Robin Hood (2010) Film Review

Ridley Scott takes on here another re-telling of the Robin Hood legend: the saviour of Nottingham, to rob from the rich and give to the poor. The significant difference being this is an origin story, going back to what may have created the legend in the first place. Robin Hood played by Russell Crowe is an archer in the army of King Richard the Lionheart while amid a siege of Chalus Castle in 1199.

Feeling disillusioned by the drive of the crusade. Robin Hood and his merry men seek to escape from their posts after their king is slain in battle. They, however, face conflict when Godfrey played by Mark Strong, a knight who has betrayed the crown and has assassinated King Richard by orders of King Philip of France. Attacks and slays a group of knights, including Sir Robert Loxley, played by Douglas Hodge.

Robin Hood promises the dying Hoxley to return his sword to his father, which he and his men sees that as an opportunity to return home. Arriving in Nottingham to return the sword to Sir Walter Loxley played by Max Von Sydow. Robin meets Loxley’s widow Maid Marian played by Cate Blanchett. Who is a feisty and fierce and initially hesitant and suspicious towards Robin, but gradually something of a connection starts brewing between them.

Meanwhile, Robin returns the crown to Prince John, and John is declared King on the spot and soon proceeds to create an absolute tyranny in Nottingham. Demanding unreasonable tax and taking all that he can. Godfrey temporarily sides with him before hatching his own plans, and it’s up to Robin Hood to take leadership and form the legend to come.

The film attempt to cover a great deal of plot. Trying to cover significant moments of history as well pretty much inventing the character that we are all aware of in several stories and media. Resulting in a very baggy and muddled film. Going back to the central character’s origins is different from the several interpretations that have come before it.

Which conclusively show him as the famous outlaw in action, in theory, could work, but ultimately it’s a film that doesn’t take flight as it should do. First, it’s a film that doesn’t know the audience it’s primarily made for. The film is rated 12 that’s suitable for young kids but is shot so dark and dreary that there isn’t much action-packed fun to be had. Not only that, with the film being a 12, the action sequences feel entirely toothless.

Russell Crowe, in what is to this day the latest in his collaboration with Ridley Scott, can’t decide what region he is from. Scotland? Ireland? Down under? His accent is all over the map, and it’s really distracting. I said before about the film being mudded with the plot. There are equally too many characters and subplots that the script provides, but can't figure out know how to wrangle them all together.

To the point where the audience isn’t sure who’s aligned with who, where characters are in the story or what their story arc is. There isn’t any space to care about the characters. When the film is more interested in atmosphere and piecing together specific factoids of history like it’s a puzzle box.

If there is anything positive to be taken from the film I would say that the atmosphere in question is well shot. Evoking dark and down-beat styles that do come across quite moody, and there are a few side performances that stand out. Such as Max Von Sydow. Who is always a magnificent screen presence and Mark Addy as Friar Tuck. Even when his character is lost to the plot, he does shine in what is effectively a small role. But as it stands, it’s just not as a terrifically exciting film as it was marketed to be. It’s dull, long and has a miscast performance from Russell Crowe that doesn’t fit the bill; it’s a complete mess. Watch the film for specific atmospheric sequences but skip the rest.

2/5