Tis Robin Hood, and his....brooding persona?

So perhaps the phrase "robbing from the filmgoers," as the USA Today review by Claudia Puig is titled, is a bit harsh. I understand however that the temptations of using such a pun must have been overwhelming. They were not, however, too far from hitting the target (a pun of my own!) with this description.

The first thing you must know about this film is that it is basically a prequel to the conventional Robin Hood story. Indeed it is a departure in more than chronology, as you will see none of the charming daring of Errol Flynn, and all of the brooding, deliberateness (yes, that is a word) of Russell Crowe. This may be for the better, as Crowe is a tad old to be prancing around in tights, but then why not cast someone more suave, such as Orlando Bloom? The answer lies in director Ridley Scott's vision for this movie. After directing hits such as Gladiator and Kingdom of Heaven, you would expect a more serious, dramatic spin on this classic tale, and this is what you get, like it or not. Crowe did not high-jack the character, but rather played the role exactly as Scott wanted. Therefore, the blame lies on him. I found the film.....lacking. 

First off, the relationships within the plot are not developed to their fullest potential, specifically the one between Crowe and Cate Blanchett, playing Lady Marion. Although Blanchett's icy persona complements Crowe's nicely, It makes for a rather boring love story, and the interactions between the two are clumsy at best. 

Also, the friends with which I saw this film complained about the multitude of "cheesy moments" that occurred, the climax of these moments being when Lady Marion, clad in battle armor, leads a group of shirtless twelve year-olds into battle and certain death. Not that I am against female heroism, but an appearance by Wonder Woman was quite unnecessary, actually causing us to laugh out loud during this scene of epic drama. I am sure DC Comics already has a Wonder Woman movie in pre-production. Speaking of scenes of epic drama, I have read compliments on the cinematography and disagree. During the climax of the last battle, I, well, still don't even know what exactly happened because the camera was shaking around so bloody much. Hold the damn thing still! Shaking it around with water splashing all over does not add to my viewer experience, it does not put me in the action, it just frustrates me because I can't see what the hell is going on!

Finally, the fact that this movie is without a doubt set up to introduce a sequel speaks to the overconfidence of those involved, especially considering it did only 37 million in the U.S. on opening weekend (losing to Iron Man 2, which I saw the next night and was even worse I might add). I will be significantly less excited to see this inevitable sequel, however, having seen the first, I will feel obligated to view the second. I just sincerely hope that it is not called Robin Hood 2. My overall impression was 2 1/2 stars by the way.