Robin Hood (2010)

As a scholar of the Middle Ages I can say you're not likely to see a better re-creation of the era of King John than any random frame you might pick from Ridley Scott's Robin Hood. From Celtic monuments to Roman ruins, to Loxley hall abundant with 12th century furnishings this film is breathtaking and superbly researched. Except perhaps for the huts clustered around London Tower-the castle was in the midst of a city long before AD 1199. But real huts may be preferable to digital animation.

The authors know English history and the Robin Hood material and play fast and loose with both -which is being true to the tradition of Mallory,Shakespeare, and the Victorian versions of the tale that nowadays seem to be taken for Robin Hood gospel.In a merry spirit of throwing a bit of everything into this script, we are being treated to glimpses of the masked Dying God in the forest (see archeologist Margaret Murray's The God of the Witches for what that's all about.) The Magna Carta -complete with authentic signatures of the 1215 version and Matthew Paris's illustrations of shields from forty years later -makes a premature appearance twice. And the royal favorite turns out to be an agent working for the unpopularity of the king to make way for an invasion from France -a plot twist borrowed from the time of Richard III (don't trust Shakespeare for this, see Paul Murray Kendall's definitive Richard III.) But, hey, Walter Scott combines three centuries in the opening paragraphs of Ivanhoe, why can't Ridley Scott? I give this film five stars, it is stunningly produced, persuasively acted, and keeps up the long tradition of anchronism in Robin Hood plots.

The story of Robin Hood has been told in films with different plot twists. In Douglas Fairbanks' version from 1922, Robin Hood is the Earl of Huntington, going off on Crusade with King Richard (played by Wallace Berry). Huntington returns to oppose Prince John, who is threatening to take the throne from his brother.

Errol Flynn's version has Robin Hood staying in England as a Saxon nobleman opposing Prince John for the same reasons as Douglas Fairbanks' Huntington. Kevin Costner keeps the Third Crusade in the story but adds a Muslim warrior played by Morgan Freeman. There are many approaches to telling the story of Robin Hood.

Ridley Scott's version is perhaps the most ambitious. The film begins with Richard the Lion Heart's siege of the Castle Chaulus Chabral in Normandy. This is where we meet Robin Longstride, a skilled archer, who has followed King Richard into battle for many years. The king looks for an honest man and is confronted with Longstride who has been running a game of chance and is accused (by Little John) of cheating. Robin is not cheating but, ironically, his honest answers to the king land him and his companions shackled. So much for honesty and kings.

The death of King Richard allows Robin and his companions to escape and flee back home. Along the way, they run across a party led by Robert Loxley retuning the crown back to England. Loxley has been attacked by an English nobleman named Godfrey (magnificently played by Mark Strong) who is conspiring with King Philip of France to invade England. Loxley is mortally wounded but Robin and his companions rout Godfrey and his men. The dying Loxley asks Robin to return his sword to his father. Not being a nobleman, Robin impersonates Loxley and returns the crown to the hands to Prince John.

The story develops with Robin and his men going to Nottingham where Robin is, conveniently, asked by Sir Walter Loxley (Max von Sydow) to pretend to be his son in order to preserve the household for his daughter-in-law Marion (Cate Blanchett). The story centers on stopping Godfry and the intended invasion of England by King Philip. A sub-plot concerns the rights of Englishmen centered on a documents of rights that Robin's father (long ago executed) was instrumental in conceiving. The document is the Magna Carta in all but name.

This Robin Hood brings the 12th century to life in all of its grim realities of hard work and, by our standards, hard living. The production design is beautifully conceived, down to the rushes strewn on the floor of the manor house. The performances are magnificent down to supporting roles. It was nice to see Mark Addy (of The Full Monty) as Friar Tuck and Oscar Isaac made an effective quarrelsome King John. John Hurt has a strong role as William Marshall, a courtier of King Richard, and Eileen Atkins made a strong Queen Eleanor. Danny Huston made an exciting Richard the Lion Heart.

The film ends with Robin declared an outlaw for supporting the rights of Englishmen. The film ends where Errol Flynn's version begins. I have not heard if Ridley Scott intends to take up the story but we are left in anticipation of what is to come. This Robin Hood is well acted and beautifully photographed. The story is refreshingly different from the other Robin Hood's but it is a story that has differed from film to film and television.

Buy Robin Hood (2010) Now

I adored this movie. Not only did it give some humor, action, and what notbut it also gave a much more realistic and historic view of the famous Robin Hood.

I was watching the History channel the night before we went to see this movie in the theaters. I think it gave the movie sort of a prequel of what to expect along with actual historical informationwhether it was on the kings, Robin Hood himself, or the weapons used. The amount of detail that went into the movie to make sure it was as historically accurate as possible was amazing. The construction of the bows, the shields and weapons used (my favorite part was the war hammer that Robin used near the end!) and the horses.

If you aren't interested in the historical part of RH and would rather see tons of explosions and what notthis movie may not be for you. If you are interested in a more realistic/historic tale of Robin Hoodthen I think you'll enjoy this piece.

Check out the History channel's special on Robin Hood I think you'll come to find how amazing this movie is along with the amount of detail that was put into the weaponry and other items in the movie.

Read Best Reviews of Robin Hood (2010) Here

Ridley Scott's version of Robin Hood isn't the version you're used to. This tells the mythical story of Robin Hood before he became an outlaw and lived in Sherwood Forest. Of course the story of Robin Hood is one of a lot of mythology and possibly a little bit of fact. No one knows the real story. Chances are that film/book depictions of "Robin Hood" are completely wrong, so it's difficult to say if this movie is realistic in any way, shape, or form minus the historical accuracies dealing with the king of England.

This version of Robin Hood is probably the best I've seen. It's very entertaining, and not a "big, dumb action movie." It's not on the level of Ridley's Gladiator, but I think it's a big leap ahead of Kingdom of Heaven (the theatrical release, at least).

The problem with Robin Hood is the ending. *Warning: spoilers ahead if you don't know the story of Robin Hood* I have not seen the director's cut yet but I would hope that between the final 2 scenes in the film there's something stuck in between them as a bridge. You go from a pretty mediocre beach battle to the king declaring Robin Hood as an outlaw. It feels like they had to cut something, or they just got tired with the film and wanted it to end and they rushed through the final scenes. At any rate, the film almost completely falls apart at the end, though the shots of Robin Hood going into Sherwood Forest make up for a bit.

Ultimately, this is one of the most watchable films of the last couple of years. It's not perfect by any stretch, but it's entertaining and one that I could watch over and over again. It has that kind of vibe to it. Other films I put in that category (in recent release) are the Hurt Locker, Shutter Island, The Wrestler. Just films that I can watch and be entertained by no matter how many times I've seen them. That's good company, and though critics panned Robin Hood, you should give it a shot. As I said, from a technical standpoint I can see it's flaws, but this is a very entertaining movie, and sometimes that's good enough for me.

Want Robin Hood (2010) Discount?

This was a good prequel and action movie. I was left wanting to see a Robin Hood movie at the end though. I think they should have stuck with the original title of the film "Nottingham" or even "Robin of Locksley" then made a sequel called Robin Hood. Some people probably complained about how Robin was a commoner in this film and not the aristocrat that everyone knows him as, but he was actually a commoner in the earliest versions of the story. I hope they release a directors cut like Kingdom of Heaven that made the theatrical version of the film look like crap and a sequel film with Crow actually being Robin Hood.

Save 42% Off