Robin Hood:A merry mess of a movie

There’s been many film viewpoints of the legend of Robin Hood. There’s the classic ones, like Errol Flynn in The Adventures of Robin Hood, ranging up to post modern block busters like Robin Hood:Prince of Thieves. There’s even been the silly Mel Brooks classic Robin Hood:Men in Tights. So where does the latest version, the singly named Robin Hood stand among them?

It’s clear from the beginning that director Ridley Scott and crew want to make some sort of hip, new version of the tale. They start off by having it set well before the events of any of the previous versions, with Robin Longstride(Russell Crowe) off fighting the Crusades with Richard the Lionhearted.  He’s just an archer, with a habit of playing three card monte,apparently. A chance encounter with Richard leaves him in the stocks, when Richard is killed.

It’s at this point that the movie also makes very clear it’s going to throw out anything resembling historical accuracy,which most fictional versions have  tried to not play with too badly,considering they’re dealing mostly in fiction and myth. Still,it is a startling turn for those of us well versed in how the story is supposed to go.

Another chance encounter with the men taking Richard’s crown home leads to Robin taking the sword of the now dead Sir Robert of Locksley home to his father.  Robin and his friends fight off a crew lead by Godfrey(Mark Strong, who is the villain in everything this year),pose as knights, and return to England, where Robin is asked by Walter of Locksley(Max Von Sydow,one of many Oscar winners slumming through this thing) to pose as his now dead son, which is fiercely opposed by his son’s wife, Lady Marian(Cate Blanchett).

I  could go on about the twists and turns the plot takes from here, but there’s just too many to count. Suffice to say that by the time Robin’s father is revealed to have written the basis for the Magna Carta, the story seems like a device to hang quips and fight scenes on. And it does end up with all the people in the places they’re supposed to be at the start of  the traditional tales. The actors do the best they can with the material given. Russell Crowe does an admirable job, bringing an occasional sense of fun to the typical Ridley Scott hero.  Big plus if you can spot the nod to one of his Oscar roles in one scene. All the other Oscar level talent, including William Hurt, seem wasted in their roles. A big surprise is Oscar Issacs as Prince John, bringing a level of fun,arrogance and foolishness  to the role rivaled by Alan Rickman’s in Prince of Thieves.

Ridley Scott turns in his usual directing job here, the same one he’s been stuck on since Gladiator. Lots of slow-mo in the fight scenes, everything looks dirty and grey. It’s a plus in the ridiculously long mass battles scenes,but detracts from everything else.  He really needs to let the material reflect his cinematography. There’s very little light in what has traditionally been a story with light moments.  Yes there are bright spots of humor, most notably between Marian and Robin, but no overall sense of adventure or fun.

Robin Hood is a mess, but to it’s credit, it’s an entertaining mess. Those expecting Errol Flynn level acrobatics or chases will be disappointed,as well as those hoping for it to be historically accurate.  Pagans will also be disappointed that any mention of outside  religion is gone from this version. Crosses are displayed prominently in all village squares, though they do use the Celtic one which was interesting.