored after Ironman2 receiving such a glowing review. :-)
My Dear Colonel, you are missing the point. This was obviously a daring experiment in audience participation, immersing the viewer in the entirety of the 3D experience. You went to see a film about wealth redistribution from the Wealthy to the Poor and were robbed of the price of your ticket. I can understand your delicate Republican tendencies being upset by this theme. ;)
However I must point out that, in this case, what really happened was that the wealth was redistributed from the Poor (You) to the Rich, Sir Ridley Scott. ;)
You have been schooled. ;)
BTW, Our I.T. department's new Internet Policy blocks the Bunker. I blame Connie's racy posts.
Pints, as always, insightful.
Bruce, I find a few beers and a life time of watching TV allows me to achieve the same result. ;)
Post a Comment