Three big movies will be fighting for first place this Thanksgiving weekend: Ralph Breaks the Internet, Creed II, and Robin Hood. While the Disney Animation movie is expected to win the top spot by a mile, it appears as if the Taron Egerton led reboot is going to bomb in a huge way if these reviews for the movie are any indication.
Described as an "abomination" and a Guy Ritchie ripoff, it doesn't sound like Robin Hood has any redeeming qualities at all, and it sadly fails to even fall into the "so bad, it's good" category.
A few critics liked it, but these reviews are worth reading simply to find out just how historically inaccurate the hoodie-wearing Robin is in a tale which seemingly exists solely to set up a sequel which will likely never become a reality.
So, to check these out, all you guys have to do is click on the "View List" button below.
Robin Hood offers some lightly revisionist takes on most of its principals—besides Foxx’s newly intense, sagely badass John, there’s Tim Minchin doing a flustered Simon Pegg version of Friar Tuck. But the only actor here that seems to find a real character in his iconic role is Mendelsohn, who delivers a monologue about his hatred of lords that reveals hidden reservoirs of hurt underneath the usual cartoon villainy. Otherwise, this dopey franchise hopeful breaks from tradition mainly in setting: Only in the final minutes do we catch a verdant glimpse of Sherwood Forest, which the filmmakers are saving for a sequel that probably won’t get made. And come to think of it, that was true of Scott’s dismal film, too.
SOURCE: AV Club
If only this anti-establishment action saga weren’t so totally in love with the establishment it claims to despise. If only it weren’t so desperate to be the foundation of a cinematic universe that it treats Little John meeting Friar Tuck (Tim Minchin) like they’re in the post-credits scene of a Marvel movie — like you’re supposed to get a chill down your spine at the sight of a homicidal Moor befriending a manic clergyman. Chandler and Kelly go to incredible lengths to set up a sequel, but even more incredible is how the film genuinely seems to believe that people might want to see where this story goes next. [D]
SOURCE: Indie Wire
Robin Hood won’t steal any hearts, nor should it rob you of your valuable time when there are so many better versions to choose from.
SOURCE: The Wrap
If they've just ripped off Robin's story and renamed the characters, it would still be a shoddy piece of work, but we wouldn't be compelled to compare it to those Robins which precede it. This singularly fails to swashbuckle in the manner of 1939 classic, The Adventures of Robin Hood, and Egerton has as much in common with Hollywood legend, Errol Flynn, as I do. Even Ridley Scott's dour 2010 take has a meaty sense of historical purpose and some magnificent visuals typical of the director. This is an abomination worse than Guy Ritchie's recent King Arthur and as bad as Assassin's Creed, wildly misfiring and always off target. [1/5]
SOURCE: Mirror Online
Bottom line: Aside for a few bright spots, this Robin Hood proves it’s time to hang up the bow and arrow, once and for all. [4/10]
SOURCE: We Live Entertainment
But if Robin Hood‘s visuals are murky, its political orientation is surprisingly cleareyed. The film puts a distinctly progressive spin on a legend which has always been inherently egalitarian in spirit, and Bathurst actually broadens its scope beyond the archetypal heroic white guy. Here, Robin isn’t simply born into greatness; rather, he’s made great by the black man who trains him and the woman, Marian (Eve Hewson), who urges him to fight for equality. While no one is going to confuse this cheesy little action flick for The Battle of Algiers, its unambiguous endorsement of left-wing revolution—however broadly defined—is notable as a sign of our politically polarized times. These days, even a centuries-old folk hero has to decide: Which side are you on?
Nottingham is funded by mines that didn't exist in England at that time, and populated by people who wear American Apparel beanies and glasses and visit buildings made of concrete. A Knight's Tale made those kinds of anachronisms work because it was steeped in the actual history surrounding jousting and classism in the Middle Ages. But Robin Hood just really wants to show you what a wagon chase/arrow shootout in an industrial yard would look like. It's simply another action movie desperately hoping to spawn a franchise, despite doing nothing to justify one.
