UPDATE: ‘Robin Hood’ Opens To $6M In 3 Countries
The 63rd Cannes Film Festival opened with Ridley Scott’s Robin Hood. Stars Russell Crowe and Cate Blanchett (but not director Ridley Scott, sidelined after painful knee surgery) faced 3,000 journalists from 80 countries. Launching a big movie like this at Cannes can leave a studio vulnerable to incoming arrows. It’s also incredibly expensive, costing Universal up to $5 million to fly in everybody from the talent to the executives and stage the glitzy premiere and after-party. Then again, the budget for the film was already high at $225 million (yet another reason Universal Pictures chairman Marc Shmuger was fired). Speaking from the red carpeted steps of the Palais des Festivals in his dinner jacket, Universal’s international president David Kosse was upbeat about the movie’s prospects. The studio is estimating — and audience tracking surveys suggest — that Robin Hood could sell twice as many tickets overseas as it does domestically, hence the Cannes hoopla. Then again, London’s Daily Mirror is giving away free pairs of Robin Hood tickets to its readers starting this weekend.
So what kind of reception has Universal received for its money? The execs thought the movie “played great” to the media, gushing to Deadline that “reviews and early numbers internationally are terrific”. But I found press reaction to the first screening was muted, with some critics questioning the political correctness of the script.
The French press have been almost hostile, not surprising given how unkind this version of Robin Hood is about their countrymen, who are portrayed at best as a kind of Gallic Keystone Kops. Of the London critics, reaction has been mixed. The Times wrote that Ridley Scott and Russell Crowe have delivered a film more provocative than most of the product unspooling here over the next 13 days. The Daily Telegraph said it’s Ridley Scott’s best movie since Gladiator. And Chris Tookey in the Daily Mail called Robin Hood a “magnificent return to form for Sir Ridley Scott with this magnificent epic… This is a cracking good yarn, and you should see it.” But Xan Brooks in the Guardian said he watched the movie in an unfilled cinema that barely responded with applause when the end credits rolled. The Spectator magazine said this Robin is “horribly long … serious to a fault … a dull movie of the kind that doesn’t pay emotional dividends”.
Russell Crowe, who at Cannes grabbed media attention by picking a fight with Big Media, was criticized in some quarters: “Playing Robin with all the mumbling machismo he can muster, there are times when watching him is as fun as a visit from the tax inspector,” wrote James Mottram in the Independent. Uk critics have been kinder about Cate Blanchett though, with most liking her beefed-up Maid Marian role.


225 million dollars… and then people wonder what the fuck is wrong with Hollywood. That’s 15 Slumdog Millionaires. 225 million… how many good independent, smaller, human movies could’ve been made for that? The spec that sold actually sounded interesting because it turned the tale on its head, making the Sheriff a good guy investigating a murder and Robin a criminal. But then, as always happens, originality caused some exexs to start shitting in their pants with fear and the movie was shut down in pre, then revamped and a more “traditional” movie was made.
What a waste of everything. Between overpriced shit like this and Avatar, it’s a miracle that a single movie is made where normal humans are dealing with normal problems of life. Hello to the theme park/epic, goodbye to human drama.
I so agree with you. Avatar is the worst movie I ever saw!
You’re the worse movie I ever saw. Avatar is the best film ever made since Lord of the Rings.
I so disagree with you , Avatar was/is a great movie. They are not going to remake the walton’s into a movie any time soon.
Actually, that’s exactly why I wanted to hate Avatar. I watched it with every intention of laughing at it and making fun of it later. Only problem, Avatar was pretty freaking good.
Just because a movie is overpriced, over-marketed, and too “studio” doesn’t mean it is going to be bad. Keep your mind open… I have high hopes.
Gladiator rocked.
Nice exaggerations, troll. Avatar is a great film, the best ever? Hell no. But still quite a good movie. As Roger Ebert said in his review, “at least there’s one man in Hollywood who knows how to spend $250 million wisely”. Plus, if you think Avatar is the worst movie ever, than you clearly haven’t seen very many movies. How old are you? 12?
Try Batman and Robin, that one’s pretty bad, or Freddie Got Fingered, or Battlefield Earth. Terrible films.
