Robin Hood (2018) Poster

(I) (2018)

User Reviews

Review this title
594 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
1/10
I wanted to like it. I couldn't manage it.
valarik56426 November 2018
If anyone reads this, it's likely because you're either reading a bunch of reviews because you can't decide if a ticket is worth it, or you hated it and are reading all the 1 star reviews so you can say "thank you" multiple times when you read a criticism you agree with. If you're the latter, welcome, you're among friends. If you're the former, I'm not going to tell you that you shouldn't see or love this movie, clearly some people do, I'm just going to lay out why I can't.

It's built on clichés and one-liners, and scenes seem to be written around setting that up, if they set it up at all. Even in the credits, next to the actors name and icon, the most dramatic quotes their character had is written next to them. Most of the lines are written to serve the drama as opposed to being substantive or sensible. There's even a scene with a mildly villainous character doing the maniacal laugher ended by angry scream with the dramatic music in the background, and it literally comes out of nowhere. There was no set up for that character doing that, and it made the whole thing feel silly. Imagine a play built only on the soliloquies of Shakespearean tragedies mixed with every cliché about love giving strength in despair, but lacking any real sense of plot or structure. That is this film.

Also, the action sequences are filmed like an over the top modern war movie. There's literally a slo-mo scene where some of the characters are driving away from an explosion. I'm not saying there's no place for that in a period movie, but it was executed lazily and without much thought about how to do that and do justice to the combat of the time period.

Basically this is just a standard subpar action movie with a Robin Hood skin. Splashy effects and dialogue with no effort given to make it cohesive or new or worthwhile. I'm usually the person in a group who's more forgiving of bad movies than others are, but I just can't with this one. I kept trying to enjoy it throughout the movie, and it felt like it was fighting me the whole time.
354 out of 425 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Why?
amazon-3949028 November 2018
It takes a lot for me to leave the cinema but this film achieved it. From the over the top bow and arrow fights that feel like something out of black hawk down to the bizarre mix of costumes it's just all wrong. I'm really not sure who thought 100 million budget was well spent making this steaming heap of a film.
214 out of 258 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Primark clothed, badly staged, legend wrecking, stinker
roberteburne24 November 2018
Went to see this today... and it was really bad. A real stinker. They have just 5 sets. The town, the church, a kind of bow and arrow Iraq war, the mine with random flares (what are they mining?) and a place for doing speeches to the peasants. The costume department clearly raided primark and you keep thinking how did a man with one hand get handcuffed twice in this film? And when are Blake's 7 going to turn up to ask for their footwear back. There is a scene with dialogue from most English speaking accents... Irish, Cockney, American, Australian but none of this is meant to be funny. The best bits are the super unrealistic close combat bow and arrow shooting... and then end after the excruciatingly bad "false ending". Help.
235 out of 288 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
On the short list of films I have walked out of...
CubsandCulture28 November 2018
I had gone to see this film in the hopes that at worst it would be so bad it's good. Unfortunately, it careened past that point about 15 minutes in to it's so bad it's obnoxious. I managed to suffer through about 2/3rds of it before throwing in the towel. I saw nothing in that time that made me want to ever finish the movie.

I think the problem is the film couldn't decide what it wanted to be. A lot of it is super dumb action movie stuff, i.e. MTV style training montage, which can be fun but then the film injects political commentary to make it socially relevant., i.e. Robin is a Crusader and Little Jon is a Muslim. It all ended up being a mismash of tone, style and seriousness that grated on my nerves.

I also must say that the film had some of the laziest plotting in recent memory. At one point a character, and this is why I left, directly stated his nefarious intentions and plan in detail to Robin because one just vouched for Robin.

