I've seen so many Robin Hoods by now that you'd think I'd be sick of it, but apparently not.:) This version is slightly different, and, I felt, more realistic (though most reviews say its historically inaccurate, but I'll get back to that). What I liked about it is that it made a believable story out of a myth, apparently after many years of rewriting the script. The myth of Robin Hood is that he had his own way of fighting tyrannical authority, that of King John (yes, the same one who was forced to give up the 'divine right of kings' in a Magna Carta 16 yrs later and form the modern English Parliment:). He robbed from the rich and gave to the poor, and hunted the king's sheriff and men in Sherwood Forest.
This is the story of how Robin Hood came to be - which is never talked about in the myth. Russell Crowe and Kate Blanchett, both not my favorite actors, did a fantastic job in this movie. Russell Crowe is, what I like to call, a man's man. He's very appealing to men, and therefore women like him, the way girls like popular guys in sports that they don't play. lol!
Robin in the movie is a lowly archer in King Richard the Lionheart's army, disgusted with the murderous crusade (The guilt of the West finally showing up in movies!). He chances upon an ambush after the king's death. He's sworn into returning a dying man's sword his father and the crown to England. The father asks Robin to take the dead son's name and masquerade as Miriam's husband to save their property. In time he begins to fight the exploitation of the village by church and king and return it to the people.
The historical inaccuracy is essential to the story, unfortunately. Robin Hood is supposed to have suggested outline of the Magna Carta in exchange for helping King John rid England of the imminent French attack. Later King John, true to his spiteful and jealous nature (historically true), goes back on his word and outlaws Robin (fiction).So, even though fact mixes with fiction (the Magna Carta has a different history dating years into the future) it is very well done.:)
The historical inaccuracy is essential to the story, unfortunately. Robin Hood is supposed to have suggested outline of the Magna Carta in exchange for helping King John rid England of the imminent French attack. Later King John, true to his spiteful and jealous nature (historically true), goes back on his word and outlaws Robin (fiction).So, even though fact mixes with fiction (the Magna Carta has a different history dating years into the future) it is very well done.:)
I usually hate Ridley Scott movies for their pompousness (eg., Gladiator) but I liked this one. Robin is popular because he's a humble and deeply honest man with little regard for man-made laws before higher ones. This makes authorities dislike him which is just like in real life. So believable.
2 comments:
"He's very appealing to men, and therefore women like him, the way girls like popular guys in sports that they don't play. lol!"
i liked this line, shows a bit of the heart we dont know of women, thanks yoda,
this one too.
"honest man with little regard for man-made laws before higher ones. This makes authorities dislike him."
(The guilt of the West finally showing up in movies!).
U seem to savour a movie and taste it soo well to write about them.
Thank you, venkhat, seeing the world though art and literature is easy, but you do the same though your own real life experiences. You ought to be published, like R K Narayan!
Sometimes I wish I could be as open as you about my own day to day living experiences. One day when no one remembers what India was like in the late-20th and early-21st century, your writing will be as historical as Robin Hood.:)
Post a Comment