I completely agree. AVATAR both was god awful–some of the worst writing ever.
Out of control greed. This is because normal profit margins are not
good enough. They are aiming at astronomical results. Very often this leads to huge failures which they deserve.
I’m 71 yrs old and have seen all the Robin Hoods thru the years. I hope this one comes close to the rest of them. We can only hope that this one worth the pop corn.
At 6.50 for a medium size, I doubt the pop corn is worth it!
6.50! Is that pounds or dollars?
Brilliant observations.
I don’t think the point of the movie experience is to watch people go through the same BS that we have to go through in order to buy the movie tickets, hence grandiose epic films have risen in popularity.
I don’t want to see some bum sitting in a cubicle staring at a computer for 50 hours a week. If I wanted that, I would just record myself.
As far as the greed goes, it’s not necessarily always bad. In fact, greed is really only bad when that greed infringes upon the rights of others. Otherwise, greed has been fantastically productive and innovative through the years.
Hey, Office Space was an awesome film that I believe many people can relate to!
I go to movies because I want to be entertained. If I want a life lesson I will go to church. Short films only entertain short people. And, I am not talking height.
There’s a few problems with your argument though:
1. Some people go to movies to be entertained, I.E. they want to see big action spectacles like Robin Hood, Clash of the Titans, Avatar, etc…
2. Movies about real human drama on small budgets are still made; Precious and The Hurt Locker for example. You make it sound like they stopped existing at some point.
Great post Josh. It’s as if people think they stopped making great human stories for smaller budgets. I’m tired of all these OLD HOGEY FOGIES whining and bitching and moaning about Hollywood blockbusters. Tired of this bullshit about how people who want to see movies like Avatar or Iron Man are somehow less than intelligent, or the people who post as if they’re too good for movies like Avatar. I try just to be entertained with film.
I recently read the book “Robin Hood” with my kids. I’ve always had a moral problem with the idea that stealing is ok in any circumstance. However, the movie stresses that Hood is fighting against an out of control GOVERNMENT. A movie for out times- I can’t wait to see it.
Leave your conservative B.S. at the door honey.
Why do I care how much a studio spends on a film? Why should any of us? It’s their money isn’t it? They can spend how ever they want to spend it. If it makes a huge profit, bravo. If it flops, that’s tough on the studio, but they’ll recover. The success or failure of this or any huge budget means nothing a smaller film being made or not made. So what if it’s 15 SLUMDOG’S. Eat some popcorn, get a big soft drink, sit down and enjoy yourself in the theatre. It’s not life or death we’re talking here. It’s entertainment
Drama King, your post is juvenile and revealing. For most consumers (the ones paying the money to see the blockbusters), the desire is to escape the mundane and many times painful realities of everyday life, not pay to wallow in them on the big screen. If you want sycophantic pandering to your “human” pain, tune into the Lifetime channel. While I don’t agree with the message of Avatar (humans bad, everything else good), the movie was glorious and exciting and new and very beautiful, as is Robin Hood. As for the costs, regardless of the leftist socialist bent of Hollywood, capitalism still rules, and the movies that are going to money must appeal to consumers, and more consumer appeal means more money. A $10m movie is NOT going to make $500m. Just like a baseball player that would work for $100k/yr will NOT be able to hit a 95 mph fastball, and very few consumers would pay to watch him play. There is, however, a market for anything in a free enterprise republic, which means you can watch what you want, as can I and others. Be careful in your desire to force others to consume what you see fit. Once you establish the precedent and mechanism, what happens when someone you don’t agree with becomes in charge? There’s a name for it: Tyranny.
Well said. I wish they had had the guts or originality to follow the spec you mentioned. Sounds like another overlong, overwrought ego-fest. Won’t be seeing it.
But I would like to see a short on how exactly the key players managed to ‘ef this up (for $225 million).
I just wish I could see it in my town this friday!
Hollywood simply should have stopped in 1938 with the Errol Flynn version. It just isn’t going to get any better than that, folks.
You got that right, sir….
Ditto
Charles – I just taped the Errol Flynn version (with his pal, Alan Hale) just the other day. It was on TCM. When I saw it when I was a kid I called it the ”Tarzan Hood” movie. I know better now.
