Digital Spy

Search Digital Spy
 

DS Forums

 
 

Ridley Scott's Robin Hood


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 20-05-2010, 13:05
GARETH197901
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: XBL-JediScho PSN-Gareth1979
Posts: 21,960
ah well got my free tickets out of the paper today,if its boring at least ive not paid anything to see it
GARETH197901 is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 20-05-2010, 13:51
alisonrose3764
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,428
I'm just gutted - went to see it last night and was very disappointed!
Over long and all over the place.
I'm a massive fan of Russ as an actor and a man - hubba - but he just does not seem to be used enough in this movie - once he is off screen it all falls flat.
Mark Strong hams it up a bit and the King is amusing - but its just not good enough.
Gutted - had to youtube a bit of Maximus when I got home to have a good film fix.
alisonrose3764 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-05-2010, 14:44
late8
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 7,030
did they have ww2 style beach landing craft with ores stuck on all those years ago?
late8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-05-2010, 14:51
Mooby~
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,572
Since when was Robin Hood a 46-year-old with middle-age spread and an Irish accent?

I heard Crowe's interview with Lawson and thought he sounded like an utter nob. I'm not even going to bother watching it, I can't take Crowe and his childish grumpy hard man act seriously.
Mooby~ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-05-2010, 14:53
eggflip
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 97
Awful, awful movie - just gave it 2 stars on IMDB and was actually being generous (an extra star for the comedy accents). To be fair to Crowe, though, I doubt he has been anywhere in England outside London, so maybe he just used all the accents he heard there.
eggflip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-05-2010, 15:14
Dai13371
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Ammanford, South Wales
Posts: 7,900
How many complained that he didn't talk like a Spaniard in Gladiator? I think people are really focusing too much on his accent after Mark Lawson decided to waste Crowe's time on the subject. Saying that though, I am looking forward ot this so much.
Dai13371 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-05-2010, 17:56
ritch
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,468
I don't mind it being long it's the lack of direction tha I struggled with. If didn't appear to know where it was going and what it was supposed to be. It wasn't an action film as there wasn't enough of that to give it that label. Equally it wasn't a love story. You didn't really see the relationship between Robin and Marion develop.

I think it doesn't help that it's called Robin Hood. He didn't really become Robin of the Hood until after the events of this film. It would be like making a film called Spiderman and just doing a film about Peter Parker and say well Spiderman happens after this film finishes.

What was the point of the Merry Men in this film? What did they do and actually contribute to the story? Did you feel they they had a close relationship and thought of each others as "brothers" and would lay their lives down for each other? I didn't. Of all the Merry Men the only one that got any decent characterisation was Friar Tuck. The rest could have just been anybody or even not used at all in the film. If there is to be a sequel you could just have easily introduced them in that film and base it around Robin now an outlaw and building up his gang.
Hed the characterisation been better it would have made the slower parts of the film more interesting and made it flowed better.

IMO the lack of direction for the film, a weak plot and poor characterisation are a bigger problem than the pacing and length of the film.


The intention was a real take on Robin Hood going right back to the roots, rather than the steal from the rich give to the poor thing. It seems like they want to cover a large story arch, it basically needs another film to get to the other stuff, which I hope they do.

I agree that the direction could have been a bit better though, I’d did veer off at points and you didn’t know what they were trying to get at, some points of the story were not gone into enough, or the more interesting parts seemed neglected a bit for the sake of drawing out others scenes, which was probably a big mistake.

Better editing to optimise things a bit probably would have helped the flow of the film more. I still enjoyed it though, if they address these issues the sequel could be a lot better, that part of the story would be better and more interesting to work with
ritch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-05-2010, 18:27
wuffles
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 31,879
I went to see it this afternoon - it was a lot better than I thought it'd be.

I didn't see all the end credits, so can someone tell me who was playing Eleanor of Aquitaine?
wuffles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-05-2010, 18:47
cheeks
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Somerset
Posts: 20,923
I went to see it this afternoon - it was a lot better than I thought it'd be.

