Robin Hood (2006–2009) User Reviews

Enjoyable

[Aw_47 · 8/10 · 25 November 2006]

I like this version, and think the actors are good. Fair enough if it's really not your thing, but they can't please everyone.

I appreciate that it's not historically accurate, but how can it be when it's based on a legend? I don't see why it has to be - it's a drama program, not a documentary. :-)

As for the comment in one post that anyone who enjoyed it must be either ignorant or from the BBC: I am neither. It seems a shame to join a discussion only to offensively reject any opinion that conflicts with your own. :-(

I hope the rumour that it's been commissioned for a second series is true.

Eventually won me over...

[Sweet_Ophelia · 7/10 · 31 December 2006]

After the first 15 minutes of the BBC's new drama 'Robin Hood', I was pretty much certain that I wouldn't go further than the first episode. Robin (Jonas Armstrong), back from the Crusades in Jerusalem is coming home to Locksley, along with is ex-servant and friend, Much (Sam Troughton). They make a pit-stop on their journey home, to help a blacksmith in return for food... and a roll in the hay with his bosomy daughter who looks like she just stepped out of a Justin Timberlake music video. Riiight. Then came a dodgy back-flip, some ridiculous one-liner and I was thoroughly unimpressed.

I know a thing or two about the legend of Robin Hood. As a kid the Disney version (yep the sing-along with the fox as Robin) was a favorite, and when I was about 6 and went on a trip to England, my family and I made a pit-stop in Nottingham, got a photo by the Robin Hood statue and even went on a little Robin Hood ride and walk through Sherwood forest. I was told the stories of Robin Hood, and have a soft spot for the Robin and Marian romance. I felt obligated to give this new BBC drama a try, since everything Robin Hood once fascinated me as a child.

The first episode, as I said, did not inspire confidence. Jonas Armstrong isn't who I picture as Robin Hood. One review described him as being the 'Orlando Bloom' type, one who "hovers somewhere between boyhood and manhood" (Daily Express, September 9, 2006). I had seen Armstrong in the fourth season of 'Teachers' and was not terribly taken by him. But in 'Robin Hood', Armstrong is initially hard to swallow as the hooded crusader, but this isn't entirely his fault. Robin initially comes across as a cocky, womanizing lad with a hefty ego, and it wasn't until about the third episode that I actually started to warm to him. What made sure I came back to watch the second, third and eventually entire series of this show was Lucy Griffiths as Maid Marian and Keith Allen as the deliciously ruthless Sheriff of Nottingham.

Newcomer, 19 year-old Lucy Griffith's Marian has dropped the 'maid' and follows the lead of 21st century female TV heroines such as Buffy, Veronica Mars and Rose Tyler... which isn't surprising, the show could not have worked with a wimpy and weak Marian. Griffiths and Armstrong do have a great chemistry as well, despite the fact that the dialogue between Marian and Robin is sometimes corny ("kiss it better?") there is a spark, and that's enough to keep the Marian/Robin romance interesting for me. Even more so is the fact that in this updated version, Marian does not welcome Robin home with open arms. He left her 5 years ago to fight for glory and King Richard in the Holy lands, and she is still feeling the sting of his desertion.

Keith Allen plays a fantastically villainous Sheriff, who sometimes reminds me of Tim Curry, and is always entertaining. Richard Armitage plays Guy of Gisborne, the Sheriff's right hand man and the new lord of Robin's Locksley manor. To top it off, Gisborne is in tough pursuit of Marian, adding an extra layer of intensity to his dueling with Robin.

This show has been commissioned partly due to the huge success of the resurrected 'Doctor Who', and while it isn't quite on-par with the genius of Russell T. Davies's show, 'Robin Hood' is worth a try. At times the production value leaves you wanting, the stunts can be laughable and the acting a little wooden. It isn't really until the seventh episode "Brothers in Arms" that things really start to pick up with the drama and story lines, and from seven onwards it is a brilliant roller-coaster ride sure to make the previous six lack-luster episodes worth the watch.