”Such impudence, Your Highness! If I could only reach him!”
Sheriff of Nottingham while Errol Flynn is kicking the Norman’s butts.
Ya damn skippy! Errol Flynn was the shiz-nit!
And while we’re at it, Tyrone Power as Zorro is the ONLY Zorro! To this day, one of the best filmed swordfights EVER!!! “I needed that scratch to awaken me!”
Negative takes I’ve seen are fixated on the movie not being a retread of the classic story – which is precisely what they would have gutted the movie for being if it was.
I’ll still take it over most of the computer crap that is shoveled out these days in the name of genre – minus Marion in armor leading Peter Pan’s lost boys on a charge on miniature ponies.
People that watch The Tudors and things like that will like it fine. Tonally it’s closer to that than a typical rousing feature in this setting but that’s hardly a reason to tear it down.
It’s going to divide and confuse people no doubt but the early piling on is a bit mean spirited and calculating from where I stand.
Political correctness of the script?
Ugh….
That’s where I stopped reading.
If you don’t mind me asking Ginsu, what have you heard is the “political correctness” of the script? I’m curious, because NOWHERE in this blog post is that actually discussed in detail.
My guess is you found this article through the Drudge link.
Drudge? You mean the site that gets more unique visitors per day than CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, and MSNBC viewers combined (for their nightly newscasts)?
PC is clear: Marion as Warrior Woman. Muslims as “poor oppressed foreigners” (nevermind that all of Spain and Portugal were Muslim colonies with Christians oppressed, or significant parts of Southern France and Italy ruled by Muslims, or the bitter — and weird — three sided fight for Sicily between Muslims, Italians, and mercenary Vikings).
Robin Hood has “worked” through the centuries as an ordinary man, not a noble, who equalized the situation through a unique weapon only peasants could use (the longbow) and led a group of proto-superheroes. Its a pretty easy concept to wrap your head around. The rapacious, greedy nobles who tax the peasants out of life itself are the bad guys, and the outlaws against them (and a wicked King, John) the good guys.
There’s nothing self-flagellating (post-Christian, apologies to Islam and Muslims) or PC or “diverse” about it. Marion does not have to go out and laughably fight folks to be “strong” (note: Hollywood’s laughable conflation of physical with emotional strength with women is puerile and cliched). The moment I saw Blanchett snap shut her helmet and go charge the bad guys I was out.
This movie could easily have been made for under $100 million. I don’t see the production money on the trailers. At least AVATAR put it up there on the screen. Though without a plot for the latter.
…and who are you, Pete?
Oh, and how is it you know this links from Drudge?
Really
Pete – It’s in the article – above – end of the second paragraph.
Agree w/drama king. And, everybody hates Russel because he needs anger management classes.
Smarg – Don’t let Russell hear you say that. He’ll kick your butt.
Gag me with the perpetual hollywood spoon!
“But why with a spoon?”
“Because, you TWIT, it will HUUUUUURT more!”
The original idea was much more compelling. This will be more blah with blah doing the blah he always blah. I might see it for the comic value of Cate Blanchett swinging a sword at someone, but probably not.
lets just wait for the numbers
Since I’m a history buff, I’ll watch it. I used to like Russell Crowe, but I’m pretty tired of his silly attitude about things that he’s not an expert on, which is just about everything.
I think Brits love their Robin Hood, but I’m not averse to alternative views on him.
But I am betting that history will be totally botched with this film, as it is with every film Hollywood does concerning historical events & people.
History? Robin Hood? I do not get the correlation. Seriously, Robin Hood was already a myth of dubious truth when it first showed up in the middle ages. Any similarity between history and the character portrayed in anything today is fantasy…..a fairy tale that we would like to think shows us something about the potential nobility of the human spirit. Don’t get me wrong, I have always loved that notion, much as I have loved the Arthur legends. We so want them to be true!
I too used to love Russell Crowe, then after Gladiator, he became way too arrogant and pompous. I liked him when he was virtually and unknown. He does make some great movies, and he is a great actor, BUT Russell get some humility. It will make you a much better person AND your then you will become even a GREATER actor!
