PDA

View Full Version : How bad will Robin Hood bomb?



Made It Ma!
05-14-2010, 08:27 PM
I don't know anyone who wants to see this movie, every review I've read has hated it, and it doesn't look like its any fun at all.

Anyone here gonna see this one?

Mattman
05-14-2010, 08:28 PM
It's going to bomb as bad as your spelling of the word 'will'.

Ryan Elliott
05-14-2010, 08:39 PM
I think it looks awesome.

And really? Every review?

Here's a quick one from GeekTyrant
http://twitter.com/GeekTyrant/status/14016766939

Matt Jay
05-14-2010, 08:45 PM
It looks beyond boring to me, but my wife and a friend want to watch it, so I'm scared that I could actually get roped into sitting through this mess. Seriously, I've never seen such boring trailers in my life.

stevapalooza
05-14-2010, 09:04 PM
It doesn't look very Robin Hoody to me. Just looks like a million other generic medieval action movies. I'll wait for the DVD.

Foolish Mortal
05-14-2010, 09:10 PM
There's really nothing about this that makes me think this version of the fable will be anymore unique than the previous versions have been.

I don't see it as being better than the Patrick Bergin and Uma Thurman one, or the Robin of Sherwood tv series. (Both of which I think are the best, most unique tellings)

Mattman
05-14-2010, 09:17 PM
I think it looks awesome.

And really? Every review?

Here's a quick one from GeekTyrant
http://twitter.com/GeekTyrant/status/14016766939
Every review I've read. Fuck, even Harry at AICN hated it.

BENDIS!
05-14-2010, 09:23 PM
it was completely reworked. it was originally a movie called nottingham.

Kirblar
05-14-2010, 09:29 PM
it was completely reworked. it was originally a movie called nottingham.
Is this why there's been virtually no advertising until 2-3 weeks ago?

The previews look pretty awful.

Rod Nunley
05-14-2010, 09:30 PM
it was completely reworked. it was originally a movie called nottingham.

Where the Sheriff was an anti hero and Robin was the villain. Supposed to have been a very good script that got completely reworked to become what is looking to be a pretty bad movie.

I will never understand making a movie called Robin Hood that tells the story before any of the classic Robin Hood legend stuff happens.

Prequels ... ugh.

Foolish Mortal
05-14-2010, 09:32 PM
Is this why there's been virtually no advertising until 2-3 weeks ago?

The previews look pretty awful.
They changed the focus of the movie early in the production.

Originally the movie's main protagonist was the Sheriff of Nottingham, and the story was to be told from his perspective.

Now THAT would have been different.

Andrew
05-14-2010, 10:05 PM
No, this film won't do well. The trailers offer viewers absolutely no reason to watch this.

Joe Kalicki
05-14-2010, 10:35 PM
I love Robin Hood, it's my favorite story of all time, so I, at least, am excited to see this.

Nick Spencer
05-14-2010, 10:45 PM
I mostly enjoyed it, but it seemed like they couldn't decide between making an Oscar Contender-Gladiator type of film or a Sherlock Holmes-ish crowd-pleaser. Crowe puts in a very strong performance, but there are a few really groan-worthy Hollywood cliches thrown in that put me off. The movie takes a serious wrong turn about 2/3rds of the way in and never quite recovers. The end feels very tacked on.

Still, not nearly as bad as a lot of the reviews. The first act is actually pretty incredible. I think we're at a point where people just sort of expect something from Robin Hood movies, and this goes in a pretty different (but not bad imo) direction. Sad thing is, the whole thing is definitely setup for a sequel that will probably never come now, and that film could've been great.

Mattman
05-14-2010, 10:51 PM
it was completely reworked. it was originally a movie called nottingham.
See now this is a movie I would have seen. I remember hearing about it and thinking "Wow, that sounds really cool." This, with the fact that Russell Crowe is 47 (the same age Connery was when he played Robin Hood in his twilight years) and it's further evidence that I have no idea what the suits running Hollywood are thinking.

c. page
05-14-2010, 10:53 PM
They changed the focus of the movie early in the production.

