Jump to content


This is a read only archive of the old forums
The new CBn forums are located at https://quarterdeck.commanderbond.net/

 
Photo

Gladiator 2: Robin Hood


30 replies to this topic

#1 Mr. Blofeld

Mr. Blofeld

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 9173 posts
  • Location:North Smithfield, RI, USA

Posted 15 May 2010 - 02:54 AM

Before I start, I've got to admit that, yes, the new Robin Hood, does look terrible, and that, no, there are probably no redemptive features to it; however...

...since this obviously seems to be a thematic retread of Gladiator, I figured to myself, well, why didn't they just slightly recraft Nick Cave's script for Gladiator 2 and turn it into the first part of this movie?

I'm guessing a lot of you are shaking your heads in confusion, muttering, "Gladiator 2? What's he going on about?" To allay your suspicions, I therefore turn you to a handy PDF download link for the Gladiator 2 screenplay: http://www.mypdfscri...-2-by-nick-cave

It's a surprisingly short screenplay, but, since most of you probably won't be reading it long enough for the purposes of this topic, I'll give you a little rundown:
  • Maximus arrives in the afterlife, kills a couple of thieves, meets a "peacekeeper" named Mordecai, wanders through a remote wasteland of the afterlife, attempts to contact his wife and child, is commissioned by a delirious, dying group of gods to kill a rebellious member of their own, seeks out this rebel, finds him dying and is sent into the belly of the Christian massacres of Rome, years after his own death.
  • He seeks out the Christian rebels, meets his own son (who has been ressurrected by the gods after his mother sacrified her place in Elysium for him), fights with Lucius (the nephew of Emperor Commodus from the first film, who has grown into an even crueller man than his uncle was), and is recognized by astonished onlookers as being the ressurrected gladiator killed in the last movie.
  • Juba (Djimon Hounsou's character from the original film) seeks him out and presents him with the figurines of his wife and son that he buried in the ground of the Colosseum in the first film, which he recently dug up due to the Emperor planning to flood the Colosseum for a new series of games.
  • Marius's (Maximus's son) adoptive father, a Christian schoolteacher, is killed by his own students as Lucius watches on, and Mordecai visits Maximus to tell him that the gods have now permanently banished him to Earth for failing to kill the god who rebelled; he will never die "until eternity itself has said its prayers".
  • Finally, as Emperor Decius watches on, Christians are slaughtered by crocodiles and Roman warships in the new round of games at the Colosseum, intercut with Maximus and his new Christian army attacking the forces of Lucius. Lucius kills Juba, and Maximus, enraged, slashes into Lucius with the speed and fury that brought him fame as a gladiator. Finally, Lucius awaits the killing stroke from Maximus, but is unexpected killed by an arrow from Marius, who is still angry over the death of his adoptive father. As he repents to the heavens for what he has done, Maximus kneels to the ground and rubs dirt between his fingers.
  • This last shot is intercut with scenes from the rest of Maximus's life, an undying soldier living a life of banal slaughter and warfare up to today.
A bit much, I know, but bear with me, here; this could very easily be condensed into a sort of prologue... if that prologue were a third of a three-hour film. Certain events would have to be cut, but it would still be as solidly bizarre and gritty as it was.

We would segue from Maximus rubbing dirt on his fingers into... Maximus, fighting in the Crusades for King Richard, as Robin Hood. A bit cheesy, true, but at least it would spice up the traditional tale a bit, as well as give Ridley Scott and Russell Crowe an active reason for pursuing the story to be in the same vein as Gladiator before it.

I'm curious for your reactions, now; what do you all think? Is it viable, or not? B)

#2 Safari Suit

Safari Suit

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5099 posts
  • Location:UK

Posted 15 May 2010 - 11:28 AM

Boy, I didn't know you two had such a, er, deep, intimate psychological connection B)

As far as I know the Scott Hood world is trying to be "as realistic as possibe" (zzzzzzzzz...) so I don't think tying in this rather batty script into this world is feasible.

#3 coco1997

coco1997

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 2821 posts
  • Location:Chicago

Posted 15 May 2010 - 04:28 PM

"Wetdreams of Harmsway"? B)

#4 Tarl_Cabot

Tarl_Cabot

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 10505 posts
  • Location:The Galaxy of Pleasure

Posted 15 May 2010 - 05:40 PM

Crowe is ridiculously too to play Robinhood, especially a prequel version.

#5 Judo chop

Judo chop

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 7461 posts
  • Location:the bottle to the belly!

Posted 15 May 2010 - 06:57 PM

I'll be seeing it.

