Robin Hood (2/10)
by Tony Medley
Runtime 116 minutes
PG-13
The Robin Hood legend is thought
to have first appeared in the 1370s. It has undergone many iterations
but the most consistent is that he lived in Nottingham in the 12th
Century and was loyal to King Richard (the Lionhearted) who was away
fighting in the Third Crusade, while Richard’s brother, Prince John, was
trying to usurp the throne.
One of Prince John’s allies was
the Sheriff of Nottingham, so the Sheriff is the main villain with Robin
the hero and Prince John the evil tyrant whose bidding the Sheriff does.
They keep making this into a
movie. By my count there have been at least 6 since 1938 (1973, 1993,
2006, 2010, and another one besides this one in 2018), not to mention a
TV series or two. My question is, as it is with lots of these remakes,
why? The first, starring Errol Flynn and Olivia de Havilland, was a
brilliant classic. Shot in 3 strip Technicolor, it is still a delight to
the eye. It was clearly a fantasy, humorous and funny with lots of
adventure about a world that never existed.
None since have come close or
had any raison d’ ętre considering the excellence of the '38 version. In
fact, each seems to be worse than the one before.
This one is right in line. I
think they’ve finally reached rock bottom.
Director Otto Bathurst and
screenwriters David James Kelly and Ben Chandler have changed the story
completely. There's no Sherwood Forest until the last scene, and no
longer is Prince John the main bad guy. I didn’t see one mention of
Prince John (who signed the Magna Carta in 1215, by the way; being
forced to by his Barons after he became King when Richard died in 1199).
While the Sheriff of Nottingham
(Ben Mendelsohn) is still there, now the main bad guys are evil prelates
of the Church, and it is their bidding to which the Sheriff responds.
The leader now is the powerful Cardinal (F. Murray Abraham) who says
things like, “Fear is the greatest weapon in God’s arsenal” and “It’s
why the Church created hell.” While this movie is a complete fiction,
obviously, statements like this should rely on some basis in fact. The
first mention of something like hell is actually mentioned in the Old
Testament Book of Job. The “Church,” which normally refers to the
Christian Church, did not “create” hell, so no Prince of the Church
would ever utter such a preposterous line.
This time Robin is played by
Taron Egerton and, for the first time in the legend, fights in the Third
Crusade. There we see the Crusaders as bad guys and the Islamists as
good guys. In fact, one, who eventually becomes Little John, is Jamie
Foxx. He gets involved because he is an Islamic fighter whose son is
beheaded by the Crusaders despite Robin’s efforts to save him. So they
both come back to Notthingham, Foxx to get revenge and Robin to be
re-united with Marian (Ewe Henson), the love of his life. Once there he
evolves into Robin Hood.
Nottingham is pictured as
something akin to Rome with concrete buildings and streets and tens of
thousands of inhabitants. There are no figures extant for the population
of Nottingham in the 12th/13th Century, but it is
said that by the time of the English Civil War in the 17th
Century, population had “grown” to 5,000. There are more people in this
movie than lived in Nottingham 400 years after this is supposed to have
taken place.
Being Hollywood, it’s not enough
to make the Church a villain. The Sheriff gives a speech that sounds
like it’s a metaphor for President Trump’s defense of the country
against illegal aliens, demonizing the Islamists who were fighting the
Crusaders for control of the Holy Land. Since the Sheriff is a bad guy,
this makes the viewer feel empathy for the Islamists and against the
Crusaders (who have already been pictured as evil at the beginning of
the film).
The film seems to be an excuse
to (over)use CGI because we see scene after scene after scene of the
ridiculous fights that are de rigueur for today’s movies (one of
which shows Robin jumping from about 50 feet into a moving wagon without
a scratch), and the magnificent city that the filmmakers view Nottingham
to have been in the 12th/13th century. In reality
the “castle” in Nottingham was wooden at that time, and didn’t even get
stone walls until the 14th Century at the earliest.
They even throw in some
CGI-created horse and carriage chases (doesn’t every Hollywood thriller
need a car chase?) that are even more absurd than the car chases in
today’s films.
In essence, this is just another
formulaic action film. The fact that a character is named Robin Hood is
merely coincidental.
We can only hope that Hollywood
will let Robin rest in peace for the foreseeable future.
|