The Gown – student newspaper at Queen's University Belfast.

REVIEW: Robin Hood

The latest adaption of the infamous rouge that roamed Sherwood Forest reaches our screens in the shape of a Ridley Scott ideal.  Ridley Scott as we all know, means lots of action sequences, manly speeches and poorly pieced together narratives, so expect no more from this hopeful blockbuster.

BY LAURA SHEARER

Taking the audience to the heart of the legend, the film opens with a candlelit scroll of medieval script that defines the era and sets the audience up for huge historical inaccuracies.  The action of the film begins like a hazy memory, depicting a land not so far removed from the typical English countryside scenery of today and we are launched straight into a battle scene.  The political dramas of England at this time are weakly addressed and this is surprising given the attention paid to making a statement as a film that wishes to be themed as a historical epic.

The characters float past our eyes, each specifically allocated a different amount of screen time on their introduction that points out how important they will be to the narrative.  As boring as this is for a well-oiled film viewer, it’s completely stereotypical of the actors involved.  Adequately fulfilling the blockbuster familiarity of course, but surely the average audience is a lot more intelligent than Scott has identified with and don’t need to be told all the time where they are viewing.

Early on in the feature Scott shows huge gaps in his storytelling technique, but perhaps I should give him credit for trying to cram so much history and folklore into tiny sections.  Yet even his decision to include so much is quite clouded by his love of lengthy action sequences.  The most appalling aspect of the narrative structure is the constant descriptions of our hero’s travels.  Each place Robin arrives at is introduced by subtitles and the same long shot of the characters arriving in that area.  Not only is this relentless, it’s horribly pointing out the very disjointed narrative.

When little pieces of extra characterisation are bluntly slapped into the dialogue then I fear I’ve little patience for such a lack of creative enthusiasm.  Russell Crowe’s dubious accent is hugely confusing and to see such a well paid actor make a mess out of the film’s continuity demonstrates a shocking lack of skills in relation to the amount of vocal training he undertook in preparation.  The only semi-interesting or mildly complex character is Mark Strong’s role as Godfrey.   This is purely because he has more depth than the others, leading a dual identity as a spy and a fraud and only working for his own means.

What I failed to understand are the adjustments that Scott felt necessary to tell his adaptation.  Besides all the historical and political aspirations of the film, the love plot between Marian and Robin has been stubbornly switched for a misjudged rom-com affair that clumsily fumbles through as a discourse.  Rather than the major draw as the folklore eludes, instead we are faced with the uppity style of an Austen novel and not even much of a source of humour in their growing relationship.

Instead of a hero with a good sense of pride and clear path of justice we are given an angry and lost soldier as he attempts to find himself, and on the way gets caught up in issues far greater than can comprehend.  It just passes that he can believably bring some sense to the commotion, yet he doesn’t seem to have such a major angle on his beliefs as the legends tell.

Watch out for the single moment of cinematography and editing that develops a bit of skilfully planned camerawork in the final battle sequence.  It’s a brief few seconds but it’s colourful and effective.  It’s not a key edit or anything withstanding but it’s really well put together and it’s dramatic.  Big hint is that it’s in the tide and provides a huge contrast to the otherwise predictable and lazy use of equipment in this epic scene, there’s others very similar so blink and you’ll miss it.

Well done to Disney, who in my eyes still hold the title of the most entertaining and enjoyable adaptation of the legend, Scott should have taken heed of what viewers understand of the legend.  Instead of attempting to offer a moody and bleak interpretation, I’m suggesting that perhaps the more inevitable light heartedness of Robin Hood, Men in Tights has taken away from the depth that Scott has tried and failed to depict.  When Gladiator still remains one of the most inventive period narratives in mainstream cinema, this version just doesn’t compare.  Too many farfetched changes have been made to a loved narrative and it just doesn’t show the same strength as previous Scott films.  Sadly the artistry of the end credits perfectly outline the ideology of the legend, as well as romanticising the hero, so as the most impressive sequence, there’s small hope for the feature itself.

Tags: Gown, Laura shearer, newspaper, qub, Queen's, queen's university, Review, Robin Hood, student, students, The Gown

This entry was posted on Saturday, May 29th, 2010 at 2:18 pm and is filed under Arts + Entertainment. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.