Support NeoGAF

[rhino4evr]

DanielPlainview thought The Losers "delivered" and gave it a 7.5. The movie was worst than Guido shooting first.

Guido? :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol

Wow...serious amature.

 

[LM4sure]

Robin Hood about to turn rotten on RT. Very surprising given the cast. And I had very little interest in seeing this, but I expected it to get great reviews so I was going to have to see it anyway. Now it looks like it'll be pushed back to possible rental.

 

[Affeinvasion]

If this hasn't been posted yet:

"I declare him an OOOOUUUTLAAAAW!!!!"

funniest delivery of a line ever. I laugh everytime I see the trailer.

 

[RustyNails]

Armond White strikes again!!! With a rotten review. That can only mean one thing: Robin Hood will be great. I was beginning to get unsure about this movie, but now I'm sold. Thanks Armond.

Look at Scott’s superficial “beauty”: a couple of dusk landscapes (amazingly subtle lighting by John Mathieson) and a splendid view of French ships roiling on blue, misty waves. But these are not “cinematic” images; they’re mini TV commercials that lack existential vision. Ultra-hack Scott reverts to the slickness of his advertising background. TV imagery has pervaded cinema to the point that Scott doesn’t balance his over-cropped TV-style close-ups with the postcard vistas. Like Gladiator’s jarring F/X, it shows Scott’s disrespect for cinema.

Ridley Scott is ULTRA-HACK??? Scott's disrespect for cinema?? Just when you think he can't sink any lower, White surprises you.

 

[SonicMegaDrive]

Armond White strikes again!!! With a rotten review. That can only mean one thing: Robin Hood will be great. I was beginning to get unsure about this movie, but now I'm sold. Thanks Armond.



Ridley Scott is ULTRA-HACK??? Scott's disrespect for cinema?? Just when you think he can't sink any lower, White surprises you.

Armond White hates it???

Damn.

I might have to see this after all.

 

[PersonaX]

If this hasn't been posted yet:

"I declare him an OOOOUUUTLAAAAW!!!!"

funniest delivery of a line ever. I laugh everytime I see the trailer.

This!

Hahah, i chuckle like a fool everytime i see it.

Hehhehh...oh boy...I'm so going to see this.

 

[Kentpaul]

So if I go to a midnight showing un-sober I should enjoy it right?

wat people go to the movies sober :lol

 

[Expendable.]

Ultra hack :lol

 

[jett]

Armond White has got to be trolling on purpose. Bitch plz!

I have to say though, I lol'd at this quote from his Iron Man 2 review:

Iron Man 2 is exactly what critics and audiences deserve following the celebration of that awful, dung-hued first film

:lol

And about Clash of the Titans:

" Leterrier certainly shows a better sense of meaningful, economic narrative than the mess that Peter Jackson made of the interminable, incoherent Lord of the Rings trilogy

Wow. :lol

edit: gotta add this one too, on Scorsese's Shutter Island:

" Shutter Island is a perfect example of Hollywood excess: It demonstrates a once significant filmmaker decaying into a big budget, poorly-motivated hack."

:lol he's an endless barrel of laughs, at least

 

[Gary Whitta]

DanielPlainview thought The Losers "delivered" and gave it a 7.5. The movie was worst than Guido shooting first.

Who's Guido? :lol

 

[RustyNails]

Armond White has got to be trolling on purpose. Bitch plz!

I have to say though, I lol'd at this quote from his Iron Man 2 review:



:lol

And about Clash of the Titans:



Wow. :lol

edit: gotta add this one too, on Scorsese's Shutter Island:



:lol he's an endless barrel of laughs, at least

Don't forget the classic TDK review:

Unlike Nicholson’s multileveled characterization, Ledger reduces The Joker to one-note ham-acting and trite symbolism. If you fell for the evil-versus-evil antagonism of There Will Be Blood, then The Dark Knight should be the movie of your wretched dreams

 

[Chairhome]

Robin Hood is like Batman Begins, but only up to the part where Bruce Wayne returns to Gotham to become Batman. 2 hrs and 20 min of that.

Sounds terrible.

