Robin Hood Review

U.S. Release Date: November 21, 2018

PG-13: Extended sequences of violence and action, and some suggestive references

Summit Entertainment, Safehouse Pictures, Thunder Roads Films

1 Hr and 56 Minutes

Dir: Otto Bathurst | Writers: Ben Chandler, David James Kelly

Cast: Taron Egerton, Jamie Foxx, Ben Mendelsohn, Eve Hewson, Tim Minchin, and Jamie Dornan

Robin of Loxley (Taron Egerton) a war-hardened Crusader and his Moorish commander (Jamie Foxx) mount an audacious revolt against the corrupt English crown in a thrilling action-adventure packed with gritty battlefield exploits, mind-blowing fight choreography, and a timeless romance.

For what it’s worth, Foxx is great. Damn. Jamie Foxx is bringing his A-game here. He’s overacting the hell out of this movie as if he thought this was his next Oscar-bait performance, as if this was his next Django. It’s disappointing how much his talents are wasted considering how little Egerton is providing. If anything, Foxx is more Hood than Egerton.

Throughout film history, there have been many adaptations of “Robin Hood”. Everyone from Disney to Ridley Scott has taken a crack at the story, but I love the pretension this incarnation boasts about itself in the beginning where the narrator literally says, “Forget everything you know about Robin Hood because this Robin Hood is the truest and purest Robin Hood story that’ll ever be told.” Yet, this film has no identifying factors familiar to Robin Hood at all. There are little to no aspects of Robin Hood in the introduction that characterizes what audiences know about him. He doesn’t steal from the rich and give to the poor at all. All they establish is that he was a hot English boy who got a hot English girl and is motivated to woo her, thus making the audience respond with:

Why should the audience care for a Robin Hood who doesn’t perform the bare essential actions that people correlate him with? It's not until 40 minutes in that he starts wondering when he shall do some thieving. Egerton's Hood still acts like Eggsy from “Kingsman” and we’re basically watching the Robin Hood edition of that, but with a PG-13 rating. There’s nothing cool about him for he always manages to get his ass handed to him. When things get rough he either drinks or gives up. Not much bravery to him at all.

For a Robin Hood film that seemingly had effort put in its production, I’m surprised nobody called out the script for being dumb as hell. People do actions that are out of character and the dialogue is stupid as hell where lingo should appeal to modern audiences but it doesn’t make sense for the era in which this takes place. It’s one thing to revise a tale to make it a bit more modern, even for its setting, but at least research your history before setting your story in an era where some things never existed, such as conscription! Right in the beginning Robin Hood receives a Draft Notice to serve in the crusades. Draft Notices weren’t even a thing at the time so seeing that in a scroll in bold letters Is absolutely hilarious. Then, there’s a moment where Hood says, “it’s not as if we’re rolling in coin”, similar to the saying, “rolling in dough.” Yeah, it gets dumber.

I’ve witnessed Ben Mendelsohn in person and he’s a chill and badass dude. So, why does he always have to be typecast as the antagonist in everything? And I mean everything. Right off the top of my head I’ve got “Ready Player One” and “Rogue One”. It’s always him and Aidan Gillen playing villains because they have that snarky face. His dialogue is so bad that his snarling and intimidation attempts are ineffective. It doesn’t even matter how low of an octave you speak in; if your dialogue is stupid, it makes your performance silly. When your antagonist is really out here explaining why he hates Brandy and how much he’s going to make people shit their socks, your audience won’t feel the tension but instead feel utterly confused.

Last year, Guy Ritchie fucked up “King Arthur”, which was dull, stupid, and lame. “Robin Hood” falls victim to the same downfalls. While this isn’t a Guy Ritchie film, it does have a lot of his stylistic elements in it and... well, the lame aspects you see in every ‘blockbuster’ action film such as QUICK SHOTS OF PEOPLE DOING THINGS TO SLOW MOTION SHOTS THAT MAKE YOU BELIEVE SOMETHING IS COOL, but in actuality it’s naaaaht. You know... elements that would’ve appealed to audiences 10 years ago, but it’s very banal now. What makes this a bit more depressing is the amount of action sequences there are where you can tell it was made for a 3D format but the studio didn’t have enough money in the budget to afford a conversion.  

Just like how the first “Fifty Shades” stole the box office from the first “Kingsman” movie, Jamie Dornan is in this film as the guy who stole Egerton’s girl, Marian. Was this casting a metaphor or something? Does Marian represent the audience? Or am I digging too deep for a joke that doesn’t matter? It’s up to you.

I’m not as furious as I was with “King Arthur”, for there are entertaining scenes that’ll look fun if you watch it on TNT in 2 years. This gif perfectly sums up my thoughts of this movie in one sentence:

If you wanted to be a Robin Hood movie in 2018, you should’ve done something new. Make it a heist film rather than some generic action blockbuster that clones the lamest aspects of a Michael Bay and Zack Snyder movie. Nobody was looking forward to this. Shit, I forgot this was coming out until I got an invite last week.  We all knew what this movie was going to be and if this is the type of brainless, uninspired action flick you want to see during this holiday season, so be it. But since there’s actual quality stuff out there, don’t waste your time.

Damn, when Disney’s animated version is closer to the Robin Hood tale than this, you know you screwed up.

“Robin Hood” has the cast and production value to make it entertaining, but due to its lazy screenplay, confusion of its titular character’s identity, and generic direction, this ends up being a bleak action thriller that once again attempts at franchising for the sake of franchising.

Rating: 2/5 | 43%

Super Scene: Horse escape.