Robin Hood (2010)

As with Gladiator, Ridley Scott directs and Russell Crowe is the main man. But the magic of that earlier film is not repeated.

It’s England in 1199 and there’s intrigue afoot, with a knight conspiring against King John of England (Oscar Isaac) with King Philip of France. Chaos and conflict ensue.

Rather than a simple tale of Robin Hood and his merry men, this is a fairly “serious” historical-drama treatment that deliberately veers away from the almost-pantomime silliness of the usual story – despite shoehorning in a lame, tokenistic Friar Tuck.

For a lengthy and sometimes complex film, there’s too little explanatory material and sometimes the narrative signposting is unclear. The motivations of Sir Godfrey (Mark Strong) and Sir Walter Loxley (Max von Sydow) aren’t always evident.

Ridley Scott’s usual visual flair is on display (he’s particularly expert at large, intense battle scenes), but it lacks Gladiator’s “special” factor – perhaps because Scott takes on too much at the expense of a single, cohesive story. The film attempts to detail the Robin Hood legend, retell a slice of actual English history and develop a credible romance scenario. Cate Blanchett makes for a refreshingly tough Maid Marian and seems to have real chemistry with Crowe, so I would have preferred more of their relationship and less messy muddying of myth and reality.

Crowe is always highly watchable but his constantly changing accent – did he think he was from Scotland, Northern Ireland or Yorkshire? – was a distraction.

The plot seemed to be setting up a sequel (Robin Hood only becomes the outlaw figure of legend in the closing minutes), but – several years later – that’s looking less and less likely.