#6 dinovelvet

dinovelvet

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 8038 posts
  • Location:Jupiter and beyond the infinite

Posted 15 May 2010 - 07:57 PM

Crowe is ridiculously too to play Robinhood, especially a prequel version.


I say he's not too enough. Robin Hood was known for his too.

#7 jaguar007

jaguar007

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5608 posts
  • Location:Portland OR

Posted 15 May 2010 - 07:59 PM

I'll stick with my Errol Flynn version on Blu Ray for now.

#8 DamnCoffee

DamnCoffee

    Commander

  • Executive Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 24459 posts
  • Location:England

Posted 15 May 2010 - 08:00 PM

I saw Hood last night. Loved it. A lot better than Gladiator, anyway.

#9 PrinceKamalKhan

PrinceKamalKhan

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 11139 posts

Posted 15 May 2010 - 08:08 PM

I'll stick with my Errol Flynn version on Blu Ray for now.


I recommend the 1952 Richard Todd version. That's my favorite rendition of this tale.

#10 marktmurphy

marktmurphy

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 9055 posts
  • Location:London

Posted 15 May 2010 - 11:29 PM

What I like is that when he played the old, past it and soon to be dead Robin Hood in Robin and Marion, Sean Connery was 46 years old. In this new film, where Robin becomes the outlaw we all know and begins his life in the forest, Russell Crowe is 46 years old B)

I think it all looks rather exciting.

#11 Righty007

Righty007

    Discharged.

  • Veterans Reserve
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 13051 posts
  • Location:Station CLE - Cleveland

Posted 16 May 2010 - 08:22 PM

"Wetdreams of Harmsway"? :tdown:

Yeah, what's the deal with this thread's subtitle? B)

#12 Joe Bond

Joe Bond

    Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • PipPip
  • 672 posts
  • Location:St. Louis, MO

Posted 16 May 2010 - 09:50 PM

"Wetdreams of Harmsway"? :tdown:

Yeah, what's the deal with this thread's subtitle? B)

I think he put that since I think that Harmsway doesn't like Gladiator at all so its a sort of sarcastic remark to that effect.

#13 Mr. Blofeld

Mr. Blofeld

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 9173 posts
  • Location:North Smithfield, RI, USA

Posted 17 May 2010 - 02:38 AM

"Wetdreams of Harmsway"? :tdown:

Yeah, what's the deal with this thread's subtitle? B)

I think he put that since I think that Harmsway doesn't like Gladiator at all so its a sort of sarcastic remark to that effect.

About a year ago, he spent two threads going on and on and on about Nick Cave's script for Gladiator 2; thought this might encourage him to poke his head out and comment. :tdown:

#14 dodge

dodge

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5068 posts
  • Location:USA

Posted 18 May 2010 - 04:37 PM

Crowe is ridiculously too to play Robinhood, especially a prequel version.


I say he's not too enough. Robin Hood was known for his too.


I'm greatly relieved that no one has stopped to discussion of his too-too.

P.s.: Just read Harry Knowles' review....and, man oh man, did this film tick him off!

#15 Zorin Industries

Zorin Industries

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5634 posts

Posted 18 May 2010 - 05:22 PM

Good. Not every film is made for the great Harry Knowles' enjoyment - despite what he thinks...

#16 DaveBond21

DaveBond21

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 18026 posts
  • Location:Sydney, Australia (but from the UK)

Posted 19 May 2010 - 01:52 AM

Russell Crowe stormed out of a BBC radio interview when it was suggested that his accent sounds "Irish" in this movie, when really he is attempting to re-create the local Nottingham accent.

Did anyone find his accent a bit off?

#17 Mr. Blofeld

Mr. Blofeld

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 9173 posts
  • Location:North Smithfield, RI, USA

Posted 19 May 2010 - 02:17 AM

Did anyone find his accent a bit off?

I did... but, then again, I've probably "got dead ears, mate". B)

#18 dodge

dodge

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5068 posts
  • Location:USA

Posted 19 May 2010 - 06:48 PM

Good. Not every film is made for the great Harry Knowles' enjoyment - despite what he thinks...


Then again, maybe not so good. As it turns out, HK's virulent attack on the film has been echoed, though more quietly, in just about every review that I've read. The main complaint, toned down, is that it's not really a Robin Hood movie at all, even though it's billed as a prequel with an actor who's far too old. I think I'll take the last critic's advice and order myself a copy of the Erroll Flynn version...or even MEN IN TIGHTS, before squandering money on this "historically accurate", and joyless, farce.

#19 Judo chop

Judo chop

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 7461 posts
  • Location:the bottle to the belly!

Posted 19 May 2010 - 07:07 PM

I think I'll take the last critic's advice and order myself a copy of the Erroll Flynn version...or even MEN IN TIGHTS, before squandering money on this "historically accurate", and joyless, farce.

