"Robin hood" movie:. Review on Movie

Anglo-Saxon debate about the "author’s rights" for liberty and democracy

Guest from the present

There’s a rather small group of directors, capable of making historical movies. And it is Ridley Scott, – who created "Gladiator", "Kingdom, of Heaven" and "Robin Hood" – who leads this group. It is exactly the "Gladiator" that is considered to be the movie that brought the sympathies of the mass audience to the historical movie genre – the one that lost it since the times of "Ben-Hur" and "Cleopatra". Not the least of the factors is that in the 80s Ridley Scott with his "Blade-Runner" and "Alien" quadrilogy also headed the group of directors who were the best at shooting the films about the future. There’s no contradiction here. In order to understand humanity we have to look where we are going to at first, and then – where have we come from.

Such leaps from one epoch to another cannot go without a trace for an honest artist. Future is getting to be known with our mind, while the past – with our emotions. Ridley Scott managed to succeed at both fields. It happened due to a rather simple artistic trick he used to apply in all the cases. In fact, main hero of all of his films is the contemporary of ours – who, in an unknown way, fetched himself in the other period of time and discovers the events that take place around him. He shows the typical reactions of the white Anglo-Saxon

man from the 90s. His position is strictly democratic and anti-clerical. He doesn’t understand the matters of nobility and sanctity, having preferred to cast them away in disgust.

At the "Kingdom of Heaven" he spends a night at Golgotha Hill and in the morning he throws his cross away.

In "Robin Hood" he refuses to accept the accidentally obtained title and becomes Robin Longstride again, having – we need to add this – terribly crossed up those surrounding him. FinalMscenes of these movies are quite symptomatic. Having succeeded at their deeds and having, without doubt, influenced the history, heroes

vanish in the fog of an absolute resignation. Gladiator may have tried to become a Roman emperor. Baron of Ibelin, last protector of Jerusalem could have become a living legend of the Crusades era. Sir Robert Loxley, having rebuffed the French invasion of England, could have acquired the marshal’s baton. Instead of that

we see the escape from the history, constraining the field

of activity with the village smithery or the clearing in the

woods.

Magna Carta

Main theme of the "Robin Hood" movie is concentrated around the

event of no small importance for the English history – signing

of the Great Charter or Magna Carta by the King John. This

document limited the king’s power over his vassals. In order

to understand its significance we should know that the British

Empire, state with the ancient democratic traditions, has

no constitution

at all. That’s why recent words of a certain Russian liberal

functionary, stating that in England the elections take place according

to the constitution, were met with a sincere good-natured laughter.

Indeed, what does the man who invented the automobile might need the

instruction for? Leave these manuals to those who are willing to use

this car.

Americans, being very proud of their constitution, at the same time

sub-consciously feel the slightest nuance like this one. It may not

be perceivable by the common citizens, but for the "uncommon ones"

its significance is clear to its full extent. That’s why any attempts

to write a new contemporary constitution are blocked in the

USA – having confined the society with the amendments. There is its

own reasoning here. The time makes the text sacral and transfers it into

the completely different category. It turned out, though, that the

contemporary USA is deprived of this very time.

Group of documents, which – at a stretch – may

be referred to the principal laws of Great Britain, originates

from the very Magna Carta. It has nothing revolutionary in it,

though. From the legal point of view, the much-talked-about "Yaroslav’s

Justice" which was in use in Russia for a long time then, was

more "advanced" document of its period. English Magna Carta, however,

became the sacred myth and the "foundation stone of liberty", whatever

that word may mean. "Robin Hood" directed by Ridley Scott is the

first – may it be the probing one – attempt to work

with that myth. As we’ve mentioned – the time presses.

In Ridley Scott’s vision, Magna Carta is a document, the text,

first of all. It is not a half-verbal agreement, based

on traditions and representing the result of the years-long

negotiations and mutual give-and-takes by the nobility and king himself.

This is rather a text, written without any participation

of these persons – by a simple mason, father of Robin

Hood and a leader of the common folk. All the barons and the king

have to do is to sign this text and go home. History

turns into the theory of conspiracy.

It won’t be hard to recognize the unique style of late

Ridley Scott, as well as the reasons why did the master of the

films about future turn into the master of the films about the past. Lie

about future is much more probable to be revealed. Truth about

future says too much about the present. If Martin Luther has got

acquainted with Margot Käßmann, head of German Lutheran Church

in 2010, and heard her fierce debates concerning the rights

of homosexuals and the contraceptives as the Gift of God,

95 theses would have hardly been nailed to the church gates

in Wittenberg. So just the same, the man who thoroughly watched the

"Blade-runner" should have few illusions considering the direction the

American

democracy is moving in. Nowadays, however, Ridley Scott

is remaking the "Blade-runner". I guess, quite a number curios

inventions are waiting for us.

https://win.ru/en/movies/4487.phtml

By Vadim Bulatov