Originally the movie's main protagonist was the Sheriff of Nottingham, and the story was to be told from his perspective.

Now THAT would have been different.

i would've gone to see that. this looks like a generic medieval epic, and i'll probably wait for either netflix or the dollar theater.

leafinsectman
05-14-2010, 11:00 PM
Originally the movie's main protagonist was the Sheriff of Nottingham, and the story was to be told from his perspective.

This would've been awesome, like the Lex Luthor Man of Steel mini.

Joe Kalicki
05-14-2010, 11:01 PM
I don't know. I have no interest in seeing a movie that depicts Robin Hood as a villain.

RegularJoe
05-14-2010, 11:04 PM
it was completely reworked. it was originally a movie called nottingham.

this is good to hear - i thought i was nuts remembering reading about 'nottingham'. that sounded like an interesting movie.

The Hodag
05-14-2010, 11:40 PM
There's really nothing about this that makes me think this version of the fable will be anymore unique than the previous versions have been.

I don't see it as being better than the Patrick Bergin and Uma Thurman one, or the Robin of Sherwood tv series. (Both of which I think are the best, most unique tellings)

Never seen Robin of Sherwood, but I remember liking the Patrick Bergin movie (made for TV, right?) back in the day. It's in my Netflix on-demand queue right now - haven't seen it in a long time.

I'm still having fun watching the occasional BBC Robin Hood episode on-demand, too.

Joe Kalicki
05-14-2010, 11:42 PM
I dressed up on Halloween as the Patrick Bergin Robin Hood one year.

The Hodag
05-14-2010, 11:46 PM
Kind of interesting: I recall Costner's Robin Hood as being a turning point for me as far as big budget movies went. Before, I'd been a pretty symathetic viewer, trying to convince myself that even the bad movies had some merit, but for whatever reason Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves broke that pattern. After I saw it with my brother, we went home and eviscerated it. It was liberating!

So on some level I owe it thanks. Thanks for being so lame I learned it was okay to hate a movie. :lol:

I'm actually seeing it again later this month at a live MST3K knock-off in Austin, Master Pancake Theater. Only been to one of their shows before, but they were really good. I think I finally found the perfect venue to appreciate Prince of Thieves.

oconnellmd
05-14-2010, 11:47 PM
I don't know. I have no interest in seeing a movie that depicts Robin Hood as a villain.

I think the studio realized a lot of people would feel that way, which led to the panic which then led to a film that's not getting such great reviews. Wish they'd just planned and made a good Robin Hood film from the start.

I always get pissed when they screw up a Robin Hood or Three Musketeers movie, because that generally means I'm not going to see another stab at either franchise for like a decade.

Joe Kalicki
05-14-2010, 11:48 PM
I think the studio realized a lot of people would feel that way, which led to the panic which then led to a film that's not getting such great reviews. Wish they'd just planned and made a good Robin Hood film from the start.

I always get pissed when they screw up a Robin Hood or Three Musketeers movie, because that generally means I'm not going to see another stab at either franchise for like a decade.

I loved Prince of Thieves and the Charlie Sheen Three Musketeers movie (which was kind of a spiritual sequal to PoT).

The Hodag
05-14-2010, 11:49 PM
I always get pissed when they screw up a Robin Hood or Three Musketeers movie, because that generally means I'm not going to see another stab at either franchise for like a decade.

I hear ya.

Actually, I don't know that I've ever seen a Musketeers movie I liked wholeheartedly. Parts, yeah, but never the whole thing. I think some have slipped past my radar, though - any you'd recommend?

dasNdanger
05-15-2010, 02:43 AM
I wanna see it - but first I have to see Iron Man 2. I'm a bit behind in my movie viewing. :p


das

Ben
05-15-2010, 03:19 AM
Kind of interesting: I recall Costner's Robin Hood as being a turning point for me as far as big budget movies went. Before, I'd been a pretty symathetic viewer, trying to convince myself that even the bad movies had some merit, but for whatever reason Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves broke that pattern. After I saw it with my brother, we went home and eviscerated it. It was liberating!