This film was a waste of time. I am not even made about the 7 bucks in light of the time sink.
230 out of 286 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Robin Chav and his merry band of hoodies Vs The Evil rich white guys
borismk-3894227 November 2018
Robin looks like he's wearing gear bought off of the back of a modern day lorry, but it's okay because we came up with some flashy silly choreography. Of course only by doing what a lady tells him does he save the day from all these horrid wealthy people, and the plot only gets more original from there. It's a crying shame to see Jamie Fox wasted in this tremendous display of indignity, but after Spiderman I guess anything goes for him. This movie was the film manifestation of kicking history in the nuts and running away laughing as if it was a clever idea. All things considered, after Russel Crowe's fiasco we should just've let Robin Hood die, but I guess someone had to try re-animating the corpse so we could create this walking monstrosity
155 out of 191 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Open minded and was excited...then very disappointed
mfonte-8074929 November 2018
Warning: Spoilers
I love Robin Hood and was really excited about this cast. To the point, besides all the pointed political dialogue, the characters lacked development and connection. I never felt that Robin Hood genuinely wanted to help others. It seemed he only cared that Marianne was sleeping with a different guy. The training scenes were only missing the Rocky theme music. Just very poorly written!
136 out of 168 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Oh my god just die
bagaran26 November 2018
The amount of political correctness is nauseating. If I could give this a negative review I would. What kind of drugs is the director using that he thought this would be a good idea?
189 out of 237 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
How to ruin the image of a great story
marijn-vandriest22 November 2018
There are loads of Robin hood series and movies. This is the nr 1 for being the worst. When historical movies got political correct elements I always get a little bit cynical. I hoped that a great actor like Jamie fox could take that feeling away. This movie was really really bad. It 's Not only the political correctness the rest of the movie is even worse.
138 out of 172 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
If you love unrealistic CGI action and overt political messages, then this is for you.
famdo24 November 2018
Just watched this with my son. He liked the archery scenes. My brief recommendation is to wait until this hits RedBox if you must. In short, this is junk food's action movie equivalent. Plot set up and dialog are like a cheap suit. I still can't believe they used the phrase "redistribution of wealth." Also, the are "stealing from the rich to give to the poor." Except, that they are steeling from the "evil" Catholic Church who controlled the "sheriff of Nottingham" who stole all the money from the common people who just took it lying down until they sort of reluctantly joined "Rob". You have to love when the hero never gets hurt. Shot in the leg, no prob. Fall from 60 feet, no prob. Arrow to the heart, no prob, just pull it out. I'd rather have a well written story than cheap CGI action scenes but your 13 y/o may disagree.
194 out of 246 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Doesn't know what it wants to be.
beniteseder27 November 2018
It's not funny, it's not witty, just another rehash of a film done over and over with updated special effects (although some moments are questionable). Don't waste your time unless you want to have your ticket money stolen from you!
168 out of 212 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Terrible Hollywood cliché flick
DarkAeneas22 November 2018
Terrible terrible story, overloaded with 'politically correct' clichés. The Trump-like speech. The 'strong empowered woman' but still with lots of cleavage. A 'representative' mix of black and white actors... in medieval England?? School play storylines are way better. Apart from that, the action scenes were not half bad. Although just as non-sensical as the story :)
168 out of 212 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Braindead
thetylex21 November 2018
Reminds me of last year's re-imagining of King Arthur except a heist film this is not. Robin Hood gets his umpteenth retelling yet the film insists it's telling a new version of the story while also basically covering all you already know about the man himself. Steal from the rich, give to the poor; it's not complicated, and open to a million different interpretations of that core loop, yet here we are.

For a movie to tease some promising themes at the start (if you ignore the awful opening bit of narrative catch-up that mismatches the film's tone with twee voice over and the weakest relationship setup imaginable) only to glance over them for flat characters is a little mean, because it makes you think it might not be half bad for at least a half an hour. It could have opened with the first major action sequence, which may be the best part of the film, as it is a far cry from where the action goes from there. Robin, of course, is a man of great character, even before his transformation into a thief proper. Where the film immediately goes wrong is establishing a context to the conflict he is drafted into fighting, which clearly includes rampant racism, imperialism, and intolerance of ideology. Like I said, promising themes at first, but Ben Mendelsohn as the Sheriff of Nottingham is not a person you'll come to understand. He could hardly get more cartoonish, and during his growly monologues I wondered if this movie was actually intended for children.

I think it is and it isn't as it's suitably violent but without blood which in some instances appears to have been intended. Robin himself racks up quite the body count in his efforts to steal from the absurdly rich Sheriff, dragging presumably innocent lives into his own personal vendetta (which is fueled by Jamie Foxx, who goes back and forth between playing Jamie Foxx and Jamie Foxx's vague interpretation of an "Arab", quotes included). But because he gets results, the community rallies around him. Off screen, mostly, so that when it comes time to rally the town against the Sheriff (though one wonders why they never left if they were forced to give everything they owe to the war) they all get behind him.

There is a lot of conflicting or lazy character choices in the film, too many to get into great detail, but they keep resetting any feelings you may develop naturally when a movie is--how you say--consistent. On top of that, accents are a complete afterthought. The lead actress, an Irish actor, can't even keep an accent in her native tongue for more than a sentence every other scene she's in. The rest of the time she's speaking plain American English like everyone's afraid to remind her of her character's betrothal to another Irishman, Jamie Dornan. Oh yeah, he's in this, and his character's arc is, in order: nonexistent, then confusing and script-serving, then literally Two-Face from The Dark Knight in a categorically stupid franchise setup that promises to tell the exact same story again next time.

Any sort of personality or wit the film has is lost in the incompetent action scenes that are a complete joke. Its costuming is interesting, but feels weird and ultimately ephemeral. At times it was like a cross between Game Of Thrones and The Matrix. I also thought the film was going to end after a particularly large set piece (which includes a horse-drawn cart being driven through a wall) because the inane plotting felt sweetly dumb enough to be mercifully short, but it kept slogging on for maybe 45 more minutes. I wouldn't give this one its franchise money, if only so that Taron Edgerton can put his alright charisma towards something else.
221 out of 287 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
"Robin Hood": A Joyless Spectacle of Action and Cliche
obiegimmie26 November 2018
Quite possibly the greatest rendition of the classic "Robin Hood" story is the 1938 "Adventures of Robin Hood," starring Errol Flynn and Olivia de Havilland. The film begins with an initiative, and uses its protagonists to advance the plot methodically. Perhaps most importantly lies the film's self awareness; its delight in relishing a sense of refreshing fun and delight. The classic tale of Robin Hood has always been one best told briskly and with a sense of humor.

If only this film had followed the 1938 template. It starts out with an obvious purpose; to retell the Robin Hood legend in a modern form. This is reinforced through the bizzare steampunk costuming and one out of place scene in which Marion (played by the adequate, but not particularly noticeable Eve Hewson) wears a bedazzaled mermaid gown. Also, the film establishes the romance between Marion and Robin Hood as a key element, and presents her as, essentially, Robin's only motivation for almost the whole of the film. This is not inherently a bad decision, but the movie fails to present their relationship in a compelling or interesting way. There is no reason, no foundation, for us to feel invested in Robin's motivation, and thereby, his origin story.

The effects are borderline amateur. This film does right by incorporating a lot of detailed set pieces, that create a believable environment. On the occassion that green screen is used, however, it reminds you of a 2000's era Star Wars prequel. While the choreography regarding Taron Egerton's Robin Hood and Jamie Foxx's Little John is somewhat competent, the battle sequences are shot nonsensically with no direction or focus.

One thing this film struggles immensely with is character building. As mentioned above, there is no depth to the romance between Robin Hood and Marion. Little John and Robin Hood, despite all the scenes they have together, have no real conversation. I felt that Little John was the only character I even slightly felt for, because he was the only person with a semblance of a backstory.

It was incredibly stupid, convuluted, and cheap. I'm not saying there weren't compelling elements, but ultimately, those were bogged down by the film's idiocy.

2/10

20% (Rotten)

D
144 out of 184 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Horses doing Parkour
giggity2130 November 2018
Warning: Spoilers
I will be honest this is a 1/10 film, it is hilariously terrible I cannot believe anyone got paid to make this, but there is a scene where they ride horses up a narrow stairwell and then jump across rooftops on them and it was the single most ridiculous thing I have ever seen in a film and was worth 2 stars on its own in my book.