Continues its decline

[thelmaritter-1 · 7/10 · 26 April 2009]

Season 1 was an enjoyable romp once it got the gang assembled, and Season 2 had an energetic Empire Strikes Back quality, but we're halfway through Season 3 and it's a turkey. New lackluster characters are being introduced into the gang, taking the focus off the old characters we actually like. The writers seem to have lost the thread of the story. At the end of Season 2 they set the audience up for a big showdown, but they deflated the tension in the very first episode. There are continuity issues every episode, such as, Why does Gisborne suddenly have a sister when he spent the first season moping about having no family? Did Gisborne's soldiers get eaten? Prince John was supposed to be angry about his tax money, but when Gisborne returns, it's to kill Robin Hood, not to squeeze money from the sheriff. With a few exceptions, most of the scripts feel as if they were hastily sketched out, without much care toward development of character or continuity. It's a shame.

The one exception to the lackluster season is Toby Stephens as Prince John. He's the perfect combination of insecurity, viciousness, and preening pomposity. He's very funny.

OK... now great!

[sha_dela · 9/10 · 11 January 2007]

When I first saw it I thought it was really bad and almost didn't watch it again. The first episode was cringe-worthy.But... I stuck with it and with each passing week it got better and better. Now, I'm hooked. It's great entertainment. People who say that it is not historically correct are just being picky. Not many people care whether it is correct or not. As long as it is good drama and entertaining then it will be watched. Robin Hood has all of those things. Brilliant drama, occasionally funny and has got a hint of romance running through it. The actors, though not widely known are great and Robin Hood gets better as each week passes. Definitely something you should give a try.

Very enjoyable

[Elicottonlover · 10/10 · 11 October 2006]

I enjoyed this very much, maybe that's because I was expecting a light hearted romp for families about the legend of Robin Hood and not a documentary. Exhilarating if outrageous action scenes, humour, nasty bad guys, bit of social comment for the adults. Robin a mixture of gravitas and cheekiness. Great verbal sparring between Robin and the Sheriff and a Robin and Marian. The sets were amazing, Locksley a bit sterile but the overall look was good. Did exactly what it said on the tin for me and what I expected for a programme in that time slot. Now the characters are settling in, looking forward to more good stuff from future episodes.

Saturday night fun

[bobblainey · 7/10 · 6 December 2006]

This is perfect Saturday night viewing. Don't expect complicated plots and subtext. It is pure entertainment. Goodies wear white (or green in this case) and the baddies wear black. It is as simple as that. The costumes are a bit modern the dialogue also is more in the present day.

But the best bit that makes it worth watching is Kieth Allens Sheriff of Nottingham. He is pure am dram evil. An amoral creature who would turn over his own mother. the supporting cast are great and Jonas Armstrong puts in a great cocky performance for an unknown actor.

The back ground characters are a bit week but this is probably more due to the fact there grasp of English is limited as the series is filmed in Hungary

Absolutely Brilliant

[welshie21 · 10/10 · 19 November 2006]

In my opinion, out of the vast majority of the Robin Hoods out there, this is by far the best. It is witty, enjoyable and fast paced. Its suitable for all ages hence the 7pm airing. The casting is just right, Robin is supposed to be young, he has just returned from the crusades, Jonas Armstrong is perfectly suited. Marian (played by Lucy Griffiths) is the model woman, she stands up for what she thinks is right and isn't afraid to put herself in the line of fire so to speak. The sheriff is suitably horrid and Robin is perfect as the young, charming and cheeky rebel. As most BBC 13part shows are good, you expect this to be too and you aren't disappointed.