So on some level I owe it thanks. Thanks for being so lame I learned it was okay to hate a movie. :lol:

I'm actually seeing it again later this month at a live MST3K knock-off in Austin, Master Pancake Theater. Only been to one of their shows before, but they were really good. I think I finally found the perfect venue to appreciate Prince of Thieves.Interesting! For me it was Independence Day, second viewing. This would make a good thread topic.

Frozen Sooner
05-15-2010, 03:47 AM
This movie was a fucking mess. They didn't have any idea what movie they wanted to make, so they jammed like five different stupid ideas together. Story lines just went nowhere, characters had changes of heart that weren't explained, there was a heavy-handed political text (I can't call it a subtext because is was so blatant) that ran counter to the Robin Hood mythos...

Fuck me running, but that was a HORRIBLE movie.

Gangy
05-15-2010, 04:41 AM
Interesting! For me it was Independence Day, second viewing. This would make a good thread topic.

Ha! Me too. I was pretty young, and loved the movie the first time. I took a couple of friends to see it a few weeks later and thought it was complete shit. I've never been able to watch more than 5 minutes of it since.

J. Wilson
05-15-2010, 04:44 AM
I don't think it will bomb. I don't think it will be a runaway blockbuster either.

I have seen reviews that range from mediocre to decent. Nothing that said "Don't ever see this craptastic waste of celluloid."

Oh and yeah I want to see it. I'm going to see it this weekend and taking my brother as his birthday gift.

Kirblar
05-15-2010, 04:44 AM
Nothing that said "Don't ever see this craptastic waste of celluloid."
We clearly had different interpretations of the trailer. :lol:

Made It Ma!
05-15-2010, 05:18 AM
Well it made ~14 million last night so not a complete bomb. I guess the name, and Gladiator, sold it

Boris the Blade
05-15-2010, 05:30 AM
Where the Sheriff was an anti hero and Robin was the villain. Supposed to have been a very good script that got completely reworked to become what is looking to be a pretty bad movie.

I will never understand making a movie called Robin Hood that tells the story before any of the classic Robin Hood legend stuff happens.

Prequels ... ugh.
Now THAT sounds interesting.

Made It Ma!
05-15-2010, 05:36 AM
Yes, Nottingham would have been far more appealing. Heck, having Crowe as the Nottingham and some young "stud" like Worthington, Andruw Garfield, or, gulp, Robert Pattinson as Robin Hood would have been really fun

PatrickA
05-15-2010, 05:36 AM
I like the idea of a Robin Hood movie set before he becomes Robin Hood and love almost everything Ridley Scott does but...I'm not rushing out to see this.

I read an interesting article somewhere in which Scott said his original plan was to make a sequel to Kingdom of Heaven where the main character from that film goes back home and actually becomes Robin Hood. Which would have been interesting.

Made It Ma!
05-15-2010, 05:38 AM
I like the idea of a Robin Hood movie set before he becomes Robin Hood and love almost everything Ridley Scott does but...I'm not rushing out to see this.

I read an interesting article somewhere in which Scott said his original plan was to make a sequel to Kingdom of Heaven where the main character from that film goes back home and actually becomes Robin Hood. Which would have been interesting.

Except Bloom's character was French...

Jason California
05-15-2010, 06:22 AM
Interesting! For me it was Independence Day, second viewing. This would make a good thread topic.

For me it was show girls. I walked out of that movie and to this day I don't know how it ends

Marc Lombardi
05-15-2010, 06:30 AM
It looks fun so I'll probably see it this week sometime.

J Money
05-15-2010, 07:07 AM
outlaaaaaaw

The Funketeer
05-15-2010, 08:29 AM
It's got guys shooting arrows at each other. Who wouldn't want to see it?