 

[broadwayrock]

Andrew Pulver from the Guardian gives it 4 stars:

Ridley Scott has had his persistent faith in Russell Crowe amply rewarded

Scott orchestrates the sound and fury with a seemingly effortless bravura: unfussily pulling off a profusion of tremendous action scenes and really quite impressive period backdrops (including one CGI panorama of medieval London that looks like a Wenceslaus Hollar engraving come to life).

http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2010/may/11/robin-hood-cannes-film-review

 

[Jason's Ultimatum]

Who's Guido? :lol

The bounty hunter from A New Hope. It's a Jay and Silent Bob Strike's Back reference. Ben Affleck said it.

And I actually used "worst" instead of "worse".

 

[1138]

Just came back from the theater, and i have to say that the movie was a disappointment to me. The film has an entirely different atmosphere than most of the Ridley Scott films i have seen. It felt like they tried to appeal to every type of audience, and as a result the movie feels like an average family friendly blockbuster. The first 30 minutes of the movie was pretty good, and i had the feeling that they were going to take the story in an different direction, but in the end it felt like just another take on Robin Hood. Near the end i even got a flashback of the ewoks saving the day in Return of the Jedi. The movie just felt like a 6/10 movie, not bad, but not great either. He did such an awesome job with Kingdom of Heaven so i was expecting something really special when i walked into the theater, but in the end nothing stood out except for a few scenes. I never saw A Good Year, but i felt like this was Ridley's weakest film of the decade.

 

[sneakypete]

The bounty hunter from A New Hope. It's a Jay and Silent Bob Strike's Back reference. Ben Affleck said it.

And I actually used "worst" instead of "worse".

Maybe I'm missing an joke, but it's Greedo, not Guido. I don't even like Star Wars and I knew that one.

 

[Drewsky]

Maybe I'm missing an joke, but it's Greedo, not Guido. I don't even like Star Wars and I knew that one.

I think he was talking about the deleted scene where Han "hits the clubs" with a guido.

 

[sneakypete]

I think he was talking about the deleted scene where Han "hits the clubs" with a guido.

Ooooh the Mos Eisley Shore deleted scene, gotcha.

 

[Xevren]

This movie was such a HUGE disappointment to me. I've always been a fan of Ridley Scott's movies but this one was just such a let down. Ugh! Please be awesome Inception...

 

[Discotheque]

Since everyone seems to be picking on Mr. Plainview in here. Allow me to share some of the firing squad. Galdiator is a average movie, that gets way more love then it deserves. The fact that it won an Oscar just makes it seem more over rated. Crouching Tiger/Hidden Dragon was the deserving winner that year (in my opinion).
Gladiatior the film feels like one giant cliche after another. It's extremely formulaic.

Traffic should have won that year. Crouching Tiger second for me. Really good year when I look at it (because I also loved Gladiator).

 

[Scarecrow]

Just came back from a QC viewing of it at my theater. Was pretty neat, till the final third or so, when it got a little jumbled for me. Seemed like a retread of Gladiator, to be honest.

 

[J2 Cool]

Don't forget the classic TDK review:

Is there a thread dedicated to him yet? I would love to round up the best quotes of Armond White.

 

[Mgoblue201]

Traffic should have won that year. Crouching Tiger second for me. Really good year when I look at it (because I also loved Gladiator).

I really enjoyed Traffic, but the use of colors in that film was completely artless. I can't even stand to watch it whenever it comes on. I just listen to the dialogue.

 

[Sinatar]

I wonder if the studios fucked with Ridley on this one? Is there a Robin Hood directors cut DVD of awesomeness awaiting us?

 

[Always-honest]

It's crazy how on and off his filmography has been this past decade:

2000 Gladiator (overrated crap)
2001 Hannibal (terrible)
2001 Black Hawk Down (great)
2003 Matchstick Men (great)
2005 Kingdom of Heaven (DC is a masterpiece)
2006 A Good Year (haven't seen, but did anyone?)
2007 American Gangster (decent, but not strong)
2008 Body of Lies (terrible)

hannibal wasn't terrible imo. pretty good actually.
or maybe it's just my huge crush on Jullianna Moore in that movie

anyway, robin hood looks like a mix of braveheart, gladiator, etc.
i doubt it will bring ANYTHING surprising.

edit: dear god

 

[Always-honest]

This movie was such a HUGE disappointment to me. I've always been a fan of Ridley Scott's movies but this one was just such a let down. Ugh! Please be awesome Inception...

have a feeling that movie will be kind of interesting.

