While King Richard the Lionheart was fighting in the Crusades, his younger brother John was rising in the Royal rankings and eventually became King of England. John didn’t do well when it came to dealing with the peasantry.
Legends arose around a fellow called Robin Hood, whose birth name was Robin of Locksley. He became part of literary folklore and poetry and ballads would follow. Supposedly, according to mythology, his actual family had money and productive land. However, when Robin returned from fighting in the Crusades, he discovered that the Sheriff of Nottingham, working on behalf of King John, had seized a lot of personal property in that part of the countryside, which included Sherwood Forest. The Locksleys were essentially disinherited.
Taking on the cloak of the mythical Robin Hood, Locksley became a friend of the impoverished, and he and his Merry Men robbed from the rich to give to the poor in that region of England. All in all, this is a colorful and jovial legend that has delighted fans of theatrical folklore, verbal storytelling, classic novels, old-time radio, movies, and television for many years.
Regardless of what goes into the equation — feature films, silent shorts, Saturday matinee serial adventures, cartoons, animated features, TV movies, and television series — there are more than 75 entries associated with the Robin Hood character. Included is the 1964 American musical comedy Chicago-set mobster film “Robin and The 7 Hoods.”
My favorite full-length Robin Hood movie is the 1938 entry, “The Adventures Of Robin Hood” starring Errol Flynn as Robin and Olivia de Havilland as Maid Marian, which is a wonderful example of classic Hollywood studio moviemaking. I heartily endorse it as family viewing because of its sheer entertainment pleasure. Very good, but not quite its equal, is “Robin and Marian” from 1976 with Sean Connery and Audrey Hepburn as the couple. The story highlights an aging Robin.
An aging Robin is also at the heart of the newest entry involving the legendary hero. “The Death Of Robin Hood,” which is playing in theaters, takes the basic celebratory nature of the primary folklore about Robin Hood and turns it on its brooding, melancholy head. This is a movie with a twist of angst for the introspective crowd.
The film is written and directed by Michael Sarnoski, who has made two features, both of them good and certainly worth appreciating. He created “Pig,” which stars Nicolas Cage as an aging, reclusive loner whose life is turned upside down after his beloved truffle-hunting pig goes missing. He also wrote and directed “A Quiet Place: Day One,” which is the third in the series of horror films that highlight silence for salvation purposes. Sarnoski clearly likes moody concepts.
With “The Death of Robin Hood,” the director has taken a not very familiar aspect of a legend’s life and twisted it into an interesting shape, one that might make some members of the audience uncomfortable. Regarding Robin, the new film details that he is old and miserable. He is no longer beloved and survives on memories and sorrow. In this telling, Robin has made many enemies, and the film doesn’t shirk from letting the audience in on the damage he has wrought. He is called into a unique kind of battle one more time and ends up injured and grieving for the past. Warning: the fight scenes are gory.
It may sound like an action movie, but this is decidedly not one. It’s after the final fighting that Sarnoski will probably antagonize the purists. Robin’s battle does continue, but it’s for his mind. During a large section of the story, he is being taken care of medically and psychologically by a prioress (in this case, a supervising nun). He’s tended to in a remote abbey, where demons of an emotional and mental kind set in and overwhelm our “hero.” If you’ve ever wanted to see a story about the darkest thoughts, most haunted dreams, and deepest fears of Robin Hood, here is your chance.
In terms of my reaction, I think the movie takes a bleak road, but that’s not negative criticism. Sarnoski views Robin as a criminal and a murderer who needs to face some kind of redemption. Knowing what you know from your own encounters with the character, do you agree? Religion will also play a key part in all of this. Although there are numerous characters, what we really have is a strong two-hander. Hugh Jackman is excellent as an introspective Robin, and Jodie Comer is quite good as the nun, who is named Sister Brigid. In capable supporting roles, Bill Skarsgard as Little John and Murray Bartlett as The Leper both add some unique dimensions to the story being told.
On a visual level, the production is outstanding. The cinematography is by Pat Scola, and it fits the framework of the tale perfectly. The editing by Andrew Mondshein and the music by Jim Ghedi are both pristine. During the course of the movie, the aspect ratio of the framing changes, which is an interesting directorial choice. The image is squeezed, but not in a detrimental way.
Regardless of what Sarnoski delivers in the future, it’s obvious from his three features that he is utterly unafraid to tap into fears of the unknown, heartfelt loss, and thoughtful introspection. Yes, of course, this is not the Medieval Age Robin Hood you may remember, especially from your childhood. Some other films have tiptoed slightly into the character’s darkness and anger, but there is always a font of populist heroism that provides avenues to enjoy. Additionally, if you’ve ever wondered what mythological heroes think about as their mythology unravels, Robin in exile grants you that opportunity. Assuredly, “The Death of Robin Hood” is different. Not only does it reveal its grim point of view right up front, but it dares to be thought-provoking. We need more of that from filmmakers, not less.