“Then again, the budget for the film was already high at $225 million (yet another reason Universal Pictures chairman Marc Shmuger was fired).” ….Great….let’s dump on Marc again. Any studio would have gone ahead with Crowe and Scott. Let’s not forget Marc made money too. He’s gone. Let it rest.
it is really amazing to me that donna langley who can not tell the truth at all, has little or no good taste, and is just as responsible for universal’s demise as schmuger, keeps getting a pass. i don’t know schmuger and i don’t feel bad for him, but he has to be scratching his head and saying to himself, “how come that miserable bitch gets no blame? she brought most of these miserable failures to me…” i can’t imagine how a studio president who built a large portion of a failing slate, get’s looked over when it comes to blame…?
Ever since the 60′s, Hollywood has been doing the anti-hero thing. They’re also stuck on the theme that plays out in “Avatar”: the naughty white people ruin the pristine environment of the innocent locals. Hollywood needs to realise that there ARE alternatives to these tired politically-correct formulae, as the previous commentator mentioned. Example: I just saw an incredible movie from the 90′s: “No Man’s Land”. I won’t try to summarize the plot here, but suffice to say it is a complex, unpredictable, funny, tragic and very human drama. If you’ve just seen “Robin Hood”, watch “No Man’s Land” to cleanse your palate. Actors that should be banned from making any more movies: Jennifer Anniston, Morgan Freeman, Nicolas Cage, Sandra Bullock, etc., etc.
What about the anti-hero you found in 1950′s films like Stalag 17? Judging by your idiotic post, I’d venture a guess you came here via Drudge.
You sir, sound like a pabulum puking liberal.
Drudge gets more hits per day than DHD sub-sites combined. Indeed, more than will EVER see Precious.
If you want to know what’s popular, check out Drudge.
Anti-heroes ARE cliched, and so particularly is the self-loathing of anti-Western civilization. Even the most anti-hero stuff in the 1950′s did not loathe Western civilization. Actual, real, card-carrying members of the Communist Party in the 1930′s and 1940′s did not think Western Civilization was evil nor did they ascribe to the unique evil of White people and the unique goodness of non-Whites. Grapes of Wrath did not end with Tom Joad denouncing White people and calling for the end of America, with some “noble savages” dancing around in nature or something.
American movies have been stuck on the same self-loathing, Malibu Marxist Millionaire idiocy for forty years.
Robin Hood is simple: poor WHITE British peasants fight back against the nobility. They are not multicultural. They are not “diverse.” They are not PC. Marion is not some Hong Kong Wire-fighting fantasy, waify ass-kicker weighing 90 pounds. Its a peasant story about peasants, for peasants.
Which is no wonder why Hollywood can’t do it right — they see themselves as the Sheriff not the hero. The nobility not the ordinary people who MUST be the bad guys somehow.
Lets put it this way. It takes all kinds of stupid to screw up Robin Hood. Like Superman, this ought to be a no-brainer. But never fear, Hollywood is fully equal to screwing up Robin Hood. By virtue of their social isolation.
Hear, hear Pete. What a bore we have to read troll posts here.
The embittered loner William Holden played in Stalag 17 was a pretty far cry from the anti-heroes that infest so many of today’s movies. You usually have to watch the summer Olympics to see somebody making that kind of leap.
And lighten up on the stereotyping. Some of us who read Deadline Hollywood on a regular basis–Drudge link or no Drudge link–have the same opinion of Hollywood’s devotion to politically-correct plots where some representation of capitalism or the American military is the villain.
I’m sure you’d like to go back to the good old days right? When minorities were “in their place” and Indians were the dirty, evil villains in all the westerns, right? You’re post screams of a generation who’s ideas are long dead. By the way, Morgan Freeman is an excellent actor.
how about you shut-up and go back to your shack in idaho, idiot… leave the blogging on this site for people who are actually in the business, with something meaningful to say.
$225 Million is not that much, as far as movies are concerned. International distribution generates boatloads of cash these days, and with DVD sales the studio will get it’s money back, easy.