 

[duckroll]

Armond White is the greatest troll movie critic of our time. Respect. :lol

 

[Expendable.]

Rottenwatch Update: 44% with 63 reviews

I completely agree with Phillips review:

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.

It's just a solid adventure story with beautiful production values and great performances. Nothing more. I guess since I was expecting the worst, I came out surprised.

 

[sneakypete]

Rottenwatch Update: 44% with 63 reviews

I completely agree with Phillips review:

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.

It's just a solid adventure story with beautiful production values and great performances. Nothing more. I guess since I was expecting the worst, I came out surprised.

Sweet! I loved American Gangster. If I can find a midnight release around here I'll be seeing this tonight.


Edit: Just got back from watching it. I enjoyed it, but the ending felt tacked on and purely setup for the inevitable sequel. All of my friends were not impressed, I imagine most won't like it.

 

[Expendable.]

in honor of Robin Hood our weekly top ten is 10 Director/Actor Pairings Who Need A Break

 

[beelzebozo]

chud savaged this movie.

Not only are the familiar elements of the myth missing, but I'm not sure when Robin Hood will have time to develop them. The main character, like everyone else in this movie, is incredibly fucking old. I feel like a soulless studio exec saying this, but it's weird watching the origin story of a character when that character is being played by a bloated guy in his late 40s.

This film is the epitome of what's wrong with Hollywood's modern prequel mania. It's a movie that tells no story, that offers no new insight into the characters and that's all about putting everybody into the positions you'd rather have seen them at in the beginning.

There can be no sense of discovery in a movie like this, and there can be no sense of danger. You know the ultimate outcome, so everything that happens is just treading water. Instead of giving us a revisionist take or a showing us a new perspective on an old story, Robin Hood is the equivalent of a movie about James Bond's first day at the office.

:lol

 

[Solo]

But, its CHUD.

 

[Count of Monte Sawed-Off]

I don't generally care much for Devin, or CHUD, but that review was pretty damn good.

 

[pringles]

So he wanted a remake of the same old story we've gotten dozens of times instead of a prequel with a new story because apparantly if you know what happens after the prequel, you're just treading water?

What a shitty review.

 

[beelzebozo]

But, its CHUD.

but, he's right!

So he wanted a remake of the same old story we've gotten dozens of times instead of a prequel with a new story because apparantly if you know what happens after the prequel, you're just treading water?

What a shitty review.

i'd say he wanted something that was balanced, stood alone, and didn't seem like ridley scott sleepwalking through another historical epic. maybe even something that contained something that was interesting and resembled robin hood.

here you go

And that's one problem, to have a movie called Robin Hood that's totally not about the Robin Hood character we know, but it's another to have a bad movie called Robin Hood that's totally not about the Robin Hood character we know. I've seen the entire film and I'm not sure that I could tell you what the story of it is; I could explain to you the basic events that occur during the course of the film, and how they're connected chronologically, but that's not really a story. This film isn't actually about anything; there's no forward plot momentum throughout and characters do things simply because they need a way to pass the time and get to the next scene.

 

[Solo]

but, he's right!

You already saw the movie?

 

[beelzebozo]

You already saw the movie?

i mean generally speaking about useless prequels.

 

[VeryGooster]

in honor of Robin Hood our weekly top ten is 10 Director/Actor Pairings Who Need A Break

"10 Director/Actor Pairings Who Need a Break?" Jesus the internet has too much time on its hands, but this post would indicate the same about me.

Robin Hood is the equivalent of a movie about James Bond's first day at the office.

"Albert R. Broccoli's EON Productions presents Daniel Craig as Ian Fleming's James Bond 007 in THIS IS YOUR OFFICE."

 

[Solo]

i mean generally speaking about useless prequels.

