![]() |
Robin Hood
Robin Hood sucks, do not go and see it.
|
The irreducible ontological unit is pontifical in its ubiquity. What are the truth conditions of necessary truths? How can we come to have justified truths about modalities of qualified propositions? Arguably all else must be non-sanguine, seldomly maximal. Modality, therefore, is or isn't alethic. It is to this all correctivity is elevated. Remember, keep a strict eye on the eulogistic and dylogistic -- they must deploy and be accurate.
|
|
Quote:
|
Why do people want to see this story over and over and over..?
That's the 30th version or something. I stick to Errol Flynn, and John Cleese for fun. |
I loved reading Robin Hood as a kid. Read it so much. The movie looks like the same claptrap bullshit where they add more explosions and dirt and grime and harshness and make it suvck shit.
like sherlock holmes that shit SUCKED |
I came into this thread to say "in b4 was robin hood a real person?"....and I FAILED.
:( |
^^i was surprised to see it took more than 1 post before we got there.
don't have anything to say about the movie other than that i didn't know they (who?) were making a new one. |
Quote:
because movies aren't about what people want to see so much as what's easy to write. just take a look at 2010. not even fucking JOHN CUSACK could save that beast. |
“Robin Hood” is a high-tech and well made violent action picture using the name of Robin Hood for no better reason than that it’s an established brand not protected by copyright. I cannot discover any sincere interest on the part of Scott, Crowe or the writer Brian Helgeland in any previous version of Robin Hood. Their Robin is another weary retread of the muscular macho slaughterers who with interchangeable names stand at the center of one overwrought bloodbath after another.
|
yes, I deleted what I wrote about "with SFX" because I have no idea if this robin hood has them. I assume so.
will there be car chases, with horses replacing cars? I assume that as well. |
this robin hood is sux.
Little by little, title by title, innocence and joy is being drained out of the movies. What do you think of when you hear the name of Robin Hood? I think of Errol Flynn, Sean Connery and the Walt Disney character. I see Robin lurking in Sherwood Forest, in love with Maid Marian (Olivia de Havilland or Audrey Hepburn), and roistering with Friar Tuck and the Merry Men. I see a dashing swashbuckler. That Robin Hood is nowhere to be found in Ridley Scott’s “Robin Hood,” starring Russell Crowe as a warrior just back from fighting in the Third Crusade. Now Richard is dead, and Robin is essentially an unemployed mercenary. This story is a prequel. It takes place entirely before Robin got to be a folk hero. The idea of taking from the rich and giving to the poor was still in storyboard form. Grieving Richard the Lionhearted and now facing the tyrant King John, Robin leads an uprising. This war broadens until, in the words of the movie’s synopsis, “it will forever alter the balance of world power.” That’s not all; “Robin will become an eternal symbol of freedom for his people.” Not bad for a man who, by general agreement, did not exist. Although various obscure bandits and ne’er-do-wells inspired ancient ballads about such a figure, our image of him is largely a fiction from the 19th century. But so what? In for a penny, in for a pound. After the death of Richard, Robin Hood raises, arms and fields an army to repel a French army as it lands on an English beach in wooden craft that look uncannily like World War II troop carriers at Normandy. His men, welding broadswords, backed by archers, protected from enemy arrows by their shields, engage the enemy in a last act devoted almost entirely to nonstop CGI and stunt carnage in which warriors clash in confused alarms and excursions, and Russell Crowe frequently appears in the foreground to whack somebody. Subsequently, apparently, Robin pensioned his militia and retired to Sherwood Forest to play tag with Friar Tuck. That’s my best guess; at the end the film informs us, “and so the legend begins,” leaving us with the impression we walked in early. |
|
i like men in tights. the mel brooks movie is pretty funny too.
|
Why do people even bother going to the movies these days? I don't get it.
|
To see films Eugene.
|
Nobody can top the Cost.
![]() |
Quote:
The best thing about that movie was Alan Rickman stealing the movie as the Sheriff of Nottingham. I read a lot of Alan Rickman's scenes were cut out so he wouldn't totally steal the movie, yet he still managed to steal it. Not surprising when Kevin Costner was as wooden as the trees of the forest. |
I thought Ridley Scott (the most wishy washy big director in the world) would at lrast made it an R rating to make it at least worth seeing.
|
Quote:
or Woody |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:07 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
All content ©2006 Sonic Youth