Robin Hood, with a shade of Gladiator.

I can't remember the last time I looked forward to a film as much as I have this one
 
Gladiator is my favorite movie of all time, Russell Crowe is my favorite actor of all time, and Ridley Scott is my favorite director of all time, and hence, I am so, so, SO, much looking forward to this movie! :drool:

And then there's this -
"It is the beginning of how the man becomes known as Robin the Hood. You don't really get that until the last few minutes when you realise, 'Ah this is who he is," Scott explains.

"Let's say we might presume there's a sequel. Honestly, I thought, 'Why not have the potential for a sequel, particularly if it is a genre that you absolutely love and has never been fully explored?' If there were to be a sequel, you would have a constant enemy throughout, King John, and you would follow his reign of 17 years. The signing of the Magna Carta could be Robin's final act," Scott said.
Click to expand...
:drool: :drool: :drool: :drool:
 
SmashedHombre said:
I can't remember the last time I looked forward to a film as much as I have this one
Click to expand...

466054powerpuff_girl.jpg
 
Ixion said:
Meh, needs more Alan Rickman.
Click to expand...

I rate this poster

I read about this in the Times on Sunday, and I'm happy they seem to have gone for quite a distinct interpretation of the yarn. Mock me all you want, I loved Robin Hood Prince of Thieves, I've lost count of how many times I've watched it. I've cautiously looking forward to this. It has a lot to live up to
 
B Cantona said:
I rate this poster

I read about this in the Times on Sunday, and I'm happy they seem to have gone for quite a distinct interpretation of the yarn. Mock me all you want, I loved Robin Hood Prince of Thieves, I've lost count of how many times I've watched it. I've cautiously looking forward to this. It has a lot to live up to
Click to expand...

Hello Bradley!
 
I've watched Prince of Thieves loads of times as well, always enjoy it, and not just because of Rickman.

This new one looks like Scott dusted off the Gladiator blueprint and just changed the decor. It's annoyingly familiar, even down to the massive, eight foot tall inbred swinging his huge weapon around during a forest battle.
 
B Cantona said:
I rate this poster

I read about this in the Times on Sunday, and I'm happy they seem to have gone for quite a distinct interpretation of the yarn. Mock me all you want, I loved Robin Hood Prince of Thieves, I've lost count of how many times I've watched it. I've cautiously looking forward to this. It has a lot to live up to
Click to expand...

You could have any interpretation of the myth you like as there's no hard evidence that any of it is true.
 
Jim Schembri said:
IT'S difficult to comprehend how anybody could so totally screw up a big-screen reboot of the Robin Hood story but director Ridley Scott and his A-list regular Russell Crowe have done so with their bloated, self-important dirge of a film.

Whatever magic the dynamic duo had in bringing history alive with Gladiator (2000) is totally lost this time.

Deliberately adopting the opposite approach to the breezy, colourful, fun 1938 Errol Flynn classic, Scott and Crowe, working from a screenplay by Brian Helgeland (LA Confidential, Green Zone) have effectively sucked the life out of the beloved movie legend and replaced it with a lofty, airless, pulverising bore.

Set in the year AD1199, the film recasts Robin Hood (Crowe) as a dour renegade soldier who escapes from King Richard's French battlefront to return home to England with his band of decidedly gloomy, never mind merry, men.

En route he assumes the identity of a landowner whose wife Marion (Cate Blanchett) is patiently waiting back at the over-taxed farm. He hooks up with her and takes up arms against the nasty Prince John (a woefully miscast Oscar Isaac) before refocusing his attention on the even nastier French.

Designed to be endured rather than enjoyed, Robin Hood is a tangle of clumsy subplots and conspiracies, photographed flatly in a visually dull blue-grey tint and featuring messily edited action scenes that consist largely of sword-bearing men running into each other to the sound of clattering cutlery.

Affecting an accent of sorts, Crowe speaks almost entirely in a vocabulary of grunts and growls that are often difficult to understand, especially when delivering utterances in the guttural whisper that has become his signature.

Worse, the usually marvellous Blanchett blands out as the politically corrected Marion, no longer a damsel in distress but a dagger-wielding real estate manager. She might be a good role model for embryonic feminists but she's also just plain boring.

The entire film serves as backstory, ending with the line ''And so the legend begins''. Finishing where you should begin is never a good sign.
Click to expand...

Link: Robin Hood

Though Jim Schembri, the author, is quite biased against the film, what he's written points out that the whole concept of Robin Hood is going to be portrayed quite differently to before, so I'm looking forward to going to see it on Thursday.

Some comments about the article:
swb said:
Classic Jim Schembri: get in early to rain on the parade. On the basis of past Schembri reviews, I'll take this poor review as a reasonable indication that the movie may be quite excellent. I'll be running for the theatre on Thursday.
Click to expand...

Campbell said:
Gee, did Jim Schembri get up from the wrong side of the bed, the day he wrote this review?
Clearly, Jim wanted to see Russell in and old style classic interpetation of the film,
I'll also be rushing out to see it,
I'm yet to see a russell crowe movie i didn't enjoy.
Click to expand...

Grant said:
Saw the screening last night and wholeheartedly disagree with you, sorry Jim. I went in with an open mind, hoping for some typical Ridley Scott quality - and got it with bells on. I've seen my share of Robin Hood movies and to watch a different take on the legend was a breath of fresh air. Crowe is undeniably a first class leading man and carries this powerfully on his broad shoulders. His gruff, serious Robin is a nice change from the quirky, chirpy variety and Blanchett's Marian, while maybe a tad more independent than incarnations we're used to, is proudly forthright yet at times enticing and feminine as well. The action scenes are first class, Mark Strong's deliciously abhorrent bad guy Godfrey makes your skin crawl and veteran Max von Sydow beautifully complements a quality cast with a touch of class. The biggest endorsement I can give the film is at the end of it I immediately said to my friend 'Is that it?' I wanted more, much more and can't wait for the sequel. I think it's a triumph and Scott fans should rush to see it. Sorry Jim.
Click to expand...
 
Spammy said:
Gladiator is so overrated. By strange coincidence it is actually on tele at the moment. I'm just about to turn it over.

Ridley Scott has churned out some quite average films in the last few years.
Click to expand...

Black Hawk Down was very exciting.
 
Spammy said:
Gladiator is so overrated. By strange coincidence it is actually on tele at the moment. I'm just about to turn it over.

Ridley Scott has churned out some quite average films in the last few years.
Click to expand...

Blasphemer! ;)

I think i've even got three versions of he soundtrack lying around somewhere.
 
The film has both Andy Garcia and Mark Strong, what's the point on having 2 guys who look like Berbatov? Why don't they call the man himself?
 
MUFC07 said:
The film has both Andy Garcia and Mark Strong, what's the point on having 2 guys who look like Berbatov? Why don't they call the man himself?
Click to expand...

Both Andy Garcia and Mark Strong have denied any involvement with the film.
 
Went to see this earlier in the day. If you're going with the preconception of Robin Hood "Men in Tights" style, then either get rid now or be sorely disappointed. Aside from any external influences, the film itself certainly does leave a bit of room for improvement story-wise, and it does end rather abruptly, leaving you feeling perhaps a little short-changed. The action scenes are typical of any other movie of that era: much clanging and slashing, though without the plague of unsteady and rapid camerawork. A good solid movie, but nothing too special. 6/10
 
JezChan said:
and it does end rather abruptly, leaving you feeling perhaps a little short-changed.
Click to expand...

I've not seen the film yet myself but there were strong hints at a sequel, perhaps this ahs some bearing on that.

So the studio doesn't feel shot changed. :smirk:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.