DVD sales? DVD sales are in decline. No one is buying those drink coasters anymore. It’s one of the reasons the studios are hurting. Where have you been?
Last I read AVATAR sold around 20,000,000 DVDs. That’s around $350,000,000 gross dollars.
Drama King’s anti-capitalist rag has me convinced to take the wife to see Robin Hood!
I hope it does killer business. I know the film is taking a beating as a big fat star vehicle … but I would rather work in a Hollywood run by Talent than by corporations. They are, by far, the lesser of two evils – and their juice really does trickle down (but note that I said “Talent”, not “artists”).
Good riddance to human drama… Who wants to sit through boring regular people with regular problems movies? I don’t have to pay 40 bucks to see that. I can see it everyday for free.
Though I am tired of all the rehashes, can’t anyone come up with original ideas anymore? I’ll admit I do enjoy the big budget escapism of the comic book remakes, but it would be nice for more original works to be given the same funding as the remakes of old TV shows, movies that have been made 5 times before.
Does the world really need another Robin Hood movie? Kevin Costner’s was an embarassment.
If they had done something original, like showing why stealing from the rich (or anyone for that matter) is morally wrong, that’s a twist worth watching.
But we’re all socialists now, so it is politically incorrect to assert that the poor don’t have the right to shake down anyone they feel like plundering. ya, know, like Obama says, “spread the wealth”, even if through means of physical violence and coercion.
God! Another Drudge troll. Get back under the bridge.
Hey Johh, didn’t AVATAR tell the story of how it is wrong to steal from people, whether it is money, resources or land? Yet all you right wing, Obama-hating pinheads attacked that movie. Didn’t you? Go back to the Drudge Report with the rest of the brain dead right wingers.
I love a good movie, and this one looks beyond awful.
Why is it that every Hollywood POS film has to have someone deliver a 300-esque version of the “This is SPARTA” line?
… “Release the KRAKEN!!!”
… “I declare him an OUTLAW!!!”
… please excuse my YAWN!!!
I’m waiting for the inevitable ”They can take our lives, but they can’t take … Our Freedom!!!!!” scene. Jackson (and the other two script killers) did it in ‘Return of the King’ (Aragorn at the Black Gates – never happened in the book), and in ‘Troy’ (”We are LIONS!”). Spew City.
I can imagine it now – ”Prince John cannot see the Forest for the Trees!! Let us now take our Green revenge upon his Evil Corporate ways!”
I’ve no plans on seeing this. I will recommend Iron Man 2. Even better than 1. Audience cheered and clapped. So much fun. Don’t question the science. Just enjoy.
hay, it’s entertainment. they will make movies for $225M if we are willing to pay for them…and support the stars in them. So who cares…you may like or dislike one or the other actor in the movie, but at the end of the day, this controversy is what makes the others go and see the movie. Again…it is only entertainment, do not take it too seriously. 2 hrs of fun in the theatre…take it or leave it.
Well, as long as the car chase scenes are good and Robin has a neat gatlin gun I think it will be a GREAT movie. Although Russ will have to have a performance of a lifetime to beat out how good Kevin Costner was in his portrayal….I’m just sayin.
Have a nice day:)
225 million…it’s just crazy. Is that all in, or with not counting P&A?
Avatar the worst no-TITANIC WAS THE WORST
It was an incredibly boring movie. I am not going to guess what it will make the first weekend, but it is guaranteed a 70% drop for the second.
This movie is 125 minutes of taxation and philosophical talk that seems like it was inspired by Star Wars prequels. If you wished there were more scenes of Galactic Senate debates in those movies, you’ll love Robin Hood.
The remaining 15 minutes is ten minutes of CGI-heavy fight scenes shot in that jerky Bourne-style and 5 minutes of credits.
If your idea of Robin Hood features Robin Hood planting crops, you’ll love that sequence.
I really wish they would have made Nottingham. Russell Crowe starring as a sympathetic Sheriff of Nottingham and Sam Riley as a more villainous Robin Hood. Make it for around 100 million including p+a and release it around Oscar season. Turn the material on its head and give the audience something new. I think that would fare better than a 200 + million Robin Hood prequel. This is going to BOMB!
Nah, that would have sucked, too.