Robin Hood: Critic Reviews

We never even get to see Robin steal from the rich and give to the poor. That's because the film is a prequel in search of a sequel. With any luck, we won't get one.

Good but not great. The meatier story always follows the introduction, right?

Good but not great. The meatier story always follows the introduction, right?

It's a blah story with roots in neither history nor popular myth, and it doesn't set up Robin Hood as someone we'd care to follow after this story is told.

Scott's adaptation ... [is] about separating the legend from the man; it's about bringing Robin of the Hood out of the stratosphere of adulation and presenting him as a regular, human man.

I'm thinking the title of the movie should be Ridley Scott's Robin Hood - How to make the English hate the French again.

With its cast of thousands and impressive sets, Robin Hood looks great but this is not the gritty re-imagining of the Merry Men that many had hoped for - in fact, it hardly even counts as a Robin Hood film.

The Robin Hood we get from Scott and Crowe is neither rollicking fun nor clever re-imagining.

Scott gives the proceedings an air of sombre importance, resulting in a film that (...) feels strangely laboured and lacking in the pleasure that even the darkest adventure can provide.

full review at Movies for the Masses

Audience rousing cinema of this size and class does not come along often. A titillating conclusion leaves open the possibility of a sequel, and if Robin Hood is anything to go by, then more than merrier.

A very long stroll through an overcast Renaissance Fest

It's strange to complain about historical inaccuracies in a film about a legend whose origin is heavily debated; However, that's exactly this film's biggest problem.

It's strange to complain about historical inaccuracies in a film about a legend whose origin is heavily debated; However, that's exactly this film's biggest problem.

What is missing from this version of Robin Hood is the fun that usually goes with things like robbing the rich and giving the loot to the poor. This comes across as very serious, and it doesn't need to be.

This is not your Father's Nottingham and that's a good thing.

Nice cinematography and set design aside, "Robin Hood" fails at its most basic level--it's not particularly entertaining, and as such, it's not particularly worth your time.

Basicamente un buen entretenimiento, que especula sobre los origenes del legendario personaje sin respetar demasiado la verdad historica.

One of Ridley Scott's worst movies.

Why, this isn't Robin Hood, it's the angsty modern superhero. It's Robin Hood as a 12th-century Batman. Did we really need this?

So se torne visualmente interessante ja em seus creditos finais que combinam animacao e live action atraves da rotoscopia -- mas ai ja e tarde demais, posto que, para chegarmos ali, fomos obrigados a enfrentar 148 minutos de projecao.

a glum, darkly serious, and slow-moving origin story that takes an exceedingly long time to get to the point where the movie should have actually begun

Boring and joyless, felled by a convoluted, mostly inconsequential plot, as huge chunks of the movie are taken up by negotiations and gamesmanship between characters we don't care about.

Iako predstavlja razo%u010Daranje, Robin Hood %u0107e starijim gledateljima koji se sje%u0107aju Costnerovog Princa lopova, ipak pru%u017Eiti odre%u0111enu utjehu