A wise plan, Dodger. Save your money. Accent-schmanksent. Crowe's accent is the least of the film's problems. I spent 140 minutes of my life longing for Kevin Costner's interpretation.

btw – Mr. Flynn's first name is spelled with just one “L” at the end. Trust me. B)

#20 dodge

dodge

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5068 posts
  • Location:USA

Posted 19 May 2010 - 07:10 PM

I think I'll take the last critic's advice and order myself a copy of the Erroll Flynn version...or even MEN IN TIGHTS, before squandering money on this "historically accurate", and joyless, farce.

A wise plan, Dodger. Save your money. Accent-schmanksent. Crowe's accent is the least of the film's problems. I spent 140 minutes of my life longing for Kevin Costner's interpretation.

btw – Mr. Flynn's first name is spelled with just one “L” at the end. Trust me. B)


Thank you. I apologize for the eror in my spelling. :tdown:

Seriously, from your p.o.v., what were the film's most serious problems?

#21 Santa

Santa

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 6445 posts
  • Location:Valencia

Posted 19 May 2010 - 07:14 PM

Did anyone find his accent a bit off?


It was all over the place. Comical, in fact.

#22 Judo chop

Judo chop

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 7461 posts
  • Location:the bottle to the belly!

Posted 19 May 2010 - 07:26 PM

I think I'll take the last critic's advice and order myself a copy of the Erroll Flynn version...or even MEN IN TIGHTS, before squandering money on this "historically accurate", and joyless, farce.

A wise plan, Dodger. Save your money. Accent-schmanksent. Crowe's accent is the least of the film's problems. I spent 140 minutes of my life longing for Kevin Costner's interpretation.

btw – Mr. Flynn's first name is spelled with just one “L” at the end. Trust me. B)


Thank you. I apologize for the eror in my spelling. :tdown:

Seriously, from your p.o.v., what were the film's most serious problems?

I posted most of my thoughts in the main movie thread. But for a quicky one-word summation, your descriptor highlighted above will do nicely.

Aside from a pretty, sweeping camera shot or two over Sherwood, there is really nothing worth noting, much less celebrating, in the film. It is passionless for starters. Every one of the beloved side-characters feels extremely shoehorned in, and some are downright miscast. Then, the editing is crap and the action is uninspired. It's a grayish droning film whose individual parts are mediocre copies of ones we've all seen before.

And I guess the accents were bad too. Least of its problems though.

#23 Skudor

Skudor

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 9286 posts
  • Location:Buckinghamshire

Posted 19 May 2010 - 08:17 PM

Even the trailer looks rubbish. Will be giving this one a miss.

#24 Goodnight

Goodnight

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1917 posts
  • Location:England, United Kingdom

Posted 21 May 2010 - 05:28 PM

Hopefully going to see it soon.


I can't believe Crowe stormed out on Mark Lawson in the radio 4 interview, nothing but a big stroppy diva.

#25 DamnCoffee

DamnCoffee

    Commander

  • Executive Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 24459 posts
  • Location:England

Posted 21 May 2010 - 05:47 PM

I know. Crowe is the Australian equivalent to Christian Bale.

#26 dodge

dodge

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5068 posts
  • Location:USA

Posted 22 May 2010 - 05:33 PM

For those of you who are unaware of the Larson story, as I was, this may be of interest:

A British radio host felt the wrath of Russell Crowe on Thursday after suggesting that the actor's accent in 'Robin Hood' had "hints of Irish" in it. The Aussie star became downright ornery with Mark Lawson of BBC Radio 4's Front Row when he made this unfortunate observation, asking, "What were you thinking of?"

"You've got dead ears, mate," Crowe crowed back. "You've seriously got dead ears if you think that's an Irish accent."

Give It a Listen:



When Lawson tried to backtrack and say he only meant he heard "hints" of Irish, the beefy Crowe became even angrier, saying the host's thinking was "bollocks."

After diving right back into the discussion about the film and Robin Hood's origins, Crowe came clumsily back to the accent, telling Larson, "I'm a little dumbfounded you could possibly find any Irish in that character. That's kind of ridiculous. It's your show. Whatever."

"So you were going for a northern English?" Larson asked, to which Crowe sniped, "No, I was going for an Italian, yeah. Missed it?"

Sensing he had exhausted any chance at a productive interview with the actor, Lawson asked Crowe to respond to published claims he refused to say certain famous lines in 'Gladiator' -- which is when Crowe simply walked out of the radio booth.

He said as he exited: "I don't get the Irish thing brother, I don't get it at all ..."