Imagine a medieval fast and furious with worse writing and acting and you are close to what this film is about. Oh god its so bad... Also there are so many plot holes and random issues I could rant all day, like why are there only 2 women in the whole of Nottingham? What a sausage fest the cast party must have been... Do yourself a favour and don't watch this film (do try and find the horse scene though because it's the most a director could possibly insult the intelligence of his audience and therefore amazing). Of course its full of cliché pandering to the lowest common denominator about how terrible you automatically are if you are any more affluent than a fuedel pesant etc blah blah blah its woeful. Avoid.
62 out of 76 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Am I missing something!
Andywa25 November 2018
I tried to avoid the negative press about this film and went to see it today. Great cast just a really poorly written and directed film. I felt it tried to hard to be a cult film but failed miserably. This should have been an ITV movie!
127 out of 163 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
A real user review
paulspencer-9039424 November 2018
Does anyone remember the Simpson's episode where Homer gets the chance to design a car? Its like every other car, wheels, engine. Dashboard. But it turns out to be a ghastly mess. Well, imagine if he was asked to produce a film. No point going on about its faults as they are numerous. The biggest scandal is that people can throw millions at a film and no one says hang on, this is rubbish. I can't believe anyone would give it over 5.
88 out of 111 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
This Turkey Came Early For Xmas!
martimusross24 November 2018
This turkey came early for Christmas. From start to finish it was a total disaster, I think possibly the worst movie of the year I have seen except for The Hate U Give.

The story was derivative, we had the mines of Mordor, the staging of Game of Thrones. The acting was forced and the script banal.

Now some specifics

Themes- we had austerity, we had child abuse, we had powerful women resisting oppressive men, we had food and clothes being handed out, we had political action, all this is was so contrived.

Styling-all the clothes came from Primark and Friar Tuck had been to Specsavers, and denim was worn thoughtout, a modern setting destroyed this story and it all far to clean.

Music- it was like Gladiator and just as intrusive

Casting- the Lord had an east end accent, Little John was inserted as a token black person. Anyone who was wealthy was a raper of the poor, it just goes on and on.

Please avoid this drivel, why was it made and why did I sit through it, who knows!
125 out of 161 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Worst movie. Ever
gavinmochan26 November 2018
There is nothing good that can be said about this movie. Nobody involved could be remotely proud of the work here. The plot, the acting, the costumes, the cgi, just absolutely no positive I could take from it.

Money we will never get back. It looks like the common man has been stole from again - £20 I'll never see again.

I'm no longer a Merry man
189 out of 249 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
garbage
laincolin25 November 2018
Warning: Spoilers
I'm tired of cash grab trash flooding the theatres.

*COSTUME DESIGN: the sheriffs coat was clearly senthetic leather, and the color was unrealistic for the time. if you look at the strap on his undercoat... it is the same fabric as the straps that dangle off of a backpack. It's ungodly how lazy they were. They could have tried on robins costume as well. EVERYTHING IS SYNTHETIC. hair cuts seem iffy as well

*COMBAT: The combat was pretty good and gritty in the beginning but it was filled down by the end of the movie. the bow fighting was something out of a modern gun fight. nobody peaks corners with a bow.

*DUMB STUFF: why did they put riot shields in the movie??? SEVERELY MISSDATED. and how did they part the fire like moses did with the red sea???

