Timon
Posts: 14548
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Bristol
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Axel Foley
quote:
ORIGINAL: MoBiUGeArSkIn
... Fucking Awesome!!!
I was right about those trailers, they do a shit job selling Ridley's Hood. There is dialogue taken out of context, that ridiculous "are you ready to be who you are?" line is nowhere to be seen.
"I declare him AN OUTLAW!"
Sure you do... in the last ten minutes of the film!
This isn't Robin Hood as you know it and it actually works as a genesis movie. This basically leads into the "robbing from the rich" story we all know so well.
Ridley's Robin Hood opens in France where Robin Longstride, and what will eventually be his "Merry Men", are archers in King Richard's army. The Lion Heart is on his way back from the Crusades but is bankrupt thanks to his "adventures", plundering his way home back to England.
I won't say any more because I actually enjoyed knowing so little about the plot. Suffice to say we have backstabbing, conspiracy and democratic unrest. It's like the UK election, only more entertaining!
Performances? Terrific! Across the board, even from the minor characters. And it's a great cast. Mark Strong delivers yet another stellar performance in a villainous role.
Battle scenes? Medieval badassery! Ridley Scott knows how to shoot a sword fight, he knows how to frame a horse and how to pace a good siege. I could complain about the lack of gore (12a) but... nah.
The script is fun too, I chuckled at the intentional jokes. If I had to complain about anything is would be the length. I don't know how long the film is but... I actually wanted more! Now, I don't think Ridley Scott has ever directed a film that hasn't reached DVD being 30 minutes longer, so I fully expect there to be an extended cut of Robin Hood. I feel there's perhaps something left on the cutting room floor.
But in summary... I loved it, and I loved it a lot more than I truly expected to. I want to see it again.
I'd go with that. English history of the period is a quite complex beast to nail, but Scott gets the spirit of the times right: rising unrest from the lords over royals pissing away their tax revenue; ravaged adult male population through warring overseas; and the threat of invasion hanging in the year. Ok a bit of advantage is taken over the background to Richard Coeur de Lion, but how many folks rolling up outside the Houses of Parliament to catch sight of the statue of the Lionheart realise otherwise anyway?
Ultimately the opening sets ups the unsettled English political scene of the time. And that's why I like the film, because it doesn't hold back from trying to portray this interplay between the personal ambitions of King John, his barond and the situation of the common man and how they can be manipulated to help him maintain his power. But that isn't to say that Scott takes things to seriously - the mixture between lighter moments of merriment worked well.
As for Russ, well the accent is all over the place, but fortunately he doesn't actually have that much dialogue. And he launches arrows and wields an axe with gusto. I particularly liked the way he carried the more intimate scenes or even sowing seeds and mucking in with the rest of the settlement. He has a physical presence that allows him to dominate scenes with little more than a grim look and his chest held high.
There is a fast pace to it all that does indeed leaving one feeling there is a longer cut out there, but what we have is fine medievel action adventure come political thriller.
It is interesting to note the comments in this thread that don't like the way Scott has treated the Robin Hood legend. It reminds me of the reaction to Bond's reinvention post Casino Royale. I guess you either go with it or not, but surely there wasn't room for a men in tights prancing about and having friendly duels (just as there was none for more Bond pissing around with silly gadgets)? There's no doubt that film of this decade has taken a darker turn, but then times are darker and film often serves to reflect its contemporary world (just look at Hollywood's output through the 70s, which was probably the last period of fully global turbulence). And lets not forget that at the turn of the 13th century Europe was just about moving on from the Dark Ages, so it's right that a film about the period should reflect that too.
I saw it with a friend at the weekend and he felt what most of the British population felt, that the film Ridley should have made is the 'sequel' to this film, however I disagree.
We have seen that story countless times and this is meant to be the 'Story Behind the Legend' and it that regard, it's fantastic. It's great to see a new take on such material and seeing as Robin Hood is a legend, then you can essentially do whatever the hell you want with the character.
I for one loved th political backdrop to the film instead of keeping it just in Nottingham and I thought the cast were fine in their respective roles. I really don't understand the Crowe/accent complaints though. It sounded fine to me.
4/5
_____________________________
"I put no stock in religion. By the word 'religion', I have seen the lunacy of fanatics of every denomination be called 'The Will of God'. Holiness is in right action and courage on behalf of those who cannot defend themselves."
Twitter: @timonsingh
|
Printable Version
RE: Long but entertaining - 
RE: Robin Hood - 
RE: Thrilling Battle Scenes Makes This One To Check Out. - 
RE: Robin Hood - 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread