Metascore
53

Mixed or average reviews - based on 40 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 19 out of 40
  2. Negative: 6 out of 40
Watch On
  1. 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.
  2. Reviewed by: Dana Stevens
    60
    Pretty much ill-conceived from the ground up but saved by a couple of strong performances and a wealth of well-researched period detail.
  3. Can they really be setting up a sequel at the end, with Robin as an outlaw? Let’s hope so--that’s the movie you actually wanted.
  4. 58
    Image for image and shot for shot, Scott is still one of the most striking directors around, but in Robin Hood, the cohesive particles keeping those images together--frills like a compelling plot and sculpted characters--prove unstable.
  5. 58
    There’s quality throughout, but, visual verve aside, the enterprise is dull, heavy-handed and dispiriting.
  6. 50
    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.
  7. Still, there are some things to savor. Blanchett is an actress who's always involving, and Crowe is very much in his element as an intrepid, laconic archer who lets his arrows do the talking.
  8. 50
    If only the story were leaner and more nimble -- but then again this is a Ridley Scott film, so you go in expecting bombast and bloat in the service of leaden themes.
  9. Reviewed by: Claudia Puig
    50
    Cate Blanchett brings little but an arch toughness to the role of Marion, and, in a highly improbably climactic scene, proves herself a veritable knight. Crowe and Blanchett share a perfunctory romance, with few sparks.
  10. Except for the last five minutes, Robin Hood is the story of the radicalization of some guy named Longstride. Who?
  11. The battles are grainy and ''existential,'' but what they aren't is thrilling. They're surging crowd scenes with streams of arrows and flecks of blood, and Crowe, slashing his way through them, is a glorified extra. He's so grimly possessed with purpose that he's a bore, and so is the movie.
  12. 42
    A distinct lack of merriment marks each frame of this film, with Scott determined to erase all fond memories of past Robin Hoods.
  13. I much prefer Mel Brooks’s “Robin Hood: Men in Tights” to all this doomy somberness. Why take the legend so seriously?
  14. Reviewed by: Karina Longworth
    40
    The directorial choices are, for the most part, so lazy, the blockbuster engineering so blatant, that Robin Hood often falls into self-parody. All the more reason for Sarah Palin to love it.
  15. He's (Crowe) thwarted by the production's almost total, and truly absurd, absence of fun.
User Score
6.2

Generally favorable reviews- based on 311 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 69 out of 130
  2. Negative: 33 out of 130
  1. Sep 25, 2011
    5
    Epic, but what's the point of it?
  2. Oct 20, 2010
    1
    If it reinvents the legend at all, one has to wonder why the legend exists in the first place. The story and characters are painfully boring.If it reinvents the legend at all, one has to wonder why the legend exists in the first place. The story and characters are painfully boring. You've already seen all this action before, and the elements it borrows were selected from the bottom of the barrel. Watch Kevin Costner's again instead. Full Review »
  3. Oct 1, 2010
    5
    Felt a much longer than it should've; and no punchline. It tries to do too much and ends up playing like a pilot for 'Robin Hood' the TVFelt a much longer than it should've; and no punchline. It tries to do too much and ends up playing like a pilot for 'Robin Hood' the TV series - in which, hopefully, all of the many characters will be developed. Interesting that Ridley would create a film that looks like 'Gladiator' but fails to hit all the Gladiator,Brave Heart, etc, plot points i.e. : protaganist established as hero, family of hero is murdered by villain, hero is made outcast/outlaw by villain, hero finds love/faith/need-for revenge, etc, etc. While most of those things happen in the film, they don't flow coherently, in fact it's all very disjointed; and too many villains. And the end I was left with a feeling that Ridley was going through the motions on this one. Full Review »