Extremely Disappointing

[bs3dc · 30 October 2006]

Firstly, this seems to be a show that everyone either loves or hates. I am definitely one of the latter people. I would normally just turn over and watch something else, but I am angry how the licence fee money has been wasted yet again on a well below par TV series. I was looking forward to it, but when even the BBC's own listing magazine gave it a lukewarm preview the alarm bells began to ring, and after watching several episodes to give it a chance enough is enough.

One of the main problems of this show is the poor casting. I am far from against using unknown actors, but when they are as bad at acting as this it beggars belief. Charisma-free Jonas Armstrong is woefully miscast as Robin Hood. Are we really expected to believe he has spent five years hard campaigning in the Holy Land? Despite proclamations from the BBC about the fight training it is clear from the camera angles and the constant slow motion that they barely know one end of a sword from the other. It is also apparent that Robin uses a stunt double for most if not all horse riding, so why was he chosen? He looks more the sort of person who goes around stealing hub caps and car stereos than being the noble outlaw he is usually portrayed as. As for the rest of the cast, only Keith Allen comes anywhere near to the mark. Richard Armitage as Guy of Gisburne looks like a motorcycle courier, and has all the menace of one. Maid Marian has so much make-up on I thought at first she had two black eyes. Much is just a poor version of Sam Gamgee from Lord of the Rings and the merry men show worse acting ability than the average school play, not helped by the cringe worthy script.

Perhaps it does make a good kids show, but in which case why isn't it put on the CBeebies channel and why does it have to be so childish? The writers seem to have their own political agenda, and are intent on forcing it down our throat, with no real attempt made to disguise this fact. They seem to have run out of story ideas already after only a few episodes, with one of Robin's men being captured virtually every week. This programme is very much like the US TV series Hercules or even Xena Warrior Princess, with the wobbly dialogue, acting and special effects except that the BBC probably spent far more per episode. Perhaps this was aimed at the American market like most of the BBC programming seems to be these days, forgetting they are funded by the British public.

Overall this adaption has none of the charm of the classic Richard Greene version, which even allowing for inflation probably cost about as much per 39 episode series as one episode of this drivel. Indeed it is hard to see where the money has been spent. The costumes are hardly authentic, the same few sets are used every week, and the extras are few indeed for a town the size of Nottingham. I have seen many different versions of the classic tale and I have to say this is the worst. Even the ever-wooden Kevin Costner was better than this.

Only the music is any good which is why I gave it more than 1/10. Even that sounds as if it has been copied from Superman.

Hoping for improvements

[splomp117 · 6/10 · 14 May 2007]

I am from Canada. For the most part I am a great fan of British programming. I am certainly not alone in my enjoyment of the BBC here on the other side of the "pond". BBC Canada & BBC America has been a godsend to those of us who enjoy top notch offerings with great scripts, subtle direction and above all wonderful actors! A lot of us feel that we have hit the "mother lode" because the majority of "home grown" programs in North America are for the most part a great wasteland of mindless drivel.

I had looked forward to seeing "Robin Hood", but have been rather disappointed so far. I will try and stick it out and hope to see improvements in further episodes that some of the other commentators have noted.

I too found the scripts weak, the focus of the episodes rudderless, and the costumes mystifying to name a few. Why are the Sheriff's men "veiled" in chain mail??? It must be very uncomfortable.

I personally find that the actor playing Robin H. (Jonas A.) is too thin short and willowy looking to fill Robin Hood's shoes. (I am a grandmother and I think that I could best him in a hand to hand encounter—not too inspiring.).

The sheriff (Keith Allen) is deliciously wicked and evil. Maid Marion is very pretty with wonderful skin – but the clothes—goodness—I don't think that they had knitting machines back then, did they? In my opinion, the only "hunky" actor is Richard Armitage who plays Guy of Gisborne. They should give him a greater share of screen time. Tall dark and handsome!! Not so nice leaving your bastard son to die in the forest, though. Perhaps Marion can reform him (?) As some others have noted, I also find the modern political correctness very jarring. Shall we transport everyone back in time to see just how that would "float"? There would be many a head on pikes methinks! It would be more interesting to me to watch the cunning, resourcefulness and intelligence that must have been used by women back then to influence events. Women had to be a lot more subtle.