I didn't see all the end credits, so can someone tell me who was playing Eleanor of Aquitaine?
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0955308/

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0040586/

IMDB is your friend.....
cheeks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-05-2010, 22:30
ritch
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,468
I'm just gutted - went to see it last night and was very disappointed!
Over long and all over the place.
I'm a massive fan of Russ as an actor and a man - hubba - but he just does not seem to be used enough in this movie - once he is off screen it all falls flat.
Mark Strong hams it up a bit and the King is amusing - but its just not good enough.
Gutted - had to youtube a bit of Maximus when I got home to have a good film fix.
sounds like you were expecting Gladiator mark 2, which this film isn't really.
ritch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-05-2010, 22:56
Spacedone
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,400
sounds like you were expecting Gladiator mark 2, which this film isn't really.
If anything, a large chunk of the middle section was more like Master & Commander in tone, long periods of calm and normality between short periods of shouty violence.
Spacedone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-05-2010, 11:30
FinalBroadcast
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Dartford, Kent
Posts: 3,710
The film was, as has been said already, too long. I reckon you could easily chop 15 minutes off of the whole thing in France at the beginning and still get your point across.

Crowe's accent wavered from being good in places to pure Ringo Starr.

Saying that though, felt it was reasonably enjoyable... not the greatest film but certainly not the worst.
FinalBroadcast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-05-2010, 14:49
alisonrose3764
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,428
sounds like you were expecting Gladiator mark 2, which this film isn't really.
I def knew it was not going to be Gladiator 2 and would have been cross if it had been - but it was such a drag and that was the big surprise to me.
Gutted!
alisonrose3764 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-05-2010, 15:39
OneTreeHillFan
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Swansea
Posts: 7,085
I saw this film last Friday and wasn't very impressed. I only saw it because my accomplice refused to see anything else Russel Crowes accent throughout the film was really bizarre, and i'm kind of stupid so didn't really get what was going on... Also, i thought the king at the beginning was meant to be the good one... anddd i didn't really like Cate Blanchett in it... The only thing I did like was Robins crew or whatever... Little John and co. ALTHOUGH I spent over half an hour trying to work out where I'd seen Little John before until i relaised he was in Lost
OneTreeHillFan is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 22-05-2010, 10:46
ritch
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,468
I def knew it was not going to be Gladiator 2 and would have been cross if it had been - but it was such a drag and that was the big surprise to me.
Gutted!
Well its not as good as Gladiator that’s for sure. So I can see the disappoint in regards to comparing the quality of the two films even if not expecting a similar type thing.

I watched Gladiator again the other day and as a film it flows much better and nearly every scene has a purpose. I was interested by similarities between Joaquin Phoenix’s character and the king in Robin Hood, they both had a spoiled edge about them although Phoenix had that darker side. Robin Hood would have been better with Joaquin in it lol. I forgot how good he was in Gladiator, theres only a hand full of actors that can pull of that vulnerable insecurity allied to a brutal evil streak.

Robin Hood would defiantly have benefited from some better, more stand out characters. Although campy and amusing at times, the King doesn’t really have that edge to him and the Sheriff of Nottingham was a non entity. My hope is they will develop this more in another film. I almost feel that without a sequel this film will be regarded as a bit pointless in story terms. With one it might feel more complete and the first film might be viewed as a decent set up to an incredible follow up! Wishful thinking I know
ritch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-05-2010, 13:40
performingmonk
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 16,515
I don't think they will do a sequel to this, even though maybe they were planning to, due to the negative reaction. It seems Russell Crowe so wasn't expecting to be ripped off for this, and yet his performance IS pretty dodgy. He's obviously a good actor but definitely out of place here.

He would have been much better as the Sheriff, as was the original idea. And then maybe Orlando Bloom as Robin (would have made sense, have the two stars of Ridley Scott's previous two epics clash together). What we've ended up with is a confused mess. It doesn't know what it wants to be.
performingmonk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-05-2010, 13:48
SteveOwen
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: In the Wind
Posts: 27,017
I don't think they will do a sequel to this, even though maybe they were planning to, due to the negative reaction. It seems Russell Crowe so wasn't expecting to be ripped off for this, and yet his performance IS pretty dodgy. He's obviously a good actor but definitely out of place here.