EasyE726
05-15-2010, 08:34 AM
I thought it looked like a sequel to Gladiator from the previews.

Andreas
05-15-2010, 08:49 AM
Ridley Scott is a good craftsman and the story of Robin Hood does not age. Will it be as funny as the Chuck Jones version? No. And Cate Blanchett is no Gabriella Hall. But it's the kind of movie that doesn't bomb.

Andreas

Nick Spencer
05-15-2010, 09:25 AM
Yeah, certainly not gonna bomb, and actually making some good money internationally, which I think was the plan from the get-go.

A.Huerta
05-15-2010, 09:40 AM
So theres only Robin Hood?

Theres no other stories to tell from different cultures?

Andreas
05-15-2010, 10:04 AM
So theres only Robin Hood?

Theres no other stories to tell from different cultures?

Someone should film the story of Ishikawa Goemon. :)

Andreas

Andrew
05-15-2010, 10:12 AM
outlaaaaaaw

:lol:

By far the worst part of the trailer.

artimoff
05-15-2010, 10:41 AM
Almost as big as Avengers Academy.

Mark Mavro (kryptic6)
05-15-2010, 01:49 PM
Dying to see this. It's got Russell Crowe, Cate Blanchett and Mark Strong. A medieval epic by Ridley Scott... why wouldn't I enjoy this?

I'm just not going to expect anything special from Scott, but that doesn't mean I can't enjoy this film.

Supreme Convoy
05-15-2010, 02:14 PM
it was completely reworked. it was originally a movie called nottingham.

That's the movie I want to see.

Jason Baur
05-15-2010, 03:43 PM
...there was a heavy-handed political text (I can't call it a subtext because is was so blatant) that ran counter to the Robin Hood mythos...

I assume you're talking about the "Robin Hood, champion of modern democratic values" nonsense that's all over the trailers. Ridley Scott seems real fond of this (Gladiator is particularly bad about this). But yeah, it's stupid and condescending.

Taxman
05-15-2010, 04:04 PM
Poll open (http://www.606studios.com/bendisboard/showthread.php?t=192162) for this film.

LeggoMyEggolas
05-15-2010, 05:57 PM
It was okay. It did have some odd editing choices that gave me the impression that this got "Kingdom of Heaven"ed in that it felt like the more complete movie will get issued on DVD later.

Though the original Nottingham concept would have been awesome.

silverboy
05-15-2010, 06:11 PM
The real question is which will bomb bigger: this or prince of persia?

Joe Kalicki
05-15-2010, 06:17 PM
I don't even understand the point of this thread. There are more than one Robin Hood threads already that this could be asked in (if it must be asked at all), what's the point of a thread that's basically saying "the trailer for this movie looks bad?"

Jonathan Callan
05-15-2010, 06:23 PM
Sad thing is, the whole thing is definitely setup for a sequel that will probably never come now, and that film could've been great.

Then they should have made THAT movie.

HoldFastNow
05-15-2010, 06:31 PM
They were giving away free tickets to this at the comic shop I go to the past few weeks but the trailers just looked so bland that I didn't bother taking one. One of my friends went and saw it and loved it but we have pretty much the exact opposite taste in movies so I probably won't be seeing it.

Vigilance
05-15-2010, 07:10 PM
This thing has a higher metacritic average than IM2 right now. How crappy is that? Of course, that's only 6 reviews in.

Joe Kalicki
05-15-2010, 07:14 PM
This thing has a higher metacritic average than IM2 right now. How crappy is that? Of course, that's only 6 reviews in.

Considering what I thought of Iron Man 2, that makes perfect sense.

Nick Spencer
05-15-2010, 08:04 PM
Then they should have made THAT movie.

Well, that's not to say what they did here wasn't interesting. There were some great moments and good ideas here, as well as some stumbles. The thing is, with this kind of setup, the actual Robin in Sherwood stuff would be way more epic than we've seen before. That's why it's a shame-- this actually does a great job getting us there. But I have no idea what it would take for a sequel to happen here, I know the budget on this one got way out of control, so it's hard to say what the studio's feelings on that would be.

