The Legend of Robin Hood

I also have found, if vague, memories of watching this on PBS in New York in the early 1980s. These versions of Robin Hood and King Arthur, among other legends, were free of the cheesiness and camp of sword-and-sorcery movies of that time and foreshadowed the low-magic, human-scale dramatic (but not melodramatic) approach of TV and movies such as the more recent "Cadfael" and "King Arthur."

I, for one, would love to see these available on DVD in the U.S., and I'd be happy to sign any petitions, but I don't know how many people are aware of this version of "Robin Hood." The reasonably well-done version of a few years later with Michael Praed and Jason Connery (plus more New Age trappings) is better known.

I remember watching this series on PBS in the late 1970s. Having always been a Robin Hood fan, I have collected as many of the various versions of the story of the ultimate hero as I have been able to find, and truly wish that this version was available on DVD. Maybe if enough fans of this version would write directly to PBS, they might make a DVD available.

Lead Martin Potter and the rest of the cast were well chosen and all did very well in their respective roles. The production values seemed at times very cheap, but the story and the acting kept me from being distracted.

Most of all I remember the series host American actor Bill Bixby who recounted at the end of the story that a small gravestone was found in England that said (to the best of my recollection):

"Here, beneath this little stone Lies Robert, Earl of Huntington. No archer was as he so good, and people called him Robin Hood." (or something very like this). If this is just my imagination, I hope someone else writes a review correcting my assumption, but this is how I remember it!

I haven't heard of any other report to corroborate this but, if true, it certainly points to the existence of an actual hero, not just the exaggerated legend of today that talks about a compilation of various heroes whose deeds make up the Robin Hood legend.

In any event, I highly recommend this to anyone who can find the series nowadays in some watchable media format. It's well worth watching!

It is a crime that this series is not available on DVD or VHS. It is simply the best treatment of the Robin Hood legend that has yet been put on film. The acting was superior, costuming very good, and it both sought and succeeded in telling a very credible tale of Robin of Locksley. This is the only Robin Hood film adaptation that I can recommend besides "Robin and Marion", and I think this a better dramatic work.

This seventies BBC version with Martin Potter and Diane Keen remains one of my favourite adaptations of the Robin Hood legend, but its not without its failings.

Despite the evident attention to historical detail in the matter of costumes and props, there are some jarring anachronisms in the script, such as a Saxon thegn called Kenneth (Gaelic), a Norman henchman called Alaric (Visigothic) and a merry man called Brett (Tuolumne County).

The production is very much of its time. There is a very Seventies cynical edge and lots of speechifying; the script is not frightened of serving up dollops of history and at times borders on the lumberingly expositional. But while the production suffers as a result of the disastrous decision made by the BBC to video all interiors on cardboard sets at Television Centre, the location photography is rather charming - seldom has the greenwood looked greener.

British B movie beefcake Potter is a handsome if far from merry Robin, Keen of course is luminous as Marion, while David "Ford Prefect" Dixon and Paul "Ker Avon" Darrow, as respectively Prince John and the Sheriff, exercise more restraint than one might have thought them capable. Some of the supporting players are pure repertory ham (an old crone is straight out of Blackadder), but William Marlowe and Miles Anderson add Shakespearean heft in their roles as Guy of Gisborne and Will Scarlet.

Tony Caunter had yet to acquire the girth one associates with Friar Tuck, but Conrad Asquith is a booming Little John; Much is played by Johnny Speight's boy Richard and Stephen Whittaker completes the meiny as the hitherto unrecorded outlaw Ralph Gammon. David Ryall enjoys himself as a corrupt abbot.

The action sequences are lame by today's slick, and often graphic, standards, but the climactic broadsword duel between Potter and Marlowe has an earthy vigour. Seldom have you seen two actors looking quite so completely knackered.

Ah...to view things through the eyes of a child again. With that said, I saw this adaption of the Robin Hood legend almost 30 years ago in school. My 5th grade teacher showed the class several of the "Once Upon a Classic" series like this one. I also remember Lorna Doone and A Secret Garden. Just snippets of scenes still played in my mind, but I had completely forgotten about this version. Anyway, I very much enjoyed this time in class and not just as a break from the dreaded multiplication tables. I came across it by accident online. It didn't strike a note of familiarity until the first scene with Prince John and then it started to come back quickly. The actor who plays John is somewhat unusual looking.

One will immediately be struck with the low production value which is prevalent in the 70s with British TV. However, this is quickly forgotten due to a fine story and very good acting - something the Brits seem to always accomplish. What's interesting about Robin Hood, who is arguably one of the most popular fictional characters in Western literature is that there's really not much Hood literature. If I'm correct, he first appeared as a side character in "Ivanhoe" and really never had is own book - at least until modern times. Much of his story is just legend and folklore with snippets and different versions. This adaptation remains very true to the classical version of what we know as Robin Hood and not some of the glorified films we've seen of late. Therefore, don't expect everything to be all merry.

In fact, what surprised me most in watching it so many years later was that it was actually rather dark. Although tame by today's standards, there are actually a couple of rather gritty scenes.

LORH is not perfect by any means. It actually starts rather shaky. The early combat scenes were actually laughable.However, it grows stronger with each episode even the combat. It almost seemed to me that the later episodes may had different directors. Definitely stick through the first episode or two and you will be rewarded. The drama and action is really revved up in the second half. Several things sorely missing early on like music or used more later on and the last couple of episodes will keep you glued.

Production value may be a flaw but it is what it is and in a way adds a certain charm. I really think the one major flaw is in the editing. There are several scenes that appear truncated or that do not flow well into the next. The ending is certainly an example. I would even go so far to say that there are some "huh" moments. Surely there was some footage left out in places. There are a couple of actors that are a bit questionable like King Richard, who actually has a larger role than normal. However, the overall cast is very strong and main actor at least looks the part.

Most of the cast is not well known, at least in the US, with some having their peak careers, if that, behind them. Surprisingly, the promising young Martin Potter (Robin Hood) virtually disappeared after this - even his career was primarily behind him at this point. I think the actor who played Will Scarlet had a fairly strong career and looks familiar.

I'm sure many of you who come here have experienced this series years ago. If you haven't seen this though it definitely worth it. I'd love to get my hands on all the "Once Upon A Classic" series. Maybe one day...