He would have been much better as the Sheriff, as was the original idea. And then maybe Orlando Bloom as Robin (would have made sense, have the two stars of Ridley Scott's previous two epics clash together). What we've ended up with is a confused mess. It doesn't know what it wants to be.
Crowe's performance was far from great and he was definitely miscast but I seriously doubt that Orlando Bloom's presence would have improved the film!
SteveOwen is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 22-05-2010, 14:41
cunningham1471
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: London
Posts: 7,310
Crowe's performance was far from great and he was definitely miscast but I seriously doubt that Orlando Bloom's presence would have improved the film!
Even without the costume and ears i think people would think of Logolass seeing him running about wuth the bow.

Maybe someone like Clive Owen would have been good.
cunningham1471 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-05-2010, 16:26
ritch
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,468
I don't think they will do a sequel to this, even though maybe they were planning to, due to the negative reaction. It seems Russell Crowe so wasn't expecting to be ripped off for this, and yet his performance IS pretty dodgy. He's obviously a good actor but definitely out of place here.

He would have been much better as the Sheriff, as was the original idea. And then maybe Orlando Bloom as Robin (would have made sense, have the two stars of Ridley Scott's previous two epics clash together). What we've ended up with is a confused mess. It doesn't know what it wants to be.
I doubt it as well. Although the figures have been good the reviews have been very mixed. It’s a shame really as it could have been better. They to appear to have missed the mark that would have made it a very good film, I think its good but has a few too many faults for the majority of people to really embrace it.

Orlando Bloom would have made it worse though, personally I don’t think he has the presence for a leading role like that and would come across as a sap. I agree that Crowe was probably miscast, he was more like a worn out old solider and probably would have been better suited in another role.

It’s a shame they didn’t stay away from Robin Hood and do another historical epic type thing Crowe would have been better suited to, he has the presence to play a load of powerful historical figures, I always thought Robin Hood was a strange choice well before it came out.
ritch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23-05-2010, 11:08
deano0501
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,346
I was more disconcerted that Noah Tate from Emmerdale was in it!
deano0501 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23-05-2010, 15:20
cricket123
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 523
I saw the film yesterday. I would give it 5/10 a very avrage film. I thought the acting was quite bad and halfway through the film i did not really know what was going on. I thought the film was very fast and i hated the fighting scenes.

Not a film i will be buying when it comes out.
cricket123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31-05-2010, 21:18
Ghost World
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Pawnee Parks Deparment
Posts: 6,935
http://sex-in-a-sub.blogspot.com/201...or-writer.html

The original idea for the film sounds quite interesting:
Probably close to 3 years ago, a hot script by Ethan Reiff and Cyrus Voris called NOTTINGHAM went out to buyers. The script was the Robin Hood story told from the Sheriff of Nottingham’s point of view - as he used period “forensics”, like tracking and arrow trajectory, to find a terrorist who was robbing respectable members of society. Shelock Holmes in Sherwood Forest.
I still don't understand how a script that everyone loves can be bought up after a bidding war, only for the director to swan in and decide he wants to do something different and junk the whole thing.
Ghost World is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2010, 08:16
roddydogs
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,996
I like the way the French were portrayed as the "Baddies" when in the beginning, we were sacking French Castles.
And where did the French get WW2 landing craft in 1500?, they never actually invaded, or tried to.
roddydogs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2010, 08:45
soulboy77
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Herts
Posts: 14,208
...Crowe's accent wavered from being good in places to pure Ringo Starr.

Saying that though, felt it was reasonably enjoyable... not the greatest film but certainly not the worst.
A group of us were discussing the movie whilst out for a pub lunch the other day and came to a similar conclusion. Crowe's wandering accent made us all smile but the film was a fairly decent watch though does not live up to the pre-hype.
soulboy77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2010, 10:00
Verence
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Kessingland, Suffolk
Posts: 69,352
http://sex-in-a-sub.blogspot.com/201...or-writer.html

The original idea for the film sounds quite interesting:


I still don't understand how a script that everyone loves can be bought up after a bidding war, only for the director to swan in and decide he wants to do something different and junk the whole thing.
I probably would have gone to see the film if it had stuck to that original idea
Verence is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
 
Reply



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 20:58.