Went to see the Russell Crowe/Cate Blanchett Robin Hood last night. It seemed (very) overly long, and the story—such as it is—never really figures out what it wants to be about. Sort of a poster child for “written by committee”.
I completely gave up on this movie when we hit the slow-motion shot of Russell Crowe yelling, “Nooooooooo!”
That is honestly in the film. Hard to believe, I know. And I’m pretty sure that bit was meant non-ironically, since this wasn’t intended as a comedy or satire. I’ll bet I can guess what you’re thinking: hasn’t noooooo been a cliché since almost forever?
Yes. Yes it has.
I wish they had hewn closer to the original version of this screenplay, back when it was called Nottingham: with the sheriff as likeable protagonist, carrying out medieval forensic analysis to track Robin Hood. The LA Times piece likens this to CSI, but I’m guessing the Sheriff of Nottingham character would have played closer to William of Baskerville from The Name of the Rose (the movie of which, by the way, being a surprisingly deft adaptation of the Umberto Eco novel, imho).
Yeah, medieval CSI could be hokey beyond belief. But as a starting point it’s already miles better than noooooooo…
But at least Max von Sydow was in this. His screen presence almost made up for the bit about the Magna Carta, which made me want to throw popcorn at the screen.
Update: And I forgot to mention one of the more bizarre vestigial plotlines I’ve encountered recently– the feral Lost Boys living in Sherwood Forest. Perhaps there was supposed to be some Peter Pan connection here, but man oh man, was it lost on me. I call this plotline “vestigial” because it had no connection to the rest of the movie, plotwise or themewise or anythingwise. It seemed like the leftover remnant, a scar if you will, of some storyline that had been in an earlier draft of the screenplay.
Though it did provide a bit of Plot Convenience Theater at a crucial moment after Maid Marian fell into trouble.