I have followed all three seasons of the BBC Robin Hood series and was really excited when I saw a movie coming out by the same name. The creators of this newest Robin Hood movie chose to take a Batman Begins type approach and ask how Robin Hood became Robin Hood. Having been familiar with the Robin Hood tale and not yet seeing the movie, one could already guess the end result, so the most interesting twist in this movie is how he became a man of the Hood.
In this version of the age old tale, the known historic facts were used. The facts are these: Robert, son of William, was declared an outlaw; His name most likely morphed into Robin Hood from Robehod; He lived in England; Given the time period he lived, the movie plot is likely a realistic picture of events during the life of Robin Hood. (I have used the word likely for good reason. None of this is known for certain and all are good guesses as to the origination of the Robin Hood tale.)
For me, knowing what Robin/Robert would end up doing took some of the mystery out of the movie. This movie would work much better if the viewer didn't come into the movie thinking Robin Hood. All of the names and faces blurred together because the viewer knew the basic tale. "Robin Hood" would have been far more effective as a movie if the title had been changed. Naming the character in the title set this movie up for failure. I'd have preferred an approach like "Everafter" on the Cinderella Story. A concept or important item may have been a better title (Alternative titles: Being Hood, The Hood, The Outlaw, The People's Outlaw, The
people's sheriff, becoming Hood...?). If there is one thing I've learned in my short writing experience, it's that a title that makes or breaks a book, story or movie. Editors rename books and articles all the time so they sell better. The "Robin Hood" title may bring people to watch the movie the first time, but it won't help people continue to love the movie or put it in their DVD library.
The whole Robert/Robin name use may have been more historically accurate, but it made for a more confusing movie. The Character played by Russell Crowe started out as Robin Longslide and takes on the name of a knight, Sir Robert Locksley. His friends still call him Robin all the while trying to pass himself off as Sir Robert. The whole uncertainty of the character undermines the story and plot. The viewer has to concentrate to understand when he's Robert and when he's Robin. I would have loved to see this developed more.
I blame the writing for this flop. I would have liked to see a stronger story emerge. It felt really rushed in key moments and the plot climaxed, but didn't conclude well. I applaud the writers for putting french in a movie about the quarreling of the French and English, but also didn't feel the use helped with the continuity of the entire movie. Overall, we needed to see more of the main character and what led him internally to what he did. To be a main character, he must have far more interaction and depth than just going out and fighting.
The difficulty with a movie plot is that you can only have so many things happen. There's not really time to delve deep into the Robin Hood. This movie would have been better had I not known any of the Robin Hood stories. Yes,
all the basics were there about Robin Hood, but the story focus mostly on the time before he became an outlaw. I wish they would have stayed more in the beginning and not called the movie "Robin Hood". Yes the story was about a man becoming Robin Hood. This would have been extremely interesting. The dawning idea at the end would be becoming an outlaw and stealing.
The boys in the Sherwood could have been portrayed better. The whole animal mask thing grossed me out as a viewer. A different way of establishing their presence would have been preferred. Maybe in conversation or in children disappearing and people leaving? Both would have helped.
To me, the movie was a disappointment. The 2010 Robin Hood movie were probably trying to bring a different perspective to this age old tale. Overall the movie lacked many things, namely depth and interest. It's a million times better than "Master and Commander" but still lacks something. The best part of the movie is the idea of Robin Hood, the idea of telling his beginnings, and the cinematography. Great ideas, poor execution. Still, this movie may do well. It's an action movie and has men fighting with swords. Look! Shiny...