A little longer than it needs to be, but still worth seeing. Crowe plays the same character he plays in every Scott film, but Blanchett's Marion is a definite winner. The supporting cast is thoroughly undeveloped, but Oscar Isaac's turn as Prince John was actually sort of fun. In all, though, it just made me want to watch The Lion In Winter.
Solid, but not great. Robin Hood has its faults but never fails to entertain.
Not the Robin I grew up on, being a huge fan of Pyle's novel and Flynn's "The Adventures of Robin Hood" I was disappointed in the story but still enjoyed the costume epic.
We watched this one mostly because we were able to get a hold of a blu ray before it was released. I've enjoyed Crowe in just about everything he has done and I could say the same for Cate Blanchett (even if it seems like she hasn't done many films). I had heard the complaints about this film. It was too long. It took too long to get to the punch. It was dark. The battle scenes were intense. And after watching the film I would say all are valid criticisms. But at the end of the day it was worth my time. I'd almost consider it a poor man's Gladiator (there were many scenes that were eerily similar). This is a bit of a spoiler but you might as well know up front that they clearly set the table for a sequel(s). Then again, it was fairly obvious halfway through the movie (I wont' say why). I will say that it isn't anywhere near the classic Robin Hood story. It is almost more of a prequel that sets the stage for the Robin Hood character. Would I recommend it to you? Maybe not - I can name 500 other films that are better than this one. But it was a shade better than I thought it would be.
Every new Robin Hood movie seems to tell the story different.
Still better than Costners in my opinion because that had to much weight on the romance.
Not mind blowingly good nevertheless enjoyable for a movie evening.