I wouldnt call Casino Royale or Batman Begins "useless". Both resurrected their respective franchises.

 

[beelzebozo]

I wouldnt call Casino Royale or Batman Begins "useless". Both resurrected their respective franchises.

he actually compliments BATMAN BEGINS, or at least implies that it does a lot more than what's accomplished here. and yes, both are awesome, and are two of my favorite movies.

Imagine if you went to see Batman Begins and the entire movie featured Bruce Wayne engaged in a legal battle with the city of Gotham over zoning, and there was a guy named Joe Kerr on the City Council Planning Board who was obviously going to be important later on but did nothing at all the whole film. And then imagine that, in the last three minutes of the film, Wayne finally put on that famous mask and a voice over explained to us that from then on he would be the crimefighter we all know as Batman, and he would have many adventures.

 

[pringles]

i mean generally speaking about useless prequels.

I would say prequels generally offer a lot more "new insight into the characters" and "sense of discovery" than a remake does.

Now I haven't seen the movie yet (will during the weekend), but I find his complaints about it being a prequel silly.
Also, about it not being about the Robin Hood character we know, did he not want "a revisionist take" or "a new perspective on an old story" ? Seems to me he's kind of contradicting himself...

 

[Evlar]

Ebert hath spoken, and he brings us a message strikingly similar to CHUD's review.

“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. I cannot discover any sincere interest on the part of Scott, Crowe or the writer Brian Helgeland in any previous version of Robin Hood. Their Robin is another weary retread of the muscular macho slaughterers who with interchangeable names stand at the center of one overwrought bloodbath after another.

 

[beelzebozo]

but it's ebert!

 

[Fxp]

Just came back from the movie theater. Film was little less epic than I anticipated knowing Scott's previous films. Overall a 7/10 experience. And, God, Crowe & Blanchett have aged
I chuckled during

Spoiler

French invasion/D-day (Saving Private Ryan vibe) and Robin's headshot )

 

[D.Lo]

Saw it last night, thought it was pretty bad. I mean, production wise it was competent, acting was adequate, but the script, direction and design were all pretty awful. In my opinion the whole thing was a waste of time for everybody involved.

Broadly a Gladiator re-tread, except 10 years on the same schtick done worse doesn't have any impact.

Gladiator was an interesting modern take on the 'epic movie' of old, with some historical realism of sorts (such as the details of ancient battle tactics) thrown in to lend weight to what was still really a 'legend' tone. It also cleverly brought modern camerawork techniques to an unfamiliar genre, such as the skipped frames to enhance the confusion of battle scenes. In both these cases, RH just re-treads the same ground, it doesn't bring anything new to it.

Gladiator also had heaps of really iconic shots, lines and imagery (clouds in the sky behind Maximus, "Not yet", hand through the wheat etc), and a a fantastic, memorable score, both of which RH lacks completely.

On top of all this, RH is full of plot holes, ridiculous co-incidences, one dimensional characters, inane 'forshadowing', and a cheesy rom-com main romance (I hate you! Oh no I respect you! Oh now I love you!). And basically no other meaningful relationships are developed in the movie. Apart from Marian and Robin's 'romance', no characters have any real character arcs at all, they start and finish the movie exactly the same.

It's like the idea was to re-imagine the Robin Hood myth, but instead of being an interesting twist on it like a re-imagining should be, they merely bent the RH characters around every over-done hollywood blockbuster trope they could pack into 3 hours.

 

[LabouredSubterfuge]

Bwahahahahahaha, oh Russell Crowe:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/organgrinder/2010/may/14/russell-crowe-accent-acrimony

 

[VeryGooster]

I have a stupid question for those who've seen it:

Is the "Out-LAWWWW!!!!!" line in the movie? And is the higher pitch used? :lol

 

[bosskoss21]

this thing is gonna be sick. and whoever said they didnt like gladiator is crazy

 

[Fxp]

I have a stupid question for those who've seen it:

Is the "Out-LAWWWW!!!!!" line in the movie? And is the higher pitch used? :lol

Oh yeah

 

[pringles]

but it's ebert!

Ebert hated Gladiator so for me it's good news that he doesn't like RH either.