Hmmmmmmmmm...mixed thoughts on this one...

I've known about this for a long time (even planned on dragging Mum's boyfriend to the midnight show with me because his birth name is Robin Hood ), and frankly, I expected something a little more than Maximus from Gladiator thrown into 12th century England.

It seems almost on par with Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves, because Crowe was definately using an American accent (just like Kevin Costner did)...except the score to PoT was better than this.

I dunno, I'll see it, but it seems to be a Gladiator spinoff...too many shots fro the trailer reminded me of it, and that's a dangerous thing to do if you're not Tim Burton to do in your movies.

Cheers,
Fenrir

Maybe, but it is Riddley Scott directing and producing it, so it should be at least slightly good. May be best to wait for the director's cut to come out if your having doubts as going by Kingdom of Heavan, the director's cut will be a lot better than the theatrical cut.

1 - When did we ever need ANOTHEr Robin Hood moive/series? we have enought. Just watch Robin hood men in tights an lauch at it instead.
2 - it looks well overdone tho i action is probbaly good it's way too over the top.
3 - I don't likie it.

I'll deffinately watch it - it does look 'good' - but I'm suspicious... Looks to me that the same thing has been done as was done to Arthur when that film came out - it's just been blown up to a ridiculous scale. I mean saving the country from civil war? WTF?

It looks like it'll be a visually epic film and will probably have some cool fight scenes but Iwasn't really looking for a Robin Hood film in that sort of style...

*sigh*... Another charming British folktale bites the dust of the mainstream film industry

ArtificialWinter wrote:

*sigh*... Another charming British folktale bites the dust of the mainstream film industry

To be fair, Hollywood has done that to Robin Hood for years, with eveyone from Erol Flynn to disney having ago

there are few good Robin hood films/shows and even then only the british should make them. It's like the Chinses making a film abount thanksgiving or the Civil War.
Most of all get a english guy to play robin becuase so many "Drown" becuase they have an amrican(Often from texes) tryign to do a english acent.

Just Watch Robin Hood Men in Tights or the Disney version with the furry animals. they did it well(As the later has got some really good music)

No comment

I agree with jaws - the cartoon one was definately the best

On a serious note though, when they made it Disney didn't try to make the story into anything it wasn't. I think that's what I like least about this new version (and earier versions, but as this is the subject matter...)...they're just trying to do to much which a story that doesn't really need to be added to in that way.

To be honest, like King Arthur, the legend of Robin Hood has had so much added, changed, forgotten, rewritten and so forth before Hollywood got anywhere near it, it's hard to say what should be considered the 'true' version. Originally, Robin Hood was an icon of the emerging Middle Class, and the original ballards featuring him are supposed to have been written for the merchants of the Middle Ages as opposed to a him being a hero of the Lower Class.

Dînadan wrote:

To be honest, like King Arthur, the legend of Robin Hood has had so much added, changed, forgotten, rewritten and so forth before Hollywood got anywhere near it, it's hard to say what should be considered the 'true' version. Originally, Robin Hood was an icon of the emerging Middle Class, and the original ballards featuring him are supposed to have been written for the merchants of the Middle Ages as opposed to a him being a hero of the Lower Class.

That is true. He was often wearing red tights etc which showed how "Rich" he was and the original would often go on and on about what they whore.......like a medievil fasion magazine onthy these ones you didn't want to punch in the face.

I agree that its entirely impossible to declare whether you are following the 'true version' or not, or whether there's even a 'true version' at all any more. I don't expect film makers to dedicate themselves to religiously pursueing a 'true' story that doesn't really exist anymore - however, neither do I expect them to blow something like this (or King Arthur) to such ridiculous proportions. Don't get me wrong, I love a good battle sequence as much as the next fantasy-craving, model-collecting, Tolkien-follower but does Robin Hood need to save England from a Civil War? No. Does he need to lead a cavalry charge into a cliff-top fray? No. Does he need to doa double backflip out of a tree, simaltaniously fire two arrows in different directions (both finding their targets) and swipe off three heads with a single blow as he gracefully lands the jump....? No...

That said - I'm still going to watch it...and I'll probably enjoy it...I think I just like ranting...