Robin Hood – trailer

Robin Hood

Directed by: Ridley Scott
Starring: Russell Crowe, Cate Blanchette, Mark Strong
Rating: R
Release Date: May 14, 2010


MY THOUGHTS: Ever since Russell Crowe hefted a phone at a guy making minimum wage and then threw a momentous hissy-fit, he’s morphed, at warp speed, from a snarling gladiator to a pudgy infant prone to public tantrums. Should an actor’s private shenanigans influence the way we look at his art, especially when that actor is as undeniably fine-tuned as Crowe? I don’t know–let’s ask Mr. Cruise if anyone’s opinion of him changed after he bounced around on Oprah’s couch like a wild-eyed lunatic.

I understand that Ridley Scott and Russell Crowe are engaged in a bromance of epic proportions, but you don’t get the d*ck to play Robin Hood, no matter how good he is at Let’s Pretend. Robin Hood is beloved chiefly for his distinct lack of d*ckishness. I don’t care if you have Russell bursting out of the water in slow-mo, roaring his balding little head off; he’s an arrogant bastard, and loudly so. He’s voluminously obnoxious, so high is he on his own talent, which is, admittedly, prodigious. The roles that are perfect for Crowe at this point are the Ed Hoffmans of the world: hefty, prickish, manipulative and with a raging God complex. He should basically always play a geniune outlet of his own personality.

The trailer itself is uninspired, a measly bit of seatack for everyone who loved Gladiator. As I watched it, I thought, “At least it has Cate Blanchette,” whom I adore as one of the most magnificent, classiest actors of our day…and then I thought, “She has to kiss that fat, phone hurling man-baby on his big man-baby mouth. Yuck.” Ridley Scott loves his epics and it must have been true love the first time he and Crowe’s eyes met from across the room, but I’m anticipating another 1492 when I look at Robin Hood: you know, vaguely historic in that “Hey, aren’t you so and so from where ever?” kind of way, pretty to look at, and overly smug about its hero’s flawed humanity. It looks gritty and dirty and Crowe has his earnest face on and wears a leather vest. You present the world with Robin Hood directly after Gladiator and you’d have a more avid response. At this point, too much time has gone by, and we’ve all had to tolerate Crowe openly being himself for way too long.

We’ll see.


  1. Layne says:

    Hey, Morrow! How about a real review of the trailer, instead of this paragraphs-long rant against Russell Crowe? It’s obvious you don’t like Mr. Crowe and that has apparently tainted anything realistic you might have to say about Robin Hood.

  2. Hey Layne! You’re absolutely right. I did rant for far too long–less ranting, more reviewing. Honestly, the trailer looks silly and bloated. Is that because I think Russell Crowe is silly and bloated? Probably. I loved Gladiator and despite his off-screen idiocy, I thought he was brilliant in Body of Lies. Casting an asshole as one of legend’s most beloved saints presents itself as too large a temptation for ranters such as myself.

  3. Layne says:

    The casting of one of the best actors who’s ever worked in Hollywood is, to me, a very big temptation for seeing this film. Then, throw in one of the best directors around and an actress of Cate Blanchett’s caliber (rather than the ridiculous original casting of Sienna Miller) and you have one great movie.

    I tend to be a ranter myself, but I’m a huge Crowe fan. I’ve never seen him give a bad performance. Particularly loved him in “3:10 To Yuma” and I also loved “State of Play” earlier this year. I think his brilliance in “Robin Hood” might just make you love his performance in spite of yourself again.

  4. Morrow says:

    You could very well be right. I dislike him and, yet, he does tend to blow me away. I’d put him in the category of mad genius in that he’s undeniably brilliant, but socially and personally malfunctional. If you ARE right, I will recant the statement, apologize, and promise to leave out the personal stuff whenever I speak of Crowe in the future. If you aren’t…well…I’m going to go on a marathon rant. So what’s it gonna be? Humbled or vindicated? I can hardly wait, myself.

  5. Layne says:

    Looking forward to the outcome! Can’t wait for May, 2010!

  6. Morrow says:

    Be there or be square.

  7. Andy says:

    The only saving grace of this film is the greatest actor alive-Cate Blanchett. If she weren’t in it, I’d probably be renting it.

  8. Liz says:

    Morrow, I’m afraid you are sadly out of date/misinformed. Crowe has been keeping his nose clean for the past 4 1/2 years. Have you not seen him on Leno, Martha Stewart , Letterman or the de Generes show ? He’s funny, warm and devoted to his family. And haven’t you read any of the reports from England while he was there filming ? He had lots of good publicity for his generosity to charities and his tips to waitstaff at restaurants. And the reports recently from Pittsburgh where he’d been filming? There’s TONS of stuff out there showing him as a decent guy ( Google the story last month about him buying a street busker a new guitar in Pittsburgh)
    In other words, you are still going on about something he did ages ago. Come on – how HARD is it to be fair ?
    I bet you give Halle Berry (hit and run) and Kiefer Sutherland (DUI) a break.

  9. Rashmi says:

    Oh come on, can you not forgive him for what happened years ago and be fair to his movies? Every person has their moments of madness – unluckily for actors it is played out in the public eye. I can think of many more actors …Johnny Depp, Sean Penn, Hugh Grant, Mel Gibson, Robert Downey Jr. to name a few who have been bad boys in real life. Surely as a movie critic you do not let that colour your  judgement of the performance and the film itself? I hope not.