This link will lead you to a clip so you can judge for yourself whether Crowe sounds Irish:

http://www.popeater....ent-robin-hood/

#27 DR76

DR76

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1673 posts

Posted 23 May 2010 - 05:58 PM

I just saw it yesterday. It's a beautiful looking movie . . . much better looking than I had assumed it would. As for calling it "GLADIDATOR 2", I don't get the joke. Aside from the battle scenes, the style of the movie doesn't remind me of "GLADIATOR".


I know. Crowe is the Australian equivalent to Christian Bale.


This is is ridiculous. One actor loses his temper on the set, and he's forever branded as temperamental? I know that Russell Crowe is. It's his character. I expect it from him. And since when was it a crime for an actor or actress or any other celebrity to lose his or her temper? Everyone else does it. This forum alone is a testament to this fact.

But I forget. The rest of humanity has a low tolerance for celebrities being less than perfect. Ridiculous.



I think I'll take the last critic's advice and order myself a copy of the Erroll Flynn version...or even MEN IN TIGHTS, before squandering money on this "historically accurate", and joyless, farce.



This is why I had stopped listening to critics a long time ago.

#28 The Shark

The Shark

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4650 posts
  • Location:London

Posted 23 May 2010 - 09:14 PM

I think I'll take the last critic's advice and order myself a copy of the Erroll Flynn version...or even MEN IN TIGHTS, before squandering money on this "historically accurate", and joyless, farce.



This is why I had stopped listening to critics a long time ago.


Because they're not as tedious, tight arsed and humourless as yourself?

#29 DR76

DR76

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1673 posts

Posted 24 May 2010 - 07:03 AM

Because they're not as tedious, tight arsed and humourless as yourself?



Why did you say that? What was the purpose? All I did was express my liking of the movie and my dislike of movie critics. I never said anything to YOU. And yet, you felt that you had to insult me. Why? For what purpose?

Why in the hell can't people respect the different opinions of others? It's one thing to disagree with an opinion. But insults, like The Shark just gave me . . . what is the damn point?

#30 Zorin Industries

Zorin Industries

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5634 posts

Posted 24 May 2010 - 09:35 AM

ROBIN HOOD is a really successful film.

It is not a reboot. It is not a origin story. EVERY ROBIN HOOD film has set up the story (usually with a returning Robin picking up his life in England again).

ROBIN HOOD as envisioned by Ridley Scott is pure cinema. It is a film with a pitch-perfect cast and an astute reworking of the myths at play. Whoever says this is not a ROBIN HOOD film is dramatically missing the point. Of course it is. From the nods to the Crusades to FRIAR TUCK's mead making exploits, via trapped villagers and bawdy lute-fuelled humour, this is pure ROBIN HOOD.

Like all mythical films, they speak to the audiences of the day through the prism of the day. So we have the outcast ASBO generation causing distress and intrusion, but then you realise that their way of life is actually the forerunner for the Merry Men's very existence.

Like all good ROBIN HOOD films, the take requires a dignity and gravitas to the film. That is provided by a humble, non-swaggering performance by Russell Crowe who brings great dignity and a depth of conscience to everything he does with Scott. This is not GLADIATOR 2. Yes, two separate set pieces are lensed at Bourne Wood as 'Germania' was in GLADIATOR, but this is not Rome With Arrows. This film has a completely different narrative agenda. If you want to see it is ripping off GLADIATOR, then realise that film borrowed from BRAVEHEART, which in turn borrowed from SPARTACUS. But ROBIN HOOD is following that path of historical importance.

The supporting likes of William Hurt and Eileen Atkins are highly necessary and shed light on the duality and morality of regality. ROBIN HOOD is a cleverly written film, especially in its characterisation. Hurt and Atkins provide an elder conscience to the world of the film. Even Mark Strong's GODFREY could - for a large stretch of the film - fall on either side of good. KING JOHN is the playboy prince (as he should be) and Danny Huston's RICHARD THE LIONHEART is typically lion-esque (and looks more like Disney's 1973 cartoon KING RICHARD than not).

Cate Blanchet is a beautiful, resourceful but very of-her-time MARIAN. Dressed with the requisite care for the villagers, MARIAN is not some arrow shooting Avenger-In-Plaits. She is a lady of strength and resilience in a film that is peppered with female characters bearing the masculine drive of the time and - to be fair - the cinematic legend that is ROBIN HOOD.

It is so refreshing to see a film that is deliberately cinematic. From rousing battle scenes that do not outstay their welcome (where you know what is happening narratively in every frame) to Crowe and Blanchett's first passionate kiss which is a "screen kiss" writ-large and sweeping vistas of English countryside, this is a superb ROBIN HOOD.