The first picture of Russell Crowe as Robin Hood has finally been released and it looks great!
The movie is currently shooting and in recent weeks we’ve been seeing an onslaught of casting updates. Joining Crowe in this adventure are Cate Blanchett (Maid Marian), Mark Strong (Sir Godfrey), Kevin Durand (Little John), William Hurt (William Marshall), Scott Grimes (Will Scarlet), Vanessa Redgrave (Queen Eleanor) and Alan Doyle (Alan-a-Dale).
|
|
Interestingly, we still don’t know who will be playing the Sheriff of Nottingham, the character originally set to be played by Crowe (back when Christian Bale was supposed to play Robin Hood and even after that when Crowe was apparently going to play both characters…).
Russell Crowe as Robin Hood
Three things I first noticed from the image:
- Crowe lost a ton of weight from his role in State of Play
- Crowe’s rocking his same “Caesar” hairstyle from Gladiator
- This Robin Hood doesn’t wear tights.
All of which are good things in my opinion! Producer Brian Grazer had this to say about the updated version of the prince of thieves:
“He doesn’t have the old Robin Hood tights… He’s got armor. He’s very medieval. He looks, if anything, more like he did in Gladiator than anything we’re used to seeing with Robin Hood.”
I think this picture is great – It doesn’t match what I had in my head for the agile archer and thief but this warrior-look works for me.
The synopsis of the film is as follows:
“The untitled Robin Hood adventure chronicles the life of an expert archer, previously interested only in self-preservation, from his service in King Richard’s army against the French. Upon Richard’s death, Robin travels to Nottingham, a town suffering from the corruption of a despotic sheriff and crippling taxation, where he falls for the spirited widow Lady Marian (Blanchett), a woman skeptical of the identity and motivations of this crusader from the forest. Hoping to earn the hand of Maid Marian and salvage the village, Robin assembles a gang whose lethal mercenary skills are matched only by its appetite for life. Together, they begin preying on the indulgent upper class to correct injustices under the sheriff.”
What do you think of the new live-action incarnation of the infamous Robin Hood?
Robin Hood is directed by Ridley Scott and scheduled to release May 14, 2010, one week after Iron Man 2.
Source: USA Today
If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to our RSS feed or if you want more frequent updates follow us on Twitter. Thanks for visiting!
Loading ...
56 Comments
Along with Inception and Iron Man 2, this is one of my most anticipated releases for Summer 2010. Ridley + Russell + period epic =
. Having Blanchette, Strong, Redgrave, and Hurt in the cast doesn’t hurt either.
Regarding the tights:
Tights were not developed until the 1400s or 1500s. Therefore, it would not make much sense to have them in 1191. Plus, it’s hard to be a guerilla fighter in tights.
Regarding the Sheriff;
This may be just a rumor, but I read somewhere that Matthew McFadyen will be playing the Sheriff.
His outfit looks a bit out of time, like Balin in Kingdom Of Heaven, leather pants etc. Archery glove too, interesting.
Wools and linens were the norm, not leather.
Can’t wait to see the movie, best director for the job. I only wish one day he would tackle a film about another great historical hero, Owain Glyndwr. I live in hope, die in Caergwrle
elessar,
You are correct, we’ll have an update for this some time later today.
Sweet!!
Sheriff of Nottingham Revealed:
http://screenrant.com/robin-hoods-sheriff-nottingham-finally-rob-6958/
Story, although classic of course, sounds a lot like Kevin Costner’s movie. I still think that one’s great and doesn’t need a reboot.
I hope this film would be great…waiting to see
I think Russell is to old to play Robin…I like the Robin Hood version on BBC. Probably will go see the movie anyway.
I agree with Rob. Robin Hood is a timeless character with a timeless story. I think it might me a little bit, tiny bit interesting to see Hood be the villian, but with people who don’t know the real Robin Hood Tale they might get the wrong immpression of him.
