Robin Hood Reviews

  • This latest rehash of Robin Hood is a prime example of what happens when big stars lose respect for the audience.

    Julian Roman — MovieWeb

  • I'm all for a new take on an old story. But Scott and his screenwriter, Brian Helgeland, work so mightily to turn Robin 
 into a stolidly noble, pre-notorious version of himself that they forget to make him at all magical. Rousing. A hero of the gle

    Owen Gleiberman — Entertainment Weekly

  • There is a whole lot of meanwhile in this crowded, lumbering film.

    A.O. Scott — New York Times

  • Perhaps the worst, and most shameless, aspect of this tedious affair is that it's essentially a prequel for the Robin Hood better known for his redistribution of wealth.

    Claudia Puig — USA Today

  • The Robin Hood of myth and moviedom is for the most part AWOL. Why should we have to wait until the last five minutes to see Crowe crack a smile, let alone split an arrow?

    Michael O'Sullivan — Washington Post

  • It doesn't breathe new life into a genre as did Gladiator, Scott's first pairing with Russell Crowe, but it's a brawny reimagining of a beloved old myth, a period popcorn movie turned out with professionalism and gusto.

    Ty Burr — Boston Globe

  • The directorial choices are, for the most part, so lazy, the blockbuster engineering so blatant, that Robin Hood often falls into self-parody.

    Karina Longworth — Village Voice

  • The problem with Russell Crowe's new take on the legend is that it has one muddy boot in history and the other in fantasy. The middling result is far from a bull's-eye.

    Joe Neumaier — New York Daily News

  • It's an ersatz epic about men in fights -- grim fights, grinding battles, clanking combats that are repetitive and, in a movie that runs 140 minutes, all but endless.

    Joe Morgenstern — Wall Street Journal

  • It's a resolutely grim and grubby lesson in 13th-century British history filtered through all the requisite trademarks of a summer blockbuster.

    Tom Maurstad — Dallas Morning News

  • The action's here, there, and everywhere... but all this to-ing and fro-ing fails to advance the narrative with the compelling force you crave in movies.

    Kathleen Murphy — MSN Movies

  • "And so the legend begins," the new movie tells us at the end. But it's too late.

    Anthony Lane — New Yorker

  • Robin Hood is a high-tech and well made violent action picture using the name of Robin Hood for no better reason than that it's an established brand not protected by copyright.

    Roger Ebert — Chicago Sun-Times

  • I liked it. It's on a par with Scott's American Gangster: No revelations, but a satisfying, large-scale genre movie, toned up by its cast.

    Michael Phillips — Chicago Tribune

  • As in so many summer behemoths, the real stars are the projectiles-in this case, arrows with their own point-of-view shots, zipping through the air and finding their targets with pinpoint accuracy.

    J. R. Jones — Chicago Reader

  • Robin Hood boasts graphic battle scenes and ingenious intrigue, a sense of history that may not be accurate but feels authentic, and a love story that smartly plays with gender and Hollywood stereotypes.

    Steven Rea — Philadelphia Inquirer

  • Scott's films are usually high on technical polish but iffy in terms of emotional engagement. This one scores on all counts.

    Colin Covert — Minneapolis Star Tribune

  • If it's sword-on-sword with arrows-in-the-air action you want, Robin Hood delivers in a big way.

    Tom Long — Detroit News

  • It's a little too obvious and ham-handed in places to be a really good movie, but any film that lasts two hours and 20 minutes without seeming like a long, hard slog can't be all bad.

    Bill Goodykoontz — Arizona Republic

  • This physically imposing picture brings abundant political-historical dimensions to its epic canvas, yet often seems devoted to stifling whatever pleasure audiences may have derived from the popular legend.

    Justin Chang — Variety

Top Movies