Robin Hood evaluation

[Ethan Grotheer]

Saw the movie lastnight and really enjoyed it! but,......
In the opening scene of the movie at the first shot Robin takes, i couldn't help but notice that as soon as the Archer's paradox had worked itself out, his fletched shaft kicked extremely weak in spine. aaaaand then, at the last shot, his shaft kicks a little too stiff. I mean, couldn't Hollywood have afforded to buy him a decent set of matched arrows for crying out loud!

His form was good. They shot split finger and anchored with his index. I'll give him that...

LOL felt like being honery
If you haven't seen the movie, It's pretty decent.

[stickbow2442]

Well not to argue and I am not a history buff. But maybe in that time period, matching arrows was not as common or easy as today.

[Chester Thompson]

I bet out of the total number of people in the theater you and MAYBE one other person noticed that. Hahahahahah.

[Jeff Strubberg]

The movie was very good, with the exception of one of the final scenes where the director puts all of the archers on horseback and charges them into hand to hand range...

As for the arrows not matching the bow, arrows were built to a standard (the clothyard shaft) and you got what you got.  You were shooting shafts made up by the thousand lot and trucked to battle in a wagon!

Very, very good movie.  Good plot, great casting and overall, great directing.

[Mudd]

What I saw was a very good prequel to hopefully a future "Robin Hood" movie.

I go so far as to give it a 9.9 out of 10. My only criticism would have to be that if the bows they were using were supposed to be multiple use bows(war and hunting) then they were way too noisy.
When drawn they had a creak to them unlike a horses harness under duress.

My 2 cents worth.

God bless,Mudd

[Uncle Buck]

does anyone know( not just think so) if separate bows and arrows for hunting and war bck then. I know the bows used in combat were very heavy.

[Northwest_Bowhunter]

Depending on where you think Robin Hood took place (most agree on the early 12th century), in England it was against the law for anyone besides the Kings Foresters to carry a bow in the forrest.  Yeomen, who were land owners but not Knights, could legally own and were required to shoot their war bows (at one time it required them to shoot 2 hours a day and as long as 8 hours on Saturday, Sunday they could rest).  This was in addition to their farming duties (had to pay their taxes after all).  This is not conclusive and I can't remember where I read it at this time but I will check.

[Jacko]

From a pure entertainment perspective, I loved it, enjoyed it more than Avatar which impressed me mightily. I liked the reworking of the story and the way that Ridley Scott parodied several movies in different scene's throughout the movie. Cant wait for the sequel

regards Jacko

[Jeff Strubberg]

War bows in this period were likely to be jsut about anything.  The crown commisioned bows made just for war, which were likely what we think of as war bows.  When levies were called up from the general populace, they might be carrying absolutely anything.  

I would bet a dollar to a donut that the average poacher was not carrying a 100+ pound war bow.  I seriously doubt they were carrying anything made of yew or of the length we talk about when we discuss war bows.  A 76"+ piece of wood very susceptible to changes in temperature and humidity is not something you would drag through the forest tangle and rely on to put meat in the pot.

As far as know vs. think so, there is no such thing.  We can't agree what a politician did or did not do a year ago.  Saying definitively what was happening on a battlefield 800 years ago is always going to be a best guess.

[Chris Shelton]

When I watched the robin hood special on the history channel the stats for this movie were incredible, I will not even try to recite them, but it was ALOT of bows and EVEN MORE ARROWS, I am talking like thousands and thousands that bowyer had to make for this movie!!

That is probably why the spine wasn't matched???  Just guessing, I haven't seen the movie yet, cant wait tho!

[NoCams]

I agree wholeheartedly Jeff about the fact of what happened a year ago vs 800 years ago ! Depends on who is telling the story and how they want to skew the facts depending on what camp they are in ! I often laugh when watching the history channel and they go out on a limb about what happened 2000 years ago..... Who is still alive that was there to tell the real truth or refute what someone is saying..... ? At the end of the day we really just do not know, do we ? Uncomforting but still true. JMHO

nocams

[SveinD]

Can someone plz tell me why Hollywood has this bs tendency to put the women right in the fight with trained soldiers and the soldiers get slaughtered..? I'd not mind in certain films/settings where it would be historically plausible, but medieval europe, come on.. To be honest, I was disappointed with the move. No pointless sex scenes is a bonus for once though.