I thought it was great

[suzyyyeee · 10/10 · 11 October 2006]

finally something to fill the gap left by 'Doctor Who'. A quirky, enjoyable, funny program which had me on the edge of my seat. This is what we've been waiting for, from the BBC, after such shows as 'Doctor Who' and 'Pride & Prejudice'. The characters were already well structured even after the first episode. Jonas Armstrong is a great choice for Robin Hood, as he is a 'bad boy'. With his rugged features and lovely accent, he really makes the character of Robin come alive. Along with the other actors and actresses, he really makes the legend reality. A must-see for any fans of Action/Comedy and maybe romantics. It combines lots of genres to make it appeal to everyone. Now all i have to say is, watch it! or you'll be sorry you missed it!

Casual viewer thought it was less than okay...mostly boring

[dspot6 · 6/10 · 29 June 2009]

Have seen about ten episodes overall. Every new season I gave it another try, but it just proved too boring in the end. Slow moving plot lines acted out by a stark mix of pantomime villains and one-dimensional 'heroes', scripts that often seemed to sell the actors short and some terrible costuming (including the bendable swords). I enjoyed a few episodes that injected some emotion into the stories, especially those when close friends and family meet their ends. This type of storyline appears more realistic than the 'A-Team' one thousand bullets (or arrows) will not harm me brand of combat. I also disagree with the over-political correctness of the project. You can imagine the script and production meetings beforehand discussing 'we can't do this' and 'we must do that'. Although I can appreciate Morgan Freemans character Azeem, in Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves, which had a ring of truth to it, I cannot understand a black man playing Friar Tuck and a woman vying for the position of Sheriff of Nottingham. All this in the 12th Century? These ideas don't really make sense and indeed appear to remove some degree of authenticity with the original Robin Hood story. I sense some of the actors agree with my points too. Half of them look totally disinterested, as if coming back on set meant they had to cut a quick phone call short !

"I shot the sheriff!"

[cbrichar · 8/10 · 14 February 2008]

I love it. Absolutely love it. Without a doubt, the most appalling and horrific bastardization of a long-established "can't miss" premise, and I can't stop watching it.

The "Who Shot the Sheriff" episode sealed the deal for me - had me, in fact, on the floor in near hysterics at the pure stupidity of it all. Since then, my wife and I have had a wonderful time watching through the series with perverse glee. Not since renting, viewing and properly digesting the entirety of the Steven Seagal catalog have I enjoyed anything to this same degree for the completely incorrect reasons.

8 out of 10 for pure enjoyment factor. Now someone just needs to establish a good drinking game.

Great Entertainment!!

[bobby_b_87 · 7/10 · 5 November 2006]

This version of robin hood, more than anything else, is great entertainment. After years of the Saturday night slot being full of rubbish, the bbc follows up the success of doctor who, with another great series. The casting of the characters is brilliant, jonas armstrong plays a great robin, and the sheriff and gisbourne have both been cast very well. I look forward to seeing the lastest episode more than any other program on TV currently. the humour in the series is also used very well and keeps the action flowing. the stunts and action sequences in the series are also constructed very well.. overall the show is great, no its not historically perfect, but does that really matter? i think the main point is that the show is fun to watch and shows that bbc back at there best, it is easily the best thing on TV on Saturday nights

a great show!

This isn't about the twelfth century. It's about Britain now!

