
Honestly? I preferred the cartoon version with singing and dancing foxes, squirrels, and Friar Tuck portrayed as a, what is he? A badger? A mole? Reagrdless, he is damn adorable.

The cartoon movie was rented, almost weekly, by Micah and I as children when we lived out in the country (In a log cabin, mind you.) and had virtually no access to electronic entertainment. This was a good thing. Playing in fields and digging in the dirt trumps movie watching. But every Friday night Mom would let us walk to the country store, (This place seriously was a "country store". Everything you'd image-- hardwood floors, glass jars of candy, and a homemade sandwiches.) and pick a movie to watch. To rent one was like $1.50, I think. We always chose Robin Hood. It just never got old. And with song lyrics like, "Oo-de-lally, Oo-de-lally. Golly, what a day!", how could any child resist? We sure as heck couldn't.
Also working in Ridley's favor but he ruined everything: the fact that I love action movies. Always have. Face/Off was my favorite movie until I was in my teens, and/or realized Nic Cage is a "I only eat animals that have standardized sex" weirdo with atrocious (I cannot state this enough) hair and no acting talents. I can usually ignore the ridiculous plot holes and terrible one-liners in action movies. Here's the ultimate example: I want to see Prince of Persia. Like, really bad. I know it will be cheesy and I'll walk out complaining how my beloved Ben Kinglsey could stoop to such a level of film-making, but secretly I'll love it. Being raised with a dad and two brothers who infiltrated me with Indiana Jones, Star Wars, Arnold, and Jurrasic Park made this affinity for explosions inevitable.
This all goes to say that I do not hold action movies to a very high level of film-expectancy. But Robin Hood was supposed to be historical action, or so I thought. It ended up being just plain boring and not nearly as awesome as it's cartoon predecessor. Independently, I am enthralled by the story of Loxley and all the history and revolution surrounding it. I hoped the movie would fulfill all my secret fantasies for a really good, well acted, educational tale of the notorious thief-savior. Ridley did not give me what I wanted. It was anti-climactic and poorly acted by all but my lover, Cate Blanchett. Who could literally stand in a room holding some batteries and I'd pay to watch it.
So take my advice, don't waste your money, and go sing a song with flute accompaniment in some wooded glen instead of seeing this movie.
Let's not overlook the fact "Prince of Persia" doesn't even have a Persian in the lead role.
ReplyDeleteOh yeah, and then there's that.
ReplyDelete