Review of Robin Hood by Taron Egerton and Jamie Foxx

There are innumerable versions of the history of the prince of thieves that have been made into movies since it broke into celluloid back in 1912 in silent short film format and in black and white.

Recall that the figure Robin of Locksley comes from English folklore and rescues the figure of a man who defied the law by entering the sherwood forestin the vicinity of Nottingham, from where he orchestrated periodic looting of the public coffers using his extraordinary skills as an archer. He has been vindicated and reviled over the years as his conception has changed from altruistic to greedy depending on the new clues that were found of his true actions, but, as far as we are concerned, what interests us is the legend.

VIDEO

Robin Hood Trailer

His main enemies were the sheriff of nottingham Y John I also called Juan sin tierra, who established an abusive collection system in order to bend the noble critics with their means. What better way than to make those who opposed them capitulate than by depriving them of their privileges.

Discover the exclusive Amazon offers for movies and series

The first literary record of Robin Hood dates back to 1337, when his deeds were finally collected from the oral tradition and to which new elements would later be added: from new members to his clan of the merry men (here called “the merry company”) to a love interest, Marianwhich would be added from the fifteenth century, first as the archetypal submissive female and with the passage of time, acquiring greater relevance and even a guerrilla role with which the figure of the woman would be claimed as a participant in the adventures of the famous hooded (in the latest versions, of course).

The curious thing about Robin Hood of Otto Bathurst is that everything is updated: the socioeconomic context, the political implications, even the costumes, while the gender perspective leaves a lot to be desired. Eve Hewson gives life to one Lady Marian with generous necklines who is the only moderately relevant female character, but whose purpose does not go beyond orchestrating a love triangle in which she serves as a bargaining chip. Her reification is evident in every appearance of hers, in which, no matter what her line of dialogue is, her male interlocutor reminds him of how beautiful hers is and even indulges in marketing with her. It is treated, in short, like a piece of meat.

And it draws attention because, as we said, everything on the tape is the subject of a thorough review. There is a clear desire for the viewer to establish constant parallels between what he sees and the present. Without going any further, the Testosterone Robin from Taron Egerton They give him a very different baggage than the one we usually see: he is a wealthy bourgeois who is recruited to go to the crusades and when he returns he discovers that he has been left for dead and has lost everything, from the love of his life to his friends. possessions, which have been plundered. His wanderings in Moorish lands are worthy of those of any US Marine in the Middle East and make the hero’s motivations change throughout the footage.

Exclusive interview with Taron Egerton

At the beginning, when he returns, he only wants to take revenge and recover what belongs to him, for which he devises a way to unsettle the Sheriff of Nottingham (Ben Mendelson nailing the same Orson Krennic role again in rogue one) but new implications soon appear that lead him to develop a more revolutionary approach when he discovers the conditions in which the people live and work (closer to those of industrial England in the 19th century) oppressed by the greed of the king and his insatiable tax collector . This will lead him to establish a dialectical relationship with Will Scarlet (Jamie Dornan), who represents a more accommodating point of view by trying to be part of the system to change it from within.

On the other hand, there is also a great courage in showing a masquerade ball that would be more typical of a lavish party of The Count of Monte Cristo than of the coordinates in which the story takes place.

Nor can it be said that Robin Hood be a choral film that knows how to squeeze the potential out of the cast: Jamie Foxx works as a mentor in the arts of war but is a little john as eclectic as the staging. If camaraderie and loyalty are some of the traits that are exploited in the successive versions that we have known of the hero thanks to the most representative members of “the happy company”, here we see that the actions undertaken by the archer are quite solitary and that for example the clergyman tuck he lacks the mischievousness and charisma that is presupposed to the character.

If there is something enjoyable in the film, it is the action, which is very well shot and with its music video aesthetics, it brings a great rhythm to the narration. Much closer to recent TV products like Arrow and therefore to the individualism of the supers in vogue, this film invites the viewer to leave reason parked at the door of the cinema. It is simple in its conception and an amalgam difficult to swallow in terms of its visual expression and its plot implications.

It is not that the anachronisms (premeditated, it is obvious) squeak, it is that the writers do not know what they want to tell or what aesthetic vehicle to use to get the message across. Hence, there are times when the interpretive body itself hesitates: perhaps Mendelsohn is the only one who believes in his character, if only because he had assumed the role of villain before stepping on the set.

We would love to give thanks to the author of this short article for this incredible web content

Review of Robin Hood by Taron Egerton and Jamie Foxx


You can find our social media accounts as well as other pages related to it.https://orifs.com/related-pages/