[Uhtred · 1/10 · 22 March 2008]

Jonas Armstrong's Hood is possibly the smuggest character I've ever seen on TV drama. Makes me want to root for the sheriff except he's an equally tedious pantomine villain. Richard Armitage who plays Gisborne would have made a far better Hood, both physically and charisma wise. This show also takes a cue from the mediocre Herecules the Legendary Journeys with lukewarm comedy provided by boring buffoon like sidekicks. The biggest difference between this and the mid eighties series Robin of Sherwood is the twenty odd year time gap between them, because Britain has changed enormously in that time. I'm talking about the story lines not the lavishness/ special effects. In 1984 it was still OK to celebrate the indigenous British Saxon/ Celtc culture so you had episodes about the Swords of Weiland( the Mythical Saxon smith) and Herne the Hunter ( from Celtic myth) to the background of a heavily Celtic mystical soundtrack. It was gritty and serious. Fast forward twenty years and you've got Robin quoting the Koran, the English/ Welsh longbow takes a backseat to the 'Saracen' bow and multicultural Britain appears to be up and running in the twelfth century.Also the crusades being snidely linked by the script to the Iraq war. The crusades were a bad thing according to this show which English kids will watch. There's no show telling them that 400 years ago ships from the North African caliphate were raiding British coastal towns for slaves. No shows about the Muslim crusades in Spain and South west Europe. This is brainwashing. If they wanted a happy clappy series which all cultures in Britain can relate to, why not set it in a fantasy world instead of rewriting history.

17 years on, more enjoyable than ever

[slashworth-73435 · 10/10 · 15 February 2023]

I first watched this series in 2006 and enjoyed it.

Fast forward to 2023. I was In much need of some light entertainment with everything going on in the world.

I needed to revisit the age old tale of good triumphing over evil, at a time when global governments are the equivalent of the Sheriff of Nottingham - but much, much worse.

So I decided to rewatch all three series. What a tonic. Yeah, ok, some of its a bit cheesy. The costumes may not be completely historically accurate. The CGI is a bit dated in parts. The acting is a bit hammy. But with all that having been said, this is great television. I laughed and I cried. I cared about the characters and having just watched the final episode, I wish there was more.

Anachronistic yes, but oh so good!

[sheebs · 10/10 · 30 October 2009]

OK, so I know a lot of people have a lot of not very flattering things to say about this TV series, but come on!! It's a family TV series based on a legend (and how accurate are those in any event!). So instead of trying to find historic accuracy in this, just willingly suspend your disbelief and enjoy this show for what it is - a completely anachronistic, hammy, camp, funny, jolly romp! The show doesn't try to take itself seriously, and neither should you. The makers, costume designers, everyone admits that the show is anachronistic and slightly mad and they make gentle fun of that aspect in the DVD extras and the commentaries.

I myself wasn't quite taken with it when they first started showing it on TV, but I then got the DVDs (mostly because I am a Richard Armitage fan and also because I thought I'd give it another go) and I must admit that I LOVED it!!! And not just because of Mr. Armitage smirking and sneering in black leather and guyliner (though he does looks so very hot doing it!). Guy of Gisborne is, I have to say, the most compelling character, and I think that is also a testament to Armitage's talents as an actor since he manages to portray him as a decidedly flawed individual but one who has a well of loneliness and despair somewhere deep inside and the capacity to be good, even though he can't quite reach it. You do get the feeling, and indeed, it is hinted at in Series 1, that he could almost have been like Robin Hood had circumstances been different and this is reinforced towards the end of Series 3 where Robin and Guy's past history is explored. At times you actually wanted Marian to end up with Guy rather than Robin (imagine what the purists would have said to that!). Had this show been aimed at a slightly older audience, I believe the writers would have explored the subtle sexual tension between Guy and Marian more. It will not be obvious to children, but grown ups will pick up on it.

But I liked Robin and all his mad men with their deliciously funny interactions with each other (especially Much and Alan, though I couldn't quite feel for Little John and Kate), I liked Marian, I liked her father, and I liked, nay, loved the Sheriff. Keith Allan gives a wonderful funny campy performance complete with black silk pajamas, painted toe nails and the best lines in the show. A special mention has to go to Toby Stephens for his brilliant over the top 3-episode turn as Prince John in Series 3. At times I was laughing out loud!

