Robin Hood

Year:  2010

Filming:  Color

Length:  102 minutes

Genre: Adventure/Drama/History

Maturity:  PG-13 (for violence and sexual innuendos)

Cast:  Russell Crowe (Robin Hood), Cate Blanchett (Marian Loxley), Mark Strong (Godfrey), Max von Sydow (Sir Walter Loxley), Oscar Isaac (Prince John), William Hunt (William Marshall), Danny Huston (King Richard), Eileen Atkins (Eleanor of Aquitaine), Matthew Macfadyen (Sheriff of Nottingham), Mark Addy (Friar Tuck), Kevin Durand (Little John), Scott Grimes (Will Scarlet), Alan Doyle (Alan a’ Dayle), Douglas Hodge (Sir Robert of Loxley), Lea Seydoux (Isabella of Angouleme),

 Director: Ridley Scott

Personal Rating:  2 Stars

 

***

       After managing to survive Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves starring Kevin Coster, I decided I might as well take a shot at Robin Hood starring Russell Crowe. I figured since the former depended on a California cult symbol dressed in Lincoln Green, mayhaps a New Zealander might cut a better wildnerness figure? It remained to be seen. I came, I saw…I sighed. Okay, who decided to call this production “Robin Hood” again?? 

    We meet our main protagonist, a common English archer in the army of King Richard the Lionheart, on a field of battle in France. After being accused on cheating in a betting game, he is brought before the king, who is a far cry from the traditional heroic depiction. Somehow or other, they get to discussing the justice, or lack thereof, of The Crusades, and Robin basically confronts Richard about the mass execution of Muslim prisoners at Acre. The king is none-too-pleased at the archer’s impudence, and has him and several of his comrades locked in the stocks. But when Richard is killed by a French arrow, Robin and friends manage to escape and head for the hills. 

     But as they are fleeing through the forest, they come upon an English knight who  is being set upon by Frenchmen, and nobly come to his aid. The knight, Sir Robert of Loxley, has been mortally wounded, and entrusts Robin with the crown jewels he had been carrying  to safety and his own sword to return to his father. Even though Robin is a deserter, and running for his life, he agrees to fulfil the man’s dying request. In order to do this, he takes on the identity of Robert of Loxsley and makes for England.  
 

    Upon returning home and presenting the crown to Prince John, Robin journies to the north and to hand over the sword to the dead knight’s father, Sir Walter Loxsley. While there, he also meets Sir Robert’s young widow, the formidable Lady Marian, and is compelled to continue his guise as Sir Robert in order to secure the estate from the greedy local officials. He also hassles with miserly churchmen who are carrying off the grain needed by the commoners to plan to pay tithes to the bishop. One gent named Friar Tuck is complicent in this, but is forced to change his policity at the point of Robin’s sword! 
 

    As Robin becomes proficient in managing the estate, he earns the admiration of Sir Walter, who practically adopts him as a son, and the affection of Marian, who never had much feeling for her late husband to begin with. Meanwhile, there are some very complex transations are going on between the royal courts of England and France, resulting in something of a political crisis as the French prepare to invade England and the English barons prepare to rebel against their own heavy-handed King John! Since Rob is the one who brought home the crown, he is selected to pressure the king into giving the people a “charter” to guarentee their liberties and loyalty. And as it is later revealed, Rob’s late father wrote just such a charter befor his death, only to be executed for his trouble, and the sword of Loxsley actually used to be his! 
 

    Cutting to the chase, the king and his noblemen agree to the concept of a charter and prepare to join forced to combat the invasion. The English and French have it out in an epic battle on the coast, and Marian shows up disguised as a knight to avenge the death of Sir Walter, who was killed off by a very bald Frenchman named Godfrey. In the process of this, she’ll need to be rescued by Rob, earning his “knight in shining armor” status. But no sooner have the invaders been driven back than King John reneges on his charter-deal, and declares Robin to be an outlaw for impersonating a nobleman (he knew??!!). Rob and Marian head into the forest, where they are taken in by a band of vagabond orphan boys (who decided to turn the Merry Men into the East End Kids?) and…and…we are assured by computer generated lettering at the end that “the adventure begins”!  
 

    Russell Crowe as Robin Hood is just as bad as Kevin Costner as Robin Hood – but in different ways. The Costner film stuck with the basic plot line, while trying desperately to make it hip (Californian accents, hokey witches, naked bathing sequences, galactic sword fights…the full treatment!). The Crowe film, on the other hand, threw out the plot altogether, and created a totally new entity – but for some unreasonable reason decided to cling to the title for dear life! There were moments in the film when I said, “Hey, it’s not so bad – if it wasn’t called ‘Robin Hood’”! But it was. Like in the movie King Arthur starring Clive Owen, the producers make a vain attempt to create an “historical” explanation for a legend, simultaneously mangling history and ruining the legend we all know and love.  
 