Joe Kalicki
05-15-2010, 08:06 PM
Robin before he became Robin Hood is one of the least-explores eras of the Robin Hood story (along with his death), so a movie that shows that part of his life is due.

Andreas
05-15-2010, 08:14 PM
Robin before he became Robin Hood is one of the least-explores eras of the Robin Hood story (along with his death), so a movie that shows that part of his life is due.

It's a bit like exploring the part of Jesus' life before he became Jesus (or God's life before he became God). :)

Joe Kalicki
05-15-2010, 08:17 PM
It's a bit like exploring the part of Jesus' life before he became Jesus (or God's life before he became God). :)

Wellll. . . Anne Rice was going to do a series of books about Jesus' life between birth and Bible. . .

Foolish Mortal
05-15-2010, 08:18 PM
Robin before he became Robin Hood is one of the least-explores eras of the Robin Hood story (along with his death), so a movie that shows that part of his life is due.
The Patrick Bergin Robin Hood movie covered that, as did the Robin of Sherwood TV series. This isn't new ground they're breaking.

MayorMitch100
05-15-2010, 08:18 PM
Wellll. . . Anne Rice was going to do a series of books about Jesus' life between birth and Bible. . .

How would she do that? Doesn't seem like anything crucial would have happened. He just would have been making a ton of furniture.

MayorMitch100
05-15-2010, 08:19 PM
The Patrick Bergin Robin Hood movie covered that, as did the Robin of Sherwood TV series. This isn't new ground they're breaking.

But it has Russel Crowe!!

Andreas
05-15-2010, 08:21 PM
Wellll. . . Anne Rice was going to do a series of books about Jesus' life between birth and Bible. . .

I'm just reading the first couple of pages. It starts with Jesus killing another guy. :scared:

Foolish Mortal
05-15-2010, 08:21 PM
How would she do that? Doesn't seem like anything crucial would have happened. He just would have been making a ton of furniture.
It's not like Jesus is a real historical figure with established canon. She or anyone else could make up shit that happened.

MayorMitch100
05-15-2010, 08:22 PM
I'm just reading the first couple of pages. It starts with Jesus killing another guy. :scared:

Ah shit. that ruins everything.

MayorMitch100
05-15-2010, 08:22 PM
It's not like Jesus is a real historical figure with established canon. She or anyone else could make up shit that happened.

Is this you saying you don't believe in Jesus?

Nick Spencer
05-15-2010, 08:23 PM
How would she do that? Doesn't seem like anything crucial would have happened. He just would have been making a ton of furniture.

That period of Christ's life is extremely fascinating to many scholars, and of great dispute. One important thing to remember is that he and his family lived in Egypt on the Silk Road, essentially the most cosmopolitan part of the entire civilized world at the time. There's a lot of speculation about exactly how much that influenced his philosophy and teachings. Definitely not just making a ton of furniture. In fact, there's a lot of dispute over whether he ever practiced carpentry at all. Far more likely he was a Rabbi.

Joe Kalicki
05-15-2010, 08:29 PM
The Patrick Bergin Robin Hood movie covered that, as did the Robin of Sherwood TV series. This isn't new ground they're breaking.

I said least-covered, not "never-shown!"

Garth
05-15-2010, 08:33 PM
So this is a prequel, right? Robin Hood Begins?

Kirblar
05-15-2010, 08:34 PM
So this is a prequel, right? Robin Hood Begins?
In the sequel, the "Jester" breaks the fourth wall by causing the movie from ever being filmed.

MayorMitch100
05-15-2010, 08:35 PM
That period of Christ's life is extremely fascinating to many scholars, and of great dispute. One important thing to remember is that he and his family lived in Egypt on the Silk Road, essentially the most cosmopolitan part of the entire civilized world at the time. There's a lot of speculation about exactly how much that influenced his philosophy and teachings. Definitely not just making a ton of furniture. In fact, there's a lot of dispute over whether he ever practiced carpentry at all. Far more likely he was a Rabbi.

