Robin Hood

Azt kell mondanod magadnak, hogy a Robin Hood filmben van némi szórakoztató potenciál, valamint szép helyszínek és remek színészek (különösen a szupergonosz Mark Strong). Csak nehéz elfogadni, hogy a Scott+Crowe együttműködés újabb gyümölcse, amelytől megszoktuk a minőségileg ambiciózus, érett filmeket, a rendező úr erős szerzői érintésével. Mert a Robin Hood (legalábbis ebben a moziváltozatban) csak egyenesvonalú, ideológiailag naiv, mindenfélét másoló nyári mozi, az eredetiség legcsekélyebb jele nélkül. Ebben Crowe ismét letargikusan tapogatja a felperzselt földet vagy végig sétál egy búzamezőn, de a néző ezúttal semmit sem érez. Nem szeretem a trehányságot és a személytelen, rutinszerű megközelítést a filmkészítésben, különösen nem olyan filmesektől, akiknek a filmes képek jelentenek mindent, és akik tudják, hogy a világ vár tőlük valamit... (2010.05.11)

I'm trying to find adequate words for this repulsive and bloated screenwriting conglomerate, brought to total impotence by Ridley Scott's trembling hand. I am struck by words such as despair, embarrassment, lack of criticism, anachronism and ideological naivety bordering on simplicity. It can be roughly summarized as follows: Robin Hood was caught in the woods and sodomized with a loud reading of Marx's Capital. What was quite cute in Kingdom of Heaven is offensive and boring in this film. Only Max von Sydow stands out from the weak attempts at heroism. In a single scene, Max demonstrates what the rest of the film is hunting for in vain in the soulless theft from Shakespeare, The Lord of the Rings and about five thousand other films. One star out of sheer disrespect for Scott, who should either get bigger scissors, or leave history alone. It’s already taken a decent beating from him. (2010.05.10)

It's nice to see a film on the screen where bytes are not being smashed against each other, but where a massive ensemble is pushing conquering battering rams and stuntmen in fireproof suits are falling from the walls. The trailer was off-putting, while Ridley’s name was carrying it. I don't regret the money in favor of honest filmmaking, which compromises on ratings and, in the second half, on the tolerability of the runtime (I will, like many, be looking out for the DVD with the extended bloodier version), but otherwise entertains with well-written and acted characters that you fully believe in. Crowe’s pathetic charisma drips throughout, while the rest of the gang spit out dry catchphrases and Cate Blanchett is breathtaking. That's what makes even the romantic storyline pleasant and spirited. In a way, it's nothing we haven't seen from Ridley before, but his paintings have always had eyes boring into them, and Robin Hood isn't going to change that. (2010.06.01)

Loads of money wasted on a pointless, sterile and lifeless film. Scott is still a master of the craft, but that doesn’t mean anything if has to work with a screenwriting monstrosity that doesn’t even allow the beautiful Cate Blanchet or the charismatic Strong to express themselves properly. In short, two and a half hours of delayed sleep and bitter memories of the never made Nottingham. Ridley, please, go back to the Aliens and make me happy this time. (2010.09.03)

I was too content to be disappointed, but... I expect rather more from Ridley than a slipshod, while entertaining historical snack. I don’t doubt that in a year and a day we’ll see the release of a dozens of minutes longer and countless percent better director’s cut. Because mainly the editor had to do inhumane overtime on the second half and so in many places it doesn’t make too much sense. But it isn’t ridiculous, not at all (apart from the lady charging on the pony, huh?). The reason why Robin Hood is worth seeing isn’t sumptuous production design (there is none, anyhow) or monumental battles (there are none, anyhow), but the electrifying courting chemistry of the central two. Despite all of potential for mediocrity, I would certainly like to see a part two. Or, better still, I want Scott to give us a whole new movie about Richard played by Huston! P.S.: And although this has almost nothing to do with the legend, still it is a hair’s breadth closer to it than what they did in the version starring Costner. (2010.05.13)