  10. Morrow says:

    If they cast Colin Farrell as Jesus, you’d comment.

    For the record: addiction is a disease and it doesn’t count against a person, so RDJ is a badass both for surviving and for making a comeback.

    Douche-baggery (Crowe) and antiasemitizam (Gibson) are not actual disorders, so they do not get to pass go. When the rest of us have our moments of madness we don’t rant about hating jews or throw major public tantrums and available telephones.

    The cheaters don’t bother me (Jude Law, Hugh Grant, etc) and neither do the paparazzi-punchers (Sean Pean).

    I’m not sure why you included Johnny Depp in that list unless you’re referring to the time in the late 80’s early 90’s where he destroyed a hotel room and then said he felt he could do it because it was like his home. If that’s the case, Depp has become one of the coolest, grooviest, chillest dudes in Hollywood. He is consistently ranked as the most approachable star by fans.

    So, yes, I CAN let an asshole’s terrible public behavior influence how I see his films, especially when he’s been cast as an iconic, selfless hero of legend. That’s not so much the critic in me, but the human being in me.

    Nevertheless, the bet with Layne is still on: if he blows me away in the movie, I’ll take it all back. I’ll even be humble about it.

  11. Rashmi says:

    Morrow, I don’t agree with you completely about overlooking some of those offences which you listed while at the same time not giving Crowe a break – but whatever, if that is how you feel personally, I do not wish to debate it.

    I too have some actors I cannot stand for reasons that have nothing to do with their performance, but then I am not a movie critic and I don’t have a website where I publish my judgement.

    A movie is not only about the actor, it is a team effort. And there are many people I know that do look at movie reviews before making up their mind about watching a movie. My only point is that when you bring your personal biases which have nothing to do with a movie or the performances into your review, you discourage people from going out and watching the movie and therefore are unfair to the whole team who worked on it.

    [All this being said, I do enjoy reading your reviews. I was just surprised by the unwarranted vitriol against Crowe]

  12. Morrow says:


    Crowe rubs me the wrong way because he’s so damned talented and by all accounts, he’s such a dick about it. He consistently blows me away, but I want him to go the route of Johnny Depp and just be cool, man.

    If he stuns me silly in Robin Hood, I promise not to utter another peep about his past bad behaviors. I will apologize to both you and Layne and it will be my pleasure to do so. It is important to use the people around you as a sounding board in order to implement subtle adaptations. In short, I very much enjoy these spirited debates and I don’t mind being proven wrong.

    (However, don’t even try talking me out of my anathema for Gibson. I’ve got a death grip on that sucker)

  13. Rashmi says:

    Peace and out Morrow. I will definitely be checking out your Robin Hood review and feel quite certain now that you will be fair 🙂

  14. David Begum says:

    Looks like this “Robin Hood” movie would be a great movie to watch just like the movie about King Arthur.`~,

  15. morrow says:

    Dearest Layne and Rashmi and others (Liz, trust me, I don’t give those prancing fools a break),

    Layne, where have you been? It’s been ages since I received a criticism that wasn’t rife with hostility, misspellings, and circular logic. Our last exchange did wonders for me, but since then I’ve been dealing with the “you gots no rite to say that ’bout DEMON FINGER 3! I hate you!” variety. Truly, it bums me out. If you could find the time to challenge me at least once every few months, I would really appreciate it.

    So, I saw Robin Hood and here’s the funny part: I didn’t mind it. I didn’t hate it so much that I could rant about it for days (as threatened), but I didn’t love it either. I’m assuming you probably won’t as well, because it’s sort of dull and white washed. But that’s not the funny part. The funny part was that I wrote out a long statement telling you how much I enjoyed Russell Crowe in that part and you were totally right and I would never again refer to him as “that fat, phone hurling man-baby,” when I stumbled (entirely on accident) on this:

    So, dearest Layne, I’m afraid a compromise is in order. The guy is still a man-baby. There’s nothing I can do about that. What I can do is admit that now, at the very least, I accept that he’s a talented and sexy man-baby, and I promise not to bring up the phone incident again. That doesn’t mean Russell is going to behave himself to the extent that I don’t have other ammunition.

    I’m a ranter. Ranters rant.

    Peace out and great times at the movies!


  16. Layne says:

    So nice to hear from you! I’m afraid real life has been taking up so much of my time lately that I haven’t even had time to rant. However, I did have time to take in ‘Robin Hood’ today. Twice! Crowe did his usual excellent job. I don’t think the man would know how to give a bad performance if he tried.

    As for the article and the interview you reference-did you actually hear that interview? The guy was spoiling to rile Crowe up and he got his wish. He brought up the accent. Crowe answered and actually laughed about it. Okay-asked and answered. But no- The guy kept bringing it up again and again. Wouldn’t let it go. He was a jerk. It wasn’t Crowe who needed to behave himself, but the guy interviewing him.

    Don’t have time to go into things more right now, but I’ve bookmarked your site and I promise I’ll come back. We may disagree on Russell Crowe, but I do like chatting with you!

  17. Calhoun says:

    Noting nicer than to say new friends made haha
    I was actually looking over some of the old trailer reviews and was wondering if this would be brought up again. Good to see some consistency

Leave a Comment