Rent-Worthy: Robin Hood

 

I really didn’t need another Robin Hood movie in my life. I also don’t want Kevin Costner’s Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves to be the defining modern portrayal of the character. Sadly, after watching the most recent Robin Hood adaptation, Kevin Costner is still in the lead. For now. That’s not to say that Taron Egerton’s turn as the man who steals from the rich to give to the poor isn’t without its merits. Unfortunately, the population at large also didn’t think they needed another Robin Hood movie and it went on to crash and burn at the box office. Now it’s out on home video and I decided to give it a chance. Here is my mostly spoiler free review so you can decide whether it’s rent-worthy

 

Why it did poorly(probably)

Other than Jamie Foxx and Ben Mendelsohn, the acting is pretty stiff. The movie never seems sure if it’s light-hearted or super serious.

The release date chosen for this film was a bit questionable. It came out the same day as Creed II and Ralphs Break the Internet, and one week after The Crimes of Grindelwald. Creed II stole the male demographic, Ralph stole anyone taking their family, and the hold over of Crimes of Grindelwald likely stole any genre appeal. That’s three highly anticipated sequels to contend with. It ended up finishing seventh on its opening weekend. This movie would have done better in mid September or late January when the competition was much softer.

I also think that movies about classic material like this tend to do poorly because everyone has a specific idea of the characters and the story in mind when they go into it. If the movie fails to meet those expectations, it becomes easy to brush it aside as inferior simply because it is different. I like to look at movies like this for the creative ways that they made the story their own while still keeping it familiar. It that regard, I liked what they did here, as I will touch on later in more detail.

Hilariously enough, I was planning to make a joke about the producers likely watching too many videos of Lars Andersen on YouTube. He went viral a few years ago with his entertaining, but possibly ineffective, archery techniques. So I went to YouTube to find his channel to link here. Once I found it, I couldn’t help but laugh a little out loud. There, emblazoned on his channel banner, is an image of Mr. Andersen standing with Taron Egerton and Jamie Foxx on what appears to be the set of the movie. Sure enough, this is the dude that trained Robin Hood.

 

What I Enjoyed

I want to start by saying that I didn’t walk into this movie thinking I was about to see an award winning film. I wanted some escapism that did it’s job of letting me into a new world for two hours without doing something so egregious as to break my suspension of disbelief. I actually liked this take on the character and mythology. It borrows from the same places as every other Robin Hood tale. It picks and chooses pieces to use from a variety of different historical sources and builds it up to create a new story that is only slightly different than the others, as is the way with Robin Hood stories.

 

The Acting

I thought that Taron Egerton gave us a passable younger take on the character with the (mostly) proper charisma and look to pull off the role. He was believable in the action scenes. What more was I really looking for?

Jamie Foxx as a version of Little John was interesting, too. The role is a stock mentor-type, but Jamie Foxx keep it interesting with his presence and sense of the moment. He delivers some truly solid dialogue and works as the movie’s informal ombudsman, keeping things logical and coherent (mostly). He provides a gravitas that a popcorn movie like this probably didn’t expect or possibly deserve.

The same can be said for Ben Mendelsohn as the villainous Sheriff of Nottingham. He gives what could have been a comic book villain cliche and made it feel natural. While he is a bit over the top (it is an action movie, after all), he keeps it out of the realm of absurdity and truly makes us believe that he can justify what he is doing in his own head. That’s not to say that he is a sympathetic villain at all, as all of his goals are purely selfish, but he plays it as someone who truly believes that he deserves more than anyone else simply because he has the gall and fortitude to do whatever it takes, no matter how despicable or unpalatable.  

 

Standing Out From the Rest

This movie chose to flout a number of traditional Robin Hood assumptions. I appreciate that. I didn’t want to see a remake of another Robin Hood movie or something that blatantly took the good parts of its predecessors. There was no archery contest or overly dramatic arrow splitting scene.

Little John’s plan is deeper than simple revenge. It would have been easy to stick to the traditional ‘Robin wants revenge for the Sheriff taking his lands and overtaxing the people’ plot that we are used to. While that motivation is still there, the addition of John’s stake in the matter adds some dimension to the conflict. His reasoning is that if the funding for the war dries up, then so does the war. That’s far better logic than we are used to getting in the Michael Bay Era of action movie making.

The Sheriff of Nottingham isn’t trying to help Prince John become King, he’s trying to help himself become King. Here, the movie cuts out the middleman of Prince John. The Sheriff is no longer simply a puppet to a larger evil; he is the evil. Much like Little John, his plan is better than the average villain’s. He used some out of the box thinking to get what he wants.

What I Didn’t Enjoy

• There were a lot of anachronistic elements. From slang to costumes (Robin basically wears a hoodie) to the scope of Nottingham’s architecture, there were a lot of details that just made it feel like something was off.
• The director, Otto Bathurst, is not Guy Ritchie. It really felt like he was trying to be, but his film lacked the wit and charm that Ritchie can bring to his characters.
• The ending. I won’t spoil it, but the creators of this movie had the hubris to believe they were getting a sequel, and it really left some things unnecessarily unresolved.

 

WTF Moments

There were a few moments in the film that left me speechless. In a bad way.

• What are they mining in Nottingham? And why are there always sparks flying from everywhere in the background when they are outside the mines? It’s the middle ages, right?
• Robin wears a mask after John lectures him about always wearing a mask. Then John doesn’t wear a mask, is the only dark skinned person in the city, and no one ever questions anything he does, even after he is spotted in broad daylight helping a masked man escape.
• Severe wounds heal pretty quickly and smoothly in a world with no real antiseptic or antibiotic means of treatment.

 

The Verdict

Overall I think it’s an average, entertaining movie that sure didn’t deserve the hate that it got. It is a fine piece of entertainment. It won’t be a movie I buy, but I might watch it again if it’s on and I’m bored.

Final Rating: Redbox