    I will admit that the acting overall was decent enough, although the main cast seemed terribly miscast. Russell Crowe might be great as “Lucky Jack” Aubrey, and Cake Blanchett as the Lady Galadriel, but they just don’t cut the mustard as Robin and Marian. Both are too dark, too heavy, too conflicted. The whole setting, while lush and haunting, lacks sparkle and charm that make the original tales so endearing. Some will insist that “Merrie England” never existed, and therefore should not be recreated. But it always has and always will exist in the heart and in the imagination. It is the rebel streak and sparkling wit and glorious romance that is so characteristic of the British nature, and Robin Hood personifies it. Again, if they had decided to be original, and the whole plot was just about this random English archer who takes the place of a dead nobleman and battles against the invading French, etc., yes, it might work to change the tone. But they didn’t, and it isn’t, which is sad.  
 

    Marian’s character is one of the more complex ones in the script. She is basically bitter over having to be a pawn in the world of men’s injustice, appealing to feminist types who thrive on this sort of storyline. On that subject, the female warrior gets a bit old hat, but if that’s what women need to feel valuable, I suppose they must inndluge! While Marian obviously has come to sincerely lover her father-in-law, her relationship with her late husband seems to have crumbled due to his long absence on crusade. But honestly, her measuring of marital worth seems to rely heavily on activity in the marriage bed as opposed to any deeper emotional attachment. When chatting with Robin about her past, she sums up her marriage by one “short but sweet” night in which they had sex. I can’t help but wince at this. Is that really what defines a marriage?  
 

    Even if my marriage had been similarly arranged and cut short, I would hope I might choose to remember something about the person as opposed to the body. If her husband was a decent man, and all references indicate that he was, can she not recall one fond memory of him? One conversation shared? One letter sent? One moment when she noticed the color of his eyes for his first time? Those are the things I would hope to remember, that I would find even the slightest bit romantic. To Marian’s credit, however, I will say that she doesn’t rush off on a fling with Robin and remains chaste even when he is pretending to be her husband. In fact, she is quite determined to keep him in line…and she sleeps with a dagger just to make sure! 
 

   As for historical accuracy qualms, the writers definitely should have scrapped all the silliness about his father penning the pseudo-Magna Charta. Come on, on-set historians…ever hear of Bishop Stephen Langton? Evidently the writers were too busy vilifying the clergy to a man – including Friar Tuck, the wine-guzzling bee-keeper hoarding all the supplies from the common people! Marian even gives up going to mass because there are too many hypocrites (not a very good reason, really…the Church is a hospital for sinners). Furthermore, the Crusades got short shrift, driven by the same unreasoning bias that permeated Prince of Thieves. Indeed, we can all agree that atrocoties were committed by both sides during the wars, but in what way does that invalidate the cause to free the Holy Lands from Muslim domination? Also, the portrayal of King Richard is basically that of a war-monger lunatic. While he was certainly a warrior-king, I don’t think anyone would call him crazy. 
 

    The music score in the film was fairly good, especially the theme played during the credits, although even that seemed rather confused and lacking the proper feel. There seemed to be a desperation to replace the notion of “Merrie England” with a Celtic Distopia. When Marian and Robin are dancing, the Irish song “Spancil Hill” is played, which is totally off geographically and come after the story by almost nine centuries! And will these people please stop trying to recapture the “Braveheart Moment”, with some awkwardly worded, would-be rousing speech about “freeeeeeeedooooooom”??? Aren’t there any other things to seek after in this world? An interesting tid-bit is Russell Crowe’s seeming inability to keep his accent consistent, sounding English sometimes and Scottish others. I think he was trying his best to sound Northern English, but it was said that when someone accused him on sounding Irish, he walked off the set in a rage! Oh, well. Anything to mask the New Zealand ork-accent, what?  
 

        Overall, this picture seemed confused as to what it wanted to be when it grew up! I'll admit that there were a few moments when I was actually enjoying it, especially the big battle sequence on the coast. Look out for the lush scenery scope, including the famous White Horse markes out in the hill. And there were even moments when I could have possibly warmed to Russel Hood and his sword (interesting inscription, in the spirit of the “real” Robin Hood: “Until Lambs Become Lions”). That having been said, the combination of historical and legendary innacuracy and wrong “feel” in general left a rather bitter taste in my mouth. As I mentioned in the review of Prince of Thieves, if you want to see good adaptations, try the ones with Richard Greene, Richard Todd, Erroll Flynn, and the cartoon fox!



Robin-sort-of-ish-Hood (Russell Crowe) rides with Marian Loxsley (Cate Blanchett)