The main reason I wanted to comment on this is to tell you about Robin Hood the TV series by BBC.
Alot of the commentors on this said that the hadn’t seen a real good TV,movie interprertation of Robin Hood yet, and that they hadn’t seen a historically accurate ( as historical as you can get in a fiction book *not saying that I think that Robin Hood didn’t really exist*) intedrpretation either. Well, the BBC show Robin Hood is fufills these requirement. The story is good, the characters are rememberal, not romanticized as the other Hood movies have been (besides Robin’s love interest, Maid Marion), historically accurate to the book AND that time period, and Robin Hood is also the good buy ( sorry Ken ). This show is amazing and I really enjoy it.
Since it is a BBC show we can’t get it here in America, although if you have Comcast( don’t know about Direct TV) you can watch it on their BBC America chanel ( and ONDemand). But the BBC America Chanel is one of the premium chanels so it’s extra money unless you already have it. On ONDemand it is free under the TV Entertainment section. After each episode is played on Saturday nights ONDeman updates it with the new episode, so you always stay updated. Also if you don’t have comcast you can rent them from Netflix which is also what I’m doing to get caught up on the new season. If you don’t have Netflix you can get them from any local bookstore that also carries DVDs. Borders, Barnes-and- Noble,and Books-a-Million all carry them. If that doesn’t work, for some reason, get them from Amazon.com.
But I really recommend it for all the Robin Hood fans on this post. Please comment back if you watch the show already, and if anyone else goes out and gets the show tell me if you like it. Thx
@Lucas
“real” robin hood tale? Well, I guess true to the original folk tale, because I think it really depends on what philosophy you believe in to see Robin Hood as a protagonist or a villain. And I mean watching or reading one version of the story you can interpret it both ways. Like for me, anyone who robs people for a living is a criminal. This whole romanticized idea that someone is stealing from the “evil rich people” and giving it to the “good unfortunate poor people” is ridiculous to me.
First of all, nobody can run a campaign of robbing people on a long term basis based on bluffs and threats alone. There are bound to be those who resist being robbed and Robin Hood will have to either use deadly force to complete the robbery or reveal his bluff and ruin his reputation ending his campaign for good. So that means, he isn’t just a robber, but a murderer too.
To assume that anyone who is rich is “evil” and deserves to be robbed or killed is stupid. So what if he’s SO successful that all of the “rich” people are robbed and all of their riches are distributed to the “poor.” Then wouldn’t the “poor” then become the “rich” so now Robin Hood has to rob them and give it to the formerly rich people who are now poor?? It’ll be an endless cycle.
And just the fundamental concept of “punishing” rich people for being more successful has deeper meaning that’s relevant to real-life politics. “Spread the wealth” anyone? Do you really think it’s fair that if you worked hard all your life and was innovative enough to be more successful than those around you who didn’t try as hard or were not as smart, that you “deserve” to be punished for your hard work and your ingenuity??
It won’t only be more interesting and unique if Robin Hood was portrayed as a villain who THINKS he has a noble cause, but it would also be more realistic and believable… All of the Robin Hoods prior have them swooping down, displaying some might, and the “evil rich people” would simply submit and give them their gold without resistance or blood-shed. Come on… How naive do they think we are???
@ Ken J
I see what you mean, I understand all of that. But I’m used to the BBC show, where all the rich people are mostly evil or in alliances with the evil Sheriff of Nottingham, so in a since they are ALL evil. If you watch the show you would know what I meant. I’ve never read the real book, about Robin Hood ( not the kiddy ones I’m talking about) and I didn’t really enjoy the Costner movie either. So yea I guess I’m just too used to the BBC show to have a different perspective of Hood. But really try out the show!]
But that’s what I’m saying, the concept that “all” of any group, rich, poor, black, white, gay, straight, whatever can ALL be evil or good or whatever is an utterly ridiculous concept.
Russell is far and away the only guy to be able to carry this role ,he will be great.I just hope it doesn’t become to dark like they have done with ‘batman’………….
