ROBIN HOOD: IT'S ALL ABOUT THE ROB

Robin Hood. It's a myth that seems to resonate with us. Novels, movies, TV series, historical explorations, we keep looking for this dude. The case in point is the new movie Robin Hood, starring Russell Crowe and directed by Ridely Scott.
I was prepared to love this film. This same actor-director combo made Gladiator and I am generally just a Scott fan, even his "failures" are still more interesting, and always more beautifully filmed, than 80% of the films you see.


I wasn't disappointed. I loved this movie. It was a gritty take on the story, beautifully filmed, overall well acted with an outstanding performance by Cate Blanchett as Marion. There was perhaps a bit too much speechifying in the film but it had humour and spectacle and relied as much on old fashioned stunts as it did on CGI A stirring score, some lovely little details of life, charging horses, swords, blizzards or arrows .. this movie is a big steaming hot bowl of adventure movie yumminess. With ice cream


So where does this Robin stand with his cinematic brethren? For me, The Adventures of Robin Hood stands as the number one Robin Hood movie.








Sure, you could call this movie corny, perhaps even for the time but it really does have everything: adventure, humour, intrigue, action ... Errol Flynn was the most dashing Robin of all, even more so than Fairbanks, to the point where, afterwards, few would dare try to out dash him again. Basil Rathbone was the best of the purely villainous Sherrif's and I include Alan Rickman from Robin Hood Prince of Thieves. I know everyone loves Rickman in that movie but he chewed so much scenery it was amazing he could talk with his mouth so full. And Olivia DeHavilland was a fine Marian, strong as an actress of her day was allowed to be, a perfect foil for Robin.

For many years, my favorite Robin Hood movie was something quite different: Robin & Marion.




This was like the antithesis to Adventures: Richard Lester's movie had a gritty, realistic look to it. Robin was no noble, he was a simple soldier following a king in whom he believed but who turned out to be a bit mad. The film gave us a new perspective on Robin, as an older man, after his initial adventures, returning home. Marion hath got herself to a nunnery and the sheriff is a wearied civil servant. Rob and Little John are old and beat up as well .. but Sean Connery is Robin, Audrey Hepburn is Marion and Robert Shaw is the sheriff. So, yes, my friend, there are still fireworks.

Ridley Scott's Robin Hood has much in common with Robin and Marion. Both give us a gritty, in your face vision of medieval England. Both give us Robin's who are common men, returned from the Crusades and weary of war. Both give us Marions who are strong and intelligent. Both give us King Richards who perhaps were not all who they could be.


Scott's Robin Hood is a bit more spectacle with its huge battle scenes. Robin and Marion is definitely more romantic, the mature love story between Rob and Marion is more resolute than coy, filled with experience and a sense of commitment. Crowe's Robin, for all his reluctance, definitely carries his hero torch high whereas Connery, in one of my favorite of his performances, almost throws it away.


In the similarities I enjoyed both movies but it's hard to choose one over the other for the differences. I would say this new version of Robin Hood fits more into the "crowd pleasing" category.


I mentioned Robin Hood Prince of Thieves and I want to get back to that, since it was a popular movie.




We actually ending up watching this movie the day after we had seen Robin Hood. Prince of Thieves is not a terrible movie. It was a like a combination of Adventures and the two other movies I've discussed: This Robin returns home from the Crusades, but he's still noble; he meets Little John by fighting him at a stream, but he has a Moorish companion. Mary Elizabeth Mastriantonio is a strong yet still winsome Marion. Where it really falls apart is Keven Costner as Robin .. seriously, what were they thinking

OK, all movie reviews aside, what is our fascination with Robin Hood? Is it the myth of taking from the rich and giving to the poor? Of course this pre-supposes that the rich are evil and the poor are all deserving .. Well the rich are all evil but I've known lots of poor people in my time and trust me, sometimes all they deserve is to be poor.

Maybe it's the idea of Robin living alone in the woods with his men, living off the land, by their wits, with Marion at their side .. this is either Snow White & the Seven Dwarfs, or some old hippie commune.

If we allow the conceit that Robin is a lord who sees the error of his ways and understands the true need of his people, then it's a story of redemption which always works for me. Of course, this rarely happens does it. I'm still waiting for pretty much any level of government to see the error of their ways and give back what they've taken from the poor ..

Sure. And Kevin Costner will develop a convincing British accent.