*POSITIVES: some shots were good. That's about it...
89 out of 114 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Why Bother???
girvsjoint22 November 2018
I don't know why they continually try to remake/ reimagine Robin Hood? Try as they might, they never have, and never will top the 1938 classic Errol Flynn, Basil Rathbone version. Arguably the most perfectly cast , and executed film in history. There have been many attempts over the decades on both the large and small screen, but none have come close to recapturing the magic and charm of the original sound version 'The Adventures of Robin Hood' .
99 out of 128 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Watch the Classic
drjgardner24 November 2018
Some films are so good they require that any re-make be superb. The Errol Flynn version of Robin Hood has stood the test of time, and with the possible exception of Robin and Marion, no other film has come close. So too with this re-imagining of the story which takes some unnecessary and unwanted liberties, not to mention the coal mines which weren't in existence at the time of the story. The film has little to recommend it. Go back and watch the original.
75 out of 96 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Bad
jack-mccaddon24 November 2018
Usually I don't review things.. this is a Horrible trash movie that I regret paying money for.
79 out of 102 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Could have been a good movie
confidential-6789727 November 2018
The main problems are the following The actors who played maid Marion, fryer tuck and will Scarlett just can't act. The set's look like the Roman Empire and not 10th century England, and the clothing looks like it's just come off a Prada rack. I was expecting someone to pull out an iPhone at one point. It would have been ok if it was filmed as a comedy, but it wasn't.
97 out of 127 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Robin Hood stole my money
ChazStrummer24 November 2018
Warning: Spoilers
I had modest expectations. I was still disappointed. The movie "borrows" from V For Vendetta, Lord Of The Rings ans I don't know what else. And even worse, it appears that they intend on a sequel. If they had called the movie anything other than Robin Hood, it would be more honest. It takes little more that character names. In this movie Robin steals from the Sheriff of Nottingham in most instances to give the money back to the sheriff. Not sure what this business of the mines is. Looks like LOTR, but with only humans. The acting is pretty good with maybe the exception of the Sheriff. F. Murray Abraham isn't given much to do. The premise is nonsense.
96 out of 126 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Another misguided big-screen Robin Hood
eddie_baggins23 November 2018
We arguably didn't need yet another cinematic reimaging of the age old tale of Robin Hood and his merry band of followers, robbing from the rich and giving to the poor, but after the last big screen treatment faired so poorly in the form of the Russell Crowe/Ridley Scott version in 2010, I for one was totally up for another stab at the classic tale, aware that the material still has the potential to entertain now just as well as it first did many moons ago.

Sadly the new Robin Hood is frankly not that good, an often bizarre and mostly charmless affair that sees Robin of Loxley become some type of Assassin's Creed reject that also masquerades as a GQ fashion model, as debut filmmaker Otto Bathhurst gets caught up in the joys of slow-motion instead of getting caught up on making his characters more intriguing or his film more fun.

Unfortunately delivered in a mostly po-faced fashion that sits unevenly with how over the top and silly many of its big action scenes are (a machine gun like arrow barrage in Arabia or a horse chase along rooftops spring instantly to mind), Robin Hood wants to be taken seriously but it's impossible to do so, when the action and scenarios are all so off-putting and even if the action beats and slight thrills you get from some of these scenes make the film tolerable as such, there not going to change many people's opinions on the movie, feelings of which are likely to be largely negative when you look at early press and box-office results.

More comfortable with the action scenes than he is the character beats, Bathurst leads this negativity bringing Robin Hood down as he struggles to get much out of his capable cast, with Robin giving Kingsman breakout star Taron Edgerton his worst big-screen role yet, as the young performer struggles with making Robin a charismatic hero and has an equally hard time forcing any chemistry between himself and Eve Hewson as Marion, with the daughter of Bono fairing quite badly in her highest profile role yet.

Side players don't fare much better, with Australian tressure Tim Minchin fairing best with his role as Friar Tuck, while the seemingly constantly struggling Jamie Foxx as Little John and the charm free Jamie Dornan as Will add little to proceedings.

Outside of these unfortunate elements one of the most disappointing and eye-rolling aspects of this Robin Hood is yet another stereotypical shady bad guy turn from Ben Mendelsohn.

An unquestionably talented performer and one of our countries best acting exports, Mendelsohn delving into yet another villain role as the nefarious Sherriff of Nottingham after similar turns in the likes of Ready Player One, Rogue One, TV show Bloodline and The Dark Knight Rises begs the question of how hard the actor is trying at the moment, and while his turn here isn't "bad", it's certainly tiresome with all things considered, with the time now for Mendelsohn to break away from these type of roles.

Final Say -

With a handful of lively action scenes and some very brief snippets of fun, Robin Hood shows glimpses of what might've been, but with a lack of charisma, energy or smarts, this ends up being yet another version of the hooded hero that fails to hit the mark, with Robin Hood likely to be one of the year's biggest financial flops.

2 medieval Molotov's out of 5
92 out of 121 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed