I was extremely surprised to see that this movie is rated PG-13. Now obviously I haven't seen it yet, but I would think that we are going to be missing a lot of the realism that we usually get from films like these. Now I'm all for making films accessible for all age groups, but it seems movies like these are often very gritty and graphic, which often adds to them in a positive way IMO. It obviously is still possible to have an exciting and engaging movie rated PG-13, and hopefully that is still the case. The brutal realism in Braveheart and Gladiator only add the the phenomenal cinematic experience, and I hope we don't lose any of that with the PG-13 rated Robin Hood.
I'm really excited for this film. Scott is one of my favorite directors and Crowe is one of my favorite actors. This looks like it'll be good. I'll definitely be seeing it opening weekend. It also helps that I have a free ticket after purchasing Apollo 13.
ROBIN HOOD Trailer #3 – Universal Ramps up the Action
Best trailer yet...
Quote:
Universal Pictures has released a third trailer for director Ridley Scott’s Robin Hood that’s sole purpose is to sell you on the action. Using fast cuts and minimal dialogue, this short minute something trailer doesn’t waste any of its time trying to sell you on the story. Instead, it’s only focus is to let you know the people behind Gladiator have made another movie. And it works.
I caught a screening last week and liked the movie a lot more than some of my peers. But…I will say there is a scene towards the end that plays like a studio note or the manager of one of the main cast said, “wouldn’t it be great if…” and they put it in the movie. The scene makes no sense and it’s really bad. Not bad enough for me to say don’t see Robin Hood. It’s just a shame the scene made the final cut as the rest of the movie worked. It’s not as good as Gladiator, but it’s worth seeing.
Click the picture above to head over to the trailer.
Got back from watching it, it's was actually pretty good, the action set pieces where really inspired, I'd recommended it, worth watching on the big screen.
It's not perfect, Cate Blanchett seems to be sleep walking though the movie, and it need a few mins chopping.
What gets me from the trailer is the slow mo arrow shot. I think that is pretty BA.
I think besides the fact that Ridley is directing this, that shot was one of the main reasons I got so interested in the film, as peculiar as that may be.
Little by little, title by title, innocence and joy is being drained out of the movies. What do you think of when you hear the name of Robin Hood? I think of Errol Flynn, Sean Connery and the Walt Disney character. I see Robin lurking in Sherwood Forest, in love with Maid Marian (Olivia de Havilland or Audrey Hepburn), and roistering with Friar Tuck and the Merry Men. I see a dashing swashbuckler.
That Robin Hood is nowhere to be found in Ridley Scott’s “Robin Hood,” starring Russell Crowe as a warrior just back from fighting in the Third Crusade. Now Richard is dead, and Robin is essentially an unemployed mercenary. This story is a prequel. It takes place entirely before Robin got to be a folk hero. The idea of taking from the rich and giving to the poor was still in storyboard form. Grieving Richard the Lionhearted and now facing the tyrant King John, Robin leads an uprising.
This war broadens until, in the words of the movie’s synopsis, “it will forever alter the balance of world power.” That’s not all; “Robin will become an eternal symbol of freedom for his people.” Not bad for a man who, by general agreement, did not exist. Although various obscure bandits and ne’er-do-wells inspired ancient ballads about such a figure, our image of him is largely a fiction from the 19th century.
But so what? In for a penny, in for a pound. After the death of Richard, Robin Hood raises, arms and fields an army to repel a French army as it lands on an English beach in wooden craft that look uncannily like World War II troop carriers at Normandy. His men, welding broadswords, backed by archers, protected from enemy arrows by their shields, engage the enemy in a last act devoted almost entirely to nonstop CGI and stunt carnage in which warriors clash in confused alarms and excursions, and Russell Crowe frequently appears in the foreground to whack somebody.
Subsequently, apparently, Robin pensioned his militia and retired to Sherwood Forest to play tag with Friar Tuck. That’s my best guess; at the end the film informs us, “and so the legend begins,” leaving us with the impression we walked in early.
Ah, you say, but what of Maid Marion? In this telling, Marion (Cate Blanchett) is not a maid but a widow, and not a merry one. At one point she threatens to unman Robin with her dagger, which is unlike the Maid Marions I’ve known and loved. Blanchett plays the role with great class and breeding, which is all wrong, I think. She’s the kind of woman who would always be asking Robin, “Why do you let that smelly so-called friar hang around you like a fanboy?”
If you listen closely to the movie’s commercials, you may hear of a royal edict being issue against “Robin of the Hood.” A hood, in medieval English, was of course a wood or forest — a point that may be lost on many of the commercial’s viewers.
“Robin Hood” is a high-tech and well made violent action picture using the name of Robin Hood for no better reason than that it’s an established brand not protected by copyright. I cannot discover any sincere interest on the part of Scott, Crowe or the writer Brian Helgeland in any previous version of Robin Hood. Their Robin is another weary retread of the muscular macho slaughterers who with interchangeable names stand at the center of one overwrought bloodbath after another.
Have we grown weary of the delightful aspects of the Robin Hood legend? Is witty dialogue no longer permitted? Are Robin and Marion no longer allowed to engage in a spirited flirtation? Must their relationship seem like high-level sexual negotiations? How many people need to be covered in boiling oil for Robin Hood’s story to be told these days? How many parents will be misled by the film’s PG-13 rating? Must children go directly from animated dragons to skewering and decapitation, with no interval of cheerful storytelling?
The photography is, however, remarkable, and Crowe and the others are filled with fierce energy. Ridley Scott is a fine director for work like this, although in another world, Hollywood would let him make smarter films. God, he must be tired of enormous battle scenes.
All countries
Argentina
Austria
Belgium
Brazil
Bulgaria
Chile
China
Colombia
Cyprus
Czech Republic
Estonia
Denmark
Finland
Greece
Hong Kong
Hungary
Iceland
Indonesia
Ireland
Israel
India
Latvia
Lithuania
Malaysia
New Zealand
Norway
Philippines
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russia
Singapore
South Africa
South Korea
Sweden
Switzerland
Taiwan
Thailand
Turkey
Ukraine
United Arab Emirates
).
Linear Mode