He was a carpenter by craft. He spoke in the synagogues on occasion but his profession wasn't a Rabbi.

Foolish Mortal
05-15-2010, 08:38 PM
Is this you saying you don't believe in Jesus?
If you're asking if I'm a Christian, no I'm not.

If you're asking if there was a Jesus, there are historical scholars who believe there may actually have been a real person called Jesus who lived between 4 BC and 30 AD.

MayorMitch100
05-15-2010, 08:39 PM
If you're asking if I'm a Christian, no I'm not.

If you're asking if there was a Jesus, there are historical scholars who believe there may actually have been a real person called Jesus who lived between 4 BC and 30 AD.

Oh ok. I was asking if you were a christian. And yeah it was pretty obvious that there would be Jesus during that time period. It was a pretty common name then.

MayorMitch100
05-15-2010, 08:40 PM
So this is a prequel, right? Robin Hood Begins?

The real question is where Robin Hood: Men in Tights fits in with this continuity.

Nick Spencer
05-15-2010, 08:41 PM
He was a carpenter by craft. He spoke in the synagogues on occasion but his profession wasn't a Rabbi.

There is no evidence he was a carpenter. The earliest texts of Matthew 13:55 have him referred to as the 'son of a carpenter', which means people were distinguishing between he and his father, which is in and of itself out of custom.

Beyond that, carpenters don't get to just to speak in synagogues. It's not an open mic. Also, people randomly approach him constantly asking to be healed, forgiven, etc., no matter where in the territory he is. People don't do that to carpenters. They do it to Rabbis. That's why there's considerable support for the idea that he was. Virtually everything in the gospels makes 1000x more sense if so.

MayorMitch100
05-15-2010, 08:45 PM
There is no evidence he was a carpenter. The earliest texts have him referred to as the 'son of a carpenter', which means people were distinguishing between he and his father, which is in and of itself out of custom.

Beyond that, carpenters don't get to just to speak in synagogues. It's not an open mic. Also, people randomly approach him constantly asking to be healed, forgiven, etc., no matter where in the territory he is. People don't do that to carpenters. They do it to Rabbis. That's why there's considerable support for the idea that he was. Virtually everything in the gospels makes 1000x more sense if so.

By speaking in the synagogues he was reading the scripture not full on giving the sermons. People were asking for forgiveness and healings after his baptism.

BriRedfern
05-15-2010, 08:50 PM
I don't know where Jesus fits in, but I just saw the movie and thought it was quite good. A few third act problems, but definitely an enjoyable way to spend a few hours. Nothing struck me as really sucking. King John was a douche, but that was really the point. It was good.

Nick Spencer
05-15-2010, 08:53 PM
By speaking in the synagogues he was reading the scripture not full on giving the sermons. People were asking for forgiveness and healings after his baptism.

You think word of the dude's baptism traveled throughout Palestine? They didn't have the internet back then. :)

Also, you have the problem of the same Pharisees and Sadducees plotting his downfall continually referring to him as Rabbi. No way would they do that unless he was considered qualified.

Again, show me the biblical evidence in the gospels that Christ practiced carpentry. The only text in dispute is Matthew 13:55, and the earliest texts call him 'son of a carpenter' there. Other than that, there's literally nothing. Check for yourself. This is one of those myths that gets added between the lines (to confess, big pet peeve of mine).

Christ likely could never have started his ministry had he been a carpenter. That's not modern American society there, there isn't that kind of upward mobility. All the evidence seems to point to him being a Rabbi, other than the tradition that sons did their father's work. But Mary and Joseph believed him to be divinely conceived, so far more likely they prepared him for a different occupation more in line with that. Nobody goes to the trouble of delivering and then hiding the messiah, at great personal risk, to continue the family carpentry business, it's nonsensical.

Nick Spencer
05-15-2010, 08:56 PM
By speaking in the synagogues he was reading the scripture not full on giving the sermons. People were asking for forgiveness and healings after his baptism.

