Film Works

Ridley Scott’s Robin Hood is a sweeping epic complete with spectacle and pageantry; yet, it collapses into an epic cliché. With its elaborate plotting unable to live up to the roaring fires and engaging fights, it merely lingers around like a topnotch archer drinking buckets of mead, then expectedly fails to hit the crucial mark. At the least, it hits the edge of the target through its noteworthy performances and production values.

It could have been a tighter cinematic offer instead of being a two and a half-hour story of a few hits and lots of misses. The action part is considerably fine, but the drama part fails. While there are a few intelligent and bull’s eye moments between the talented Russell Crowe as Robin Longstride/Robin Hood and her equally talented partner Cate Blanchett as Marion Loxley that work, the very essence of this Robin Hood story has a lot of dead spaces and pointless name-checking. Its salvation is how it manages to keep the action up and running within its well-mounted set pieces; thus, making it a “beautiful bore” to some, a “just fine” compromise to casual moviegoers and Robin Hood aficionados, or a “just another hollow adaptation” to the rest who felt they got robbed money from movie tickets.

Scott’s spin on the classic Robin Hood yarn turns the familiar old English legend into a serious gritty and grubby lesson in 13^th century British history. This time, he and his usual Oscar-winning crewmates turn the familiar swashbuckling bandit of Sherwood Forest into a serious story focusing on the man behind the legend. It works like a sort of a prequel on how the legend came to be. It attempts to explain the earlier life of Robin Hood by stripping away the fantasy from the myth and making his story more like a societal lesson and a historical exposition. It seems to aim higher than all these, but it lacks the needed depth to transcend the intended character study into a more valuable piece of cinematic work.

Robin Hood is filtered through all the trademark requirements of a summer blockbuster. It has good cuts, camera movements and engaging sound. Scott is at his best with the action sequences; yet, he is unable to put enough dimensionality to the characters, amidst the solid acting performances. The robust script from Brian Helgeland has a sense of struggle in it. The climactic battle sequence is another technical saving grace amidst some overstuffed and ill-conceived moments.

On the positive side, the sense of epic sweep and detailed grounding of the film’s intentions make the uneven pacing work on a basic entertainment level. John Mathieson’s cinematography effectively relives the medieval setting and English countryside feel. The wealth of well-researched period details from production designer Arthur Max keeps the movie appealing.

The film has a strong ensemble that lodges well within the Middle Age setting. The cast of veteran actors and actresses including the supporting cast Max von Sydow as Sir Walter Loxley, William Hurt as William Marshal and Mark Strong as Godfrey maintain the serious mood befitting the director’s treatment. However, some scenes tend to inappropriately have accents wandering all over England.

For its specific merits, Robin Hood is one entertaining material. This story about the English philanthropic outlaw is still a watchable fare to the non-demanding viewers. It is technically a handsomely made movie that reworks the traditional characters of the legend into the world of real people. Its production reins over the story, though. And if not for the “too much of this and not enough of that” issue, the solid performances, rousing action sequences and impressive style could have made it a much interesting piece of cinematic wonder.