SOURCE: CBR
Looking at this week’s Robin Hood entry and the blockbusters that have come before it, one can’t escape the irony of this hero who robs the rich to give to the poor—the crass pillaging of wallets to pay for something no one wants or needs in service of the only entity more corrupt and vile than Nottingham itself: Hollywood.
SOURCE: Daily Beast
Does this version of Robin Hood set up a sequel? You bet your sweet arrow-slinging ass it does, and this writer would've happily watched it immediately after the credits rolled on this obvious series hopeful. By fitting a tired legend into an impenitent cinematic pattern, Bathurst & Co. have created one of the better pure popcorn movies of the year, and that's a pretty impressive feat for a movie nobody really wanted in the first place.
SOURCE: BMD
Eve Hewson, who is Bono’s daughter, has a romantic presence expressed through a timeless gaze — she holds the screen with the kind of electrifying radiance you’re either born with or you’re not. She roots this youth rabble-rouser in something recognizably heartfelt, making a stirring case for the people to join Robin’s cause, yet beyond that Hewson simply has it. At the end, the film nods toward a sequel (set, presumably, in Sherwood Forest) with a pretty damn good twist of villainy, and the presence of an actress like Hewson is one reason you actually want to see it.
SOURCE: Variety
First-time feature director Otto Bathurst won his stripes with the (in)famous first episode of Black Mirror, “The National Anthem,” in which a British prime minister is blackmailed into having sex with a pig on national television, and went on from there to launch Peaky Blinders. He's had no such beginner's luck with his feature debut, so the sooner he leaves it behind the better. And it's fair warning to anyone else thinking of using mid-career Guy Ritchie as a stylistic role model.
SOURCE: The Hollywood Reporter
Robin Hood perhaps sticks a little too closely to the origin formula of superhero movies, especially since moviegoers have seen so many in the last decade, but the third act takes the story in a different direction. Although there are moments when the script and directing struggle to deliver a blockbuster worthy of IMAX (so that this movie isn't quite worth seeing in IMAX), the performances of the cast help smooth out the rough edges. Altogether, Robin Hood is a entertaining movie experience, with enough new ideas to set it apart from past adaptations of the folktale, some cool archery action and a charming-as-hell lead in Egerton.
SOURCE: Screen Rant
If every generation gets the Robin Hood it deserves, which one did we deserve? Was it Ridley Scott’s postcard-pretty slice of historical revisionism from 2010, long-forgotten though it already feels? No? If it’s the new one, we must have done something unforgivably gross in a past life. Because the new one barely has a single thing to recommend it. [1/5]
SOURCE: Telegraph
Bathurst even sets up another character as an obvious Two-Face analogue for a potential sequel to the film, assuming audiences buy into an updated and contemporary Robin Hood franchise. If they do, maybe it’ll only be because they want another Batman franchise with the DCEU in flux. The film happily obliges, but its use of the Dark Knight’s iconography is troubling. The Incredibles warned us: If every hero is super, none of them are.
SOURCE: Polygon
Robin Hood is simultaneously unlike any version of Robin you've seen before, and very much like the superhero films you've seen a glut of in the recent past. While it's not perfect, and does engage in derivative practices to reach a more modern crowd, the messages that have been present in the story have been preserved note for note. The film seeks to inspire the modern generation to, like Robin, actively engage the world they live in and change it for the better. The fact that it gets that part of the story right, as well as presents some breathtaking action and entertaining performances, already puts it above some of its predecessors. [3.5/5]
SOURCE: Cinema Blend
The story of Robin Hood is one that has provided fuel for film adaptations from the swashbuckling (The Adventures of Robin Hood) to the satirical (Robin Hood: Men in Tights), but 2018’s Robin Hood aims its arrow at contemporary action and relevancy only to miss the mark entirely. [C]
SOURCE: Entertainment Weekly
"They were young, in love, and that was all that mattered, until the cold hand of fate reached out for them," the narrator notes of the couple’s early days, during which they are seen kissing while backing each other into a wall. The plot is twisty in a perfunctory way, the action predictably explosive, the sought-after exhilaration nonexistent.
