The Death of Robin Hood (2 stars out of 4)
Anyone who goes to see Michael Sarnoski’s “The Death of Robin Hood” should abandon any connection to past movies about the legendary outlaw. If you’re expecting something along the lines of Kevin Costner’s “Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves,” Disney’s animated feature, or the classic adventure with Errol Flynn, you’re in for two hours of increasingly painful disappointment.
The title of the film says it all, and in fact carries a double meaning. “The Death of Robin Hood” is about the literal death of the title character, but in a figurative sense Sarnoski’s effort feels like a character assassination, too.
The idea is one we’ve seen plenty of in recent years: the mythic character you know and love wasn’t all that great in real life, and now you’re going to see them deconstructed under the miserable, unflinching light of historical truth. This is a little curious since this particular character is more based in myth and legend than history, but whatever.
We meet this version of Robin Hood late in life, with Robin (Hugh Jackman) living in isolation as a vagabond, staving off vengeful attackers who seek to avenge his past misdeeds. His career was one of theft and criminal brutality, and his golden years are just more of the same. After a little scene-setting, Robin’s literal partner-in-crime Little John (Bill Skarsgard) recruits him to help rescue his wife from some problematic neighbors, and when that gruesomely violent operation goes south, Robin winds up in a priory clinging to life.
The premise is an adaptation of one of the common tales about the end of Robin Hood’s life, and most of the film takes place at the priory, where under the care of Sister Brigid (Jodie Comer), Robin tries to reconcile his past. After a comparatively action-packed and violent opening act, the remainder of the film transitions to an introspective and ponderous pace.
So again, even if you go in understanding that this isn’t Disney’s Robin Hood, you still might be disappointed with what you find. One of my fellow UFCA critics noted some obvious similarities with 2017’s “Logan,” but that film kept up a balance of action throughout its run time.
Credit is due to the film’s production, which establishes a strong mood, and the various elements like cinematography, the performances, the lighting, and especially the haunting score from Jim Ghedi all have their merits. But it may not be enough when the story struggles to move the needle.
To reiterate, “Death of Robin Hood” is a violent movie. There may be more graphic stuff out there, but one of the film’s main intents is to say its titular character is a menacing and uncaring villain, and on more than one occasion we see that children are not exempt from his ethos.
Ultimately “The Death of Robin Hood” is intended to be an exploration of guilt as a man reflects on and reconciles his past, and for some that may make the film worthwhile. But many will question whether the result was worth the investment.
—
“The Death of Robin Hood” is rated R for episodes of brutal and graphic violence, some involving children.