By Eric Villanueva ’11
If you’re debating whether or not to still see Russell Crowe in “Robin Hood,” in theaters since May 14, your time and money would be better spent elsewhere.
The 2010 film explores the history behind Robin Hood and prequels the legend of the hooded hero of Nottingham that everyone knows from the Disney animated movie of the same name.
But it is this narrative style that destroys the movie.
As a two-and-a-half-hour prequel, the film is slow-moving and builds to a predictable climax: the banishment of Robin Longstride (Russell Crowe), or Robin of the Hood, by King John.
Throughout the movie, I found myself checking my phone for the time, and I could tell that I was not alone by the small glowing lights that appeared quickly between seats before they were shoved back into pockets and purses.
And even as I played with cell phone in my pocket, I still kept watching the screen in hopes that Crowe’s action scenes would make up for the film’s major flaw.
In the end, moviegoers only got three real battle scenes, a whopping 30 minutes of a two and a half hour movie. Crowe fights mostly from a far with his bow or on horseback; there’s no real hand-to-hand combat (even in the climactic battle).
Crowe’s fighting in “Robin Hood” is a far cry from his raw ferocity in “Gladiator” a decade ago.
However, moviegoers of a gentler, less bloodthirsty nature, who enjoyed Crowe’s emotional acting in movies like “A Beautiful Mind,” will like the dramatic love story that plays out between the people’s defender Robin Longstride and the beautiful but tough-skinned Marion Loxley (Cate Blanchett).
While Robin Hood is known for robbing the rich to give to the poor, I felt robbed of not only my money, but also my time.
Two out of five stars