As long as there is economic disparity, the story of Robin Hood will always be relevant. But you wouldn’t know it by watching this movie. It’s a straightforward retelling with a confusing design philosophy, disappointing action sequences, weak storytelling and a cast which clearly deserved better material. [4/5/10]
Robin Hood tries so very hard to be relevant. Instead its transparency, complete with the Sheriff switching gears from George W. Bush (“they hate us for our freedom”) to Donald Trump (“and they’ll be coming here soon to do whatever they please!”) in the space of a sentence plays more like a parody of “liberal Hollywood values” than any coherent political statement. I can charitably say that this particular moralizing is unlikely to change any minds. A good outlaw movie should have something to say about the world in which it's made--and holy moley, do we need one of those right now--but Robin Hood is not a good outlaw movie. Or a good Robin Hood movie. Or a good movie at all. [1/5]
SOURCE: Den Of Geek
Some of the elements from earlier Robin Hood movies are present and correct. Others are ignored or distorted. The filmmakers take a long time to cover not a great deal in plot terms. A large part of the film is devoted to en elaborate heist which plays like something from a Michael Mann movie, but with knives and axes instead of pistols and machine guns and get away horses and carts instead of cars. Robin spends hardly any time at all in Sherwood Forest. The tempo, though, never flags. This is such an energetic affair that it hardly seems to matter when its aim is less than true. [3/5]
SOURCE: Independent
Like Guy Ritchie’s King Arthur, this tries hard to do something new and exciting with an old formula. It quickly makes you wish for something more traditional and straightforward. [2/5]
SOURCE: Empire Online
Bathurst has pitched Robin Hood as a “hip” take on the titular character’s origins, yet it is a decidedly dour, un-groovy affair. It’s a love story devoid of romance, an action flick severely lacking in spark and spectacle, a historical epic filled with flagrant inaccuracies and wrongheaded revisionism. There is nothing particularly fresh or inventive about the film, and, setting aide the wildly incongruous accents, jarringly modern, machine-stitched costumes and ugly CG render of a vaguely medieval setting, it is a simple fact that no one has ever looked cool shooting a bow and arrow while pirouetting backwards off a ledge. Jamie Dornan also stars.
SOURCE: Little White Lies
No, this is a pretty serious and stodgy Robin with lots of very serious and extended action scenes created for laptop-digital landscapes. We see what looks like a gigantic network of picturesque, and frankly rather clean and spacious medieval streets, lacking only a visitors’ centre. Robin himself does not wear Lincoln green: it’s closer to a hoodie, which is at least appropriate. [2/5]
SOURCE: Guardian
This isn’t the first time somebody has tried to probe the dark recesses of this should-be charming action story. The 2010 film with Russell Crowe did it too, but at least that movie tried to approximate the time period. In director Otto Bathurst’s new “Hood,” Nottingham looks like a Roman fortress where everybody shops at Zara.
“Robin Hood” tries to energize with violence, showcasing arrow battles and runaway horse-drawn vehicles, but Bathurst doesn’t have much style to call his own, always eager to play with speed ramping, which is meant to pass for coolness in the movie that would be much better off with one single shot of unbroken concentration on stunt work. And when the feature isn’t rolling along, it’s deathly dull, laboring to clarify a cloudy motivation for the Sheriff while creating a juicy set-up for a sequel that will likely never be produced. There were big plans at one point for “Robin Hood,” which attempts to lead with attitude but largely wallows in noise, fumbling a shot at some type of Robin Hood Cinematic Universe the world doesn’t need.
SOURCE: BluRay.com
Overall, adventure and action fuel this new vision of Robin Hood. It’s not mind blowing, but it is fun. What else could you want from the hooded crusader?
SOURCE: Black Girl Nerds
That said, the feature’s overt insistence that this isn’t the same old story — a statement that its introductory storybook narration underscores — inspires handsome technical contributions, courtesy of eye-catching production design from Jean-Vincent Puzos (The Lost City of Z) and modern-leaning costuming from Julian Day (Bohemian Rhapsody). Of course, simply looking the part is the antithesis of a hero famed for siding with the common folk over the well heeled, a notion that escapes this version’s attention.