Jonas Armstrong and Lucy Griffiths were the right ages to play Robin and Marian. Whilst Armstrong may not fit everyone's idea of a conventionally handsome, swash-buckling hero (if anyone fits that description in the show, it is probably Guy of Gisborne!), I liked his interpretation of Robin as a young flirtatious cheeky attention loving natural leader of men who does sometimes get tired of doing the right thing all the time and has a dark side as well - quite refreshing after all those portrayals of Robin as a uni-dimensional goodie two shoes. Griffiths as Marian is strong and fiesty and really comes into her own in the second series. I particularly liked the fact that she doesn't welcome Robin back with open arms when he finally returns after 5 years (given that he had left her and his obligations back home to go fight in a pointless war).

And I have to say, I loved that the series was so light-hearted and anachronistic and over the top. In fact, I felt a little let down when they went for the more serious feel and historically accurate costumes in series 3 (no doubt to try and appease the critics).

There is plenty of good old fashioned fighting, but no real violence and no images of blood and gore, even when people get run through or shot with an arrow. Of course, this is because it is a family programme, but with 'realistic violence' becoming the norm now, I too found this to be refreshing, and could enjoy all the great high-adventure fight scenes without wincing.

Some people have objected to the subtle political messages, but I never found that to be overbearing or to ring false. One could easily sympathise with Robin turning his back on violence and needless killing after the horrors he witnessed in the holy land and the futility of it all. And I smiled at 'Brother' Tuck's non-violent resistance a la Mahatma Gandhi in series 3. Every generation has its own interpretation of Robin Hood, and I feel that the one for our times could not have been made without hinting at the political sub-text (the shows creators admit that this was actually deliberate).

I only wish they had made a 4th series exploring the slightly uneasy, love-hate, buddy relationship which was developing between Guy and Robin with its wonderfully dry wit which we glimpsed towards the end of series 3. Robin and Guy had more chemistry together than with any of the women, and I could have seen a whole series with that!

Such a shame

[spr5858 · 2 September 2011]

Robin Hood is such an important Character in English Folklore and has developed over the centuries to what we have today. Each Century has added something that the people of that period can relate to. In the 20th century we finally get to see our hero on the silver screen with such acting legends as Douglas Fairbanks, Errol Flynn, Richard Greene and others. I loved the Adventures of Robin Hood on TV back in the 60s and it still has appeal today with fine actors and good story lines, and if you ever get chance to give it a rewatch then do. I remember playing with the Airfix Little Soldiers of Robin Hood and Sheriff of Nottingham inspired by this TV show (Still Have them some place). Which is now 50 years old and still fondly remembered. I wonder in 50 years time who will remember this new series? I am trying to wipe it from my memory already. Its an insult to the Legends of Robin Hood with poor acting and awful costume design, and why is Robin using that silly little boys bow, should it not be the Longbow? A mans bow? I hope one day someone will do another TV series that will re write the wrongs of this trash that insults our heritage and memories of heroes lost

BBC family TV is back!

[curtains · 7/10 · 7 November 2006]

A modern take on a very old story.

As every generation has adapted and interpreted Robin Hood to their own situation, so has ours. The metaphors here are…well, let's say subtlety is not something this program does well. Although to be fair, they're clearly not aiming for it.

What they are aiming for is a fun, enjoyable and entertaining program that everyone can understand. They don't have the technique of creating a level of seriousness or complexity aimed at adults the way Russell T Davies' Doctor Who does. What they have done, and done well is to make it with such a wry sense of humour that makes it very enjoyable. It's a very self aware program, they don't try to stop being obvious or silly, instead they do it in a way that makes you smile.

It's not without merit either. It would have been very easy to turn this into a boy's club and have Marian the helpless woman, swooning over the hero. Oh, no. Marian is not impressed with Robin and she has as much grounds to claim the title "hero" as he does, she may even be that little bit better.