You think they just let carpenters get up and read scripture? This is pre-printing press, you know. Reading scripture in synagogue-- no, go back, having ACCESS to scripture-- is a HUGE deal (and then he DOES comment on it, in the example you're citing), not something anyone can get up and do.

Nick Spencer
05-15-2010, 09:01 PM
I don't know where Jesus fits in, but I just saw the movie and thought it was quite good. A few third act problems, but definitely an enjoyable way to spend a few hours. Nothing struck me as really sucking. King John was a douche, but that was really the point. It was good.

Yeah, feels like a totally different film in the third act. If not for that, I would give it a pretty high rating. You could really feel the Hollywood-isms take over towards the end.

BriRedfern
05-15-2010, 09:12 PM
Yeah, feels like a totally different film in the third act. If not for that, I would give it a pretty high rating. You could really feel the Hollywood-isms take over towards the end.

It really seemed like the whole french invasion was added on after the fact. The wild orphans were a cool concept, but were totally misused in the last 20 minutes of the film. Like I said, I enjoyed it, but there were some odd choices there.

Nick Spencer
05-15-2010, 09:15 PM
It really seemed like the whole french invasion was added on after the fact. The wild orphans were a cool concept, but were totally misused in the last 20 minutes of the film. Like I said, I enjoyed it, but there were some odd choices there.

The one that really bugged me was

revealing Robin was the son of some great political speaker who the old man just HAPPENED to know

Why?!! Totally dumb and unnecessary, also invalidated a lot of what made the first 20 minutes so great. That and

Marion fighting

which is just standard Hollywood stupidity.

BriRedfern
05-15-2010, 09:20 PM
The one that really bugged me was

revealing Robin was the son of some great political speaker who the old man just HAPPENED to know

Why?!! Totally dumb and unnecessary, also invalidated a lot of what made the first 20 minutes so great. That and

Marion fighting

which is just standard Hollywood stupidity.

I was upset by how quickly Godfrey got to the final scene. What happened? Where was he when shit wrapped up in Nottingham? It was rushed and really felt like something was missing. Your second point above was also incredibly forced.

PatrickA
05-16-2010, 07:36 AM
Except Bloom's character was French...

Oh no! How would Ridley Scott, the guy who made both movies, have possibly dealt with that?

I imagine they would have come up with a work around. :)


How would she do that? Doesn't seem like anything crucial would have happened. He just would have been making a ton of furniture.

Read Lamb by Christopher Moore. It is hilarious and deals with the adventures of Jesus during his teens and twenties. Among other things, he travels to Asia and learns kung-fu.



There is no evidence he was a carpenter. The earliest texts of Matthew 13:55 have him referred to as the 'son of a carpenter', which means people were distinguishing between he and his father, which is in and of itself out of custom.

It's possible the the carpenter thing is a mistranslation too. Some scholar (whose name escapes me) has been suggesting the the original may have had Joseph being a stonemason, which would make the "upon this rock I'll build my church" thing a more natural metaphor.

Jonathan Callan
05-18-2010, 04:11 PM
There is no evidence he was a carpenter. The earliest texts of Matthew 13:55 have him referred to as the 'son of a carpenter', which means people were distinguishing between he and his father, which is in and of itself out of custom.

Beyond that, carpenters don't get to just to speak in synagogues. It's not an open mic. Also, people randomly approach him constantly asking to be healed, forgiven, etc., no matter where in the territory he is. People don't do that to carpenters. They do it to Rabbis. That's why there's considerable support for the idea that he was. Virtually everything in the gospels makes 1000x more sense if so.

I feel like everything you're saying, should be prefaced with. "In the ARG described by biblical canon..."

All of the "historical" texts describing Jesus' life were written one hundred years after his death. None of them pass mustard by academic standards were he not considered a divine figure.

But I assume you're not arguing that. Just that there's an interesting, unexplored place in biblical canon?