Robin Hood: A Wedding Dress Made From Different Bits of Curtain

First of all apologies are in order, The Salsa Shark has not been meeting its potential output and I know it must have been very distressing for all eight of you who actually read my blog. I can only plead extenuating circumstances for leaving you in the dark since my two-part essay on Skins as my schedule was rammed up to eleven shortly after. Needless to say I’ve been mostly dividing my time between trying like hell to graduate, looking for a job, performing stand-up on a regular basis and, perhaps most demanding of all, actually having a girlfriend for a brief period. But now all those frivolous distractions are behind me I can finally apply my efforts to where my heart truly lies, ripping into a grade-A piece of shit. Perfect for this purpose is 2010’s Robin Hood, yet another attempt by Ridley Scott to capitalise on the Historical Epic genre that he revived with Gladiator (his previous attempt, Kingdom of Heaven speaks for itself). The story opens with King Richard fighting a fictitious battle in 12th Century France where our titular Robin (Russell Crowe) is serving as a common archer. For the most part Crowe played Robin as not being so much world-weary as just plain knackered half the time. The only show of real passion is when he twats Little John for almost no reason and gets himself and his merry men in the stocks. Of course this may sound like dickish behaviour but Robin has a tragic back-story so we can feel sorry for him. After all, it’s not like we’d need strong characterisation or a nuanced performance to endear us to the hero. Fortunately the ambush isn’t for Robin but the King’s escort returning the crown back to England. Robin and his men fight Godfrey off, giving him an arrow across the cheek for his troubles. In any other film this would leave him with a pretty badass scar but in Ridley Scott’s world he just gets a herpes sore. After the battle Robin comes across Sir Robert Loxely who, with his dying breath, asks him to return his sword to the family estate in Nottingham. Robin agrees and they take the place of the soldiers escorting the crown. Meanwhile the monarchy back home is also in disarray as Prince John (Oscar Isaac), England’s first metro-sexual king, is getting jiggy with the King of France’s niece, though the girl playing her sounds more Jamaican in accent than anything. Between this and the Guatemalan Isaac playing an English king I’d swear the casting director was really hung-over during auditions. However John hopes that with his Kingston Queen he can improve relations with France, supply an heir to the throne and convince the audience he’s actually straight. The problem is this has nothing to do with the plot which s that after the costly war John attempts to collect extortionate taxes from the Northern Barons and Nottingham will soon be in his sights. Nottingham itself isn’t doing too well as it is though, Maid Marion Loxley (Cate Blanchette) is finding the community’s grain poached by the church and stolen by wild orphans. When Robin arrives with Loxley’s sword Sir Walter Loxely decides that he should take his son’s place to maintain their estate and protect the village. So now we’re throwing a marriage of convenience into the mix, this films plot, or plots, are so convoluted I’d need a flow chart to explain them all, which is fine when you’re making Magnolia but we’re here to see Robin Hood. The biggest problem though is that all the separate storylines; the war with France, Godfrey’s betrayal, Robin posing as Loxley, have so little to do with each other that any of them could be taken out with impacting the film. In a way, the film feels like a wedding dress made from several different curtain fabrics. You can maybe argue that the materials work but putting them together is going to be a clumsy and tedious effort and it’ll never look right. Ironically though the part that feels like it was added as an aside, this marriage of convenience business, is actually the strongest portion of the film. Here we engage in what is closest to the story of Robin Hood with his time in Nottingham, the back and forth sniping between Crowe and Blanchett, Little John’s fondness for fat chicks, meeting Friar Tuck, lots of good bits. It even gives the merry men, who short of Little John have had no characterisation, something to do. But Scott seems so determined to tell the true-to-life story of Robin Hood that he forces in a completely imagined war with historical figures who bear zero resemblance to their real life counterparts. This boils the story down to that of a generic historical epic which completely ignores the entire idea of Robin Hood. Robin Hood is a legendary folk hero and not someone rooted in reality and the notion that you can tell realistic, historical tale that remains true to the figure is at best misguided and at worst downright foolish Technically speaking the film is also weak, there is little that impresses in the battle scenes, especially when most of the fighters are indiscernible. Rarely cinematography is a noticeable element but here even that has its poor moments and one might feel a skilled editor could have overcome the confused plot. On a positive note Mark Strong intimidates as always and Isaac manages to overcome the issue of race to play a convincing English King, even if it convinces only in personality. The Julliard-trained William Hurt is tragically wasted as John’s advisor, a minor role by anyone standards and, like all characters opposite John, exists solely to reflect what a dick he is. But otherwise this great epic feels like Sunday night television, a relaxing distraction for when there’s nothing else to do.