In my eyes Errol is always ‘robin hood’…………
i agree with errol he is the only guy to carry out this role… and im sure he be great… hey wats ur opinion about him throwing a phone at the hotel guy
i dont think i really care he is the best actor from my point of view
and all of us have our bad days
What’s this talk of Russell Crowe possibly starring as The Doctor in a big budget version of Dr Who????
Russell Crowe as Robin is a terrible idea. I’m not saying he’s a bad actor, I’ve seen a lot better though. But He just doesn’t fit the part all that well at all. First off he’s Australian, and even though a lot of Aussie’s heritage may derive from England. It still doesn’t do the part much justice. Especially if Crowe doesn’t kick his Aussie accent. This movie Im sure isnt going to please the real Robin Hood fans, but will be a decent movie overall.
As for Ken J’s comments. The only issue I have is if you read the real stories of robin, he’s not robing from the rich like how you said. In the latter rewritten stores they have him robbing the rich to give to the poor in a more general fashion. Which yes i agree is still criminal.
One other thing I have to say. Working your life and making it rich as one would put it, is worthless if you don’t share what you have with the less fortunate.
In my opinion, no you shouldn’t be punished for earning a great living. But You should have a generous heart to share what you worked hard for with those unable to do so; whether they are not smart enough, missed an opportunity, or just simply were not provided the same privileges. And not everyone who has money worked hard for it! In fact, very few have. Most anyone who has worked hard to make it rich, knows the sympathies of those who are less fortunate.
But certainly if your robbing from just any rich person then handing it off to any poor person it’s wrong.
It could even be questionable even if you robbed a crooked rich judge who deals drugs on the side. Then gave that money to a poor widow who’s home went into foreclosure because she had no way of earning the amount she needed. But that’s more socially justifiable in many peoples eyes. I think that’s basically what some of the Robin Hood tales are trying to tell.
I do feel if you have money, share it. You don’t have to. But personally I’d rather do good with my money then keep it all for myself. If I have thousands, or a millionaire, or even a billionaire..do good with it, share it with those who are in need. If people did that, then robin wouldn’t need to steal your stash! lol.
All this about money, greed, sharing, kindness, and love for others is all covered in the The Gospels of the Bible.
Michael said:
“And not everyone who has money worked hard for it! In fact, very few have.”
Really? Where is your evidence of this?
“It could even be questionable even if you robbed a crooked rich judge who deals drugs on the side. Then gave that money to a poor widow who’s home went into foreclosure because she had no way of earning the amount she needed.”
And how exactly do you deduce this type of information? Can you right click on someone and hit properties and know that person A is bad and person B is good, or is there like a “this person is poor because he/she is lazy” indicator that you can check to make sure is off before you give them money? Just curious, maybe you actually have a method of finding these things out, knowledge like that should be shared.
Which is another thing. I have no problem with “teaching a man to fish” so to speak, but am against “giving that man a fish.” I don’t believe in giving away my money because I have no idea how it will be spent, and I work too hard for my money to be spent on alcohol, cigarettes, or drugs. But if there’s a way to educate people on the options that ARE open to them I would be all for that. And yes, almost everyone has some option open to them regardless of their situation, it’s up to them to act on it. To me, nothing is worth anything unless you’ve earned it.
Damn, did my comments fall into the spam filter abyss???
Russell Crowe has the persona to carry off any role he chooses to play. He is a wonderful actor and in his interviews I have watched he is his own person. He seems to be comfortable in his skin. I think who ever wants to cut him should man up to their own flaws. How about this he is able to live the American dream and not live here – seems to me he can be sarcastic.
a little woman in Kentucky
—Still ANOTHER ‘Robin Hood’? Seems like the once promising
careers of both Scott and Crowe have gotten permanently bogged down in their status quo comfort zones. —Boring!
What's your opinion? Leave a Reply!
Go to Gravatar.com and upload your own (we'll wait)!