Robin is a brave and flawed character. Much, mainly the comic relief, is played with such a broken innocence by Sam Troughton that - when you don't want to hit him for his repetitive lines, which the kids will love - you just want to hug him. The Sheriff of Nottingham is in no way anything other than a villain pure and simple. He is however immensely fun and has some cracking liners that will go right over kid's heads and have you laughing.

Mildly predictable in the warm BBC family TV way, which is just what has been missing from our screens for so long. Sit down with the family and enjoy it for what it is - a fun, enjoyable family series courtesy of Auntie Beeb.

Amazing show!

[QuirkNFreckles · 10/10 · 14 March 2017]

Robin Hood is a show with awesome portrayals of the classic characters from Howard Pyle's stories! The names are about where the similarities end with the books, but it is SO worth investing the time in this show.

All of the characters are so dynamic and fun! There is real character development over the course of the relatively short 3 seasons; my personal favorite being Richard Armitage's character, Guy of Gisbourne. I won't give anything away but I really enjoyed his performance and his character arc.

This is a very binge-able show with great writing and equal amounts of drama and humor. I just can't say enough good things about it! You just have to watch it!

Robin Hood series aimed at American Market?

[Cartman-44 · 7/10 · 14 October 2006]

After all the hype leading up to this new series the reality was disappointing as I expected a lot more. Was not expecting this rendition to be quite so 'A Team' like i.e. no-one died or was even harmed in the first episode even though arrows were flying everywhere. Robin and Much, his sidekick, are reminiscent of Hercules and Aeolas from Hercules - The Legendary Journeys' series. BBC America appears in the credits at the end of the show if you hadn't already guessed that the series was aimed very much at the American market. I still loved the whole Robin Hood story so will watch it a little longer and give it a chance and I do enjoy Keith Allen as a baddie.

Excellent

[nathan9 · 8/10 · 16 October 2006]

This is great Saturday evening entertainment, witty and whimsical - Robin Hood as superhero. Maybe it's not the best drama the Beeb has ever produced, but compared to the dross that passes for entertainment these days it doesn't do too bad at all. It's certainly a worthy successor to Dr Who. When you've got a pretty girl, cute boys and great scenery, who cares about camera angles and such? just enjoy the ride.

It's lighthearted and FUN - with more than a nod to the greatest of all Robin's: Errol Flynn. More swashbuckling please Jason, you're doing great. I particularly like your dress sense - those lace-up-at-the-back 'trousers', a style you picked up in the Holy Lands, no doubt. Must come in useful for something, I suppose?

Lip service to historical accuracy makes for comic capers

[imdb-TJL · 6/10 · 6 January 2007]

Okay, I have waited until I have watched the whole series before I decided to post a comment on this series, just so you know that my opinion is not a rash, spur of the moment one.

I was looking forward to watching this series; I expected the BCC to have improved on the old Robin Of Sherwood series. Unfortunately the only significant improvement I have noted is the clarity of the picture, but that may be more due to technological progress in the form of digital broadcasting than anything else.

As the premier television producer in the country the BBC have a duty to provide programmes which are not misleading. Robin Hood, unfortunately fails to meet up to my expectations of the BBC. When a story has some basis in history the scriptwriters should not just take a few of the facts, stick them in a tumble drier and see what comes out. They should try and stick to them as much as possible. Where was Friar Tuck? What happened to the initial confrontation between Robin and Little John? And a host of other missing or misleading facts.

Improvements in costumes and sets over Robin of Sherwood I would have expected but diversifying from the historical story in the way that they have means that a generation will grow up believing the wrong story. (I accept that the magic in RoS was far fetched enough to be entirely unbelievable.) We can only speculate on the small details, which the scriptwriters can legitimately have a field day on, but straying from some of the major facts is unacceptable in a production coming from the BBC.

