octagon88

I would go into more detail about the plot, but frankly, I was so freaking confused by this absurdly complex story that I had enough trouble following it, let alone explaining it. The characters were one-dimensional enough that it was still relatively easy to figure out which one was Robin Hood, but beyond that, deciphering what the heck was going on was about as easy as playing Boggle in Mandarin. I can handle confusing plots - I loved Syriana, which is the king of complexity - but confusing and boring is a deadly combination, and Robin Hood has that in spades. The first hour of the film is incredibly dull, mostly because Robin isn't an interesting protagonist and John is a painfully static bad guy. After that, the battle scenes around which the film is built turn the story into a swamp of double-crossings and "shocking" revelations.

The most depressing thing is this: the battle scenes are the worst part of the movie! I have never been a big fan of Ridley Scott. I think his films contain no style whatsoever and unlike his peers Martin Scorsese and Steven Spielberg, he is less of an artist than he is a butcher. But the work he does in Robin Hood may be his worst. The final battle scene is the only comprehensible one because Scott ignores everything going on except for one sword-fight. With as bloated a budget as this film is reported to have, you'd think that Ridley Scott would have put more of an effort into actually crafting a well-made film, but it seems like that wasn't a concern of his.

Either way, I would not recommend this movie. Even the acting seemed abit off. I don't know, it just didn't focus on the audience feeling anything which was very disappointing. 3/10

I loved the first Shrek. It was part of my childhood growing up. The second was when I was a teenager. The second one was just as good as the first one. Third one was a huge let down for me. As was this one.

Part of the reason why I liked this was because the whole cast return to do their character voices. So it's great that no one pulled out, fantastic! The problem with this movie is the humor falls flat as does the plot and characters. The first two we would understand and feel something for the characters. in this one you just don't care not one little bit. I wont explain the plot, but you will see what I mean. The whole plo9t just seemed pointless. It all ended up being predictable and you knew exactly what was going to happen. SOMETIMES things can be predictable and fun, in this one it's just predictable and stupid.

I really don't know what else to say. The script was badly written. Only thing I can recommend this for is if you are Shrek Die hard Fans who will love the characters no matter what! 4/10

Let me start off by saying i thought this movie was decent. But I expected a lot more.

We all know the story of Freddy Krueger. How he got burnt etc. In this one it's the same, but it's the change of Freddy's character that really lost my interest. Jackie Earle Haley is about as best as you can get at playing Freddy Krueger. No one will ever beat Robert Englund. He's just Freddy Krueger! I don't really need to explain the plot, you all know the plot, BUT, let me explain the changes. In the old Nightmare On Elm Street, Freddy Krueger would always mess with people before he killed them. In this one he just kills them and doesn't mess around. Nothing humorous to say, nothing, just kills them. In the original he was a psychopathic killer who hurts children. In this one he's just a pedophile. Loves to screw all the women and girls. To me, that put me off. All this put me off. So Freddy's character changed a lot, but did it work? Not for me. Didn't work for me.

All the acting was decent and there's some gory scenes, all in all, not the remake I was expecting and had hoped for. Everything about it is decent, but nothing great. 5/10