The story doesn't stray into the Robin of Sherwood mistake of too much magic, remaining with more realistic, if sometimes a little far fetched, scenarios; I mean, who, even today, would be up and walking around, running about and jumping onto horses just two days after being critically injured? In those days survival would have required weeks of bed rest, fever and probably a lifelong disability.

This is also a show with a lot of sharp instruments, bows and swords and things, but hardly any injury. It's remarkably out of proportion, more people would have died and there would have been so much blood; but this is a tea-time programme, so I can forgive them the blood.

The sets are good, being quite realistic. The outlaws have to cope with mediocre materials and do well, so well that you are always expecting to see a washing machine and tumble drier behind a tree in the background. More dirt would have been more realistic.

The dialogue is occasionally good, verging more on the corny and ironic than well written though ("It's a good day to die"? Hmmm, the scriptwriters are outlaws too are they???). I actually found that I liked the Sheriff, with most of my hate directed towards Guy (the rest of it towards the criminals that wrote, directed and produced the programmes). Yes, he is a bad dude, but isn't the sheriff supposed to be the bad dude?

In the main I was laughing at this show, not with it. A shame, they could have done so much better.

A refreshing, adventurous series

[ruffsleep · 10/10 · 24 August 2007]

I am impressed by the series so far. It's only a matter of time until the U.S. attempts to duplicate it. Of course they will probably add too much drama (they've done it with every other show they have bitten off from Britain's shows). Season 1 started out a little slow, but definitely picked up not only in speed, but in acting quality as well. You get a sense that they actors begin to get more comfortable with each other as the audience gets more comfortable with the characters. Absolutely love the last few episodes of season 1. A lot of feeling and emotion is portrayed to the audience. I am getting tired of American programming and it is refreshing to go back to an original storyline. There is nothing wrong with the classics. I look forward to season 2 and can't wait to see what adventures are in store for Marian and Robin (oh, and Much too). Keep of the good work! And for heavens sake, keep the series going! There's nothing else like it out there right now and it's a wonderful escape.

Enjoyable pseudo-mediaeval romp!

[grotifer · 7/10 · 21 January 2007]

I enjoyed this series, although I didn't like it as much as "Robin Of Sherwood", or the Patrick Bergin and Kevin Costner Robin Hood films from the 90s. The cast were generally very good, especially Robin, Little John, Alan A Dale and Much, and I also very much enjoyed Guy Of Gisbourne, who looks like an evil Tony Hadley from Spandau Ballet. Keith Allen's Sheriff is a bit too OTT and anachronistic for my liking, and Maid Marion is a bit too heavily made up and common looking, although I think she is a reasonably good actress. Costumes, sets and locations met with my approval, not sure about replacing Friar Tuck with a Muslim transvestite. All in all, an entertaining, action packed series of good family entertainment! And who cares whether mediaeval peasants wore hooded tops and combat trousers anyway?

Come on BBC, you can do better!

[razorsharp2505-1 · 4/10 · 7 October 2007]

Recently the BBC has been delivering some much improved family drama and Robin Hood promised to be the latest blockbusting instalment. having missed the first series, I tuned in to see what all the hype was about but came away feeling very disappointed.

I'm all for using a bit of artistic licence in the name of entertainment but some of the detail, acting and direction leaves much to be desired. For example, how can Robin shoot an arrow to free the ropes on a tied up maiden if her wrists are pointing away from him on the other side of a big wooden post? And how is it that none of the sheriff's guards managed to spot the ample bosom on Maid Marion when she was in disguise and insisted on referring to her as a man?

Overall, the script was quite weak, much of the acting quite stiff, the costumes lacking and many of the key characters seemed to have been miscast. I just couldn't get on with the actress playing Maid Marion at all.

I never thought I'd hear myself say this but even Kevin Costner's mediocre version of the myth of Robin Hood was more believable and much more enjoyable. For a better TV version, try out the 1980s Robin of Sherwood series instead.