Robin Hood (1922) User Reviews (33)

Impressive looking early Douglas Fairbanks Robin Hood adventure.

[Boba_Fett1138 · 8/10 · 6 August 2008]

Believe it or not but this isn't actually even the first Robin Hood movie ever made. Robin Hood movies already got made back in the 1910's both those movies are of course now days hard to come buy. This Robin Hood movie version was also presumed to be lost, until a print reappeared again somewhere in the '60's. It's the first Robin Hood adaptation though which featured many of the elements of the legend that would be featured in most later movie versions. So in many ways this was an unique and renewing movie for its time.

Still it's a slightly different movie version than you would expect for instance now days (we'll still have to wait how the Ridley Scott/Russell Crowe version will turn out to be though, if it ever gets off the ground). The difference is mostly notable in the movie its first halve, which focuses mostly on the crusades Earl of Huntingdon/Robin Hood with King Richard the Lion-Hearted ventures on. Basically the movie its first halve is one big introduction till the movie hits the point at which the Earl of Huntingdon finally becomes the courageous and honorable thief with the good intentions Robin Hood. This is also when the fun mostly kicks in.

The movie features some grand sets and mass sequences. It's a very detailed made movie, that looks perfect and spectacular in basically every shot, with its costumes, set dressing and large castles. The castle as featured in this movie is actually the largest ever built set in a silent Hollywood production. It also was the most expensive movie ever made at its time with its $1.4 million budget. The movie was also the first to get a large Hollywood release at its time, in the Grauman's Egyptian Theatre, which is still around now days.

It's a movie that very skillfully got directed by already very experienced director Allan Dwan, who during his career directed a total of 404 movies, starting in 1911 and ending his career in 1961. He even directed plenty more films (about 3 times as much), when also considering his one-reeler's. He could had directed plenty of more movies though, when considering that he didn't died until 1981. But he must had probably been fed up with film-making or modern film-making anyway. He directed mostly adventurous and swashbucklers, so he truly was a perfect pick for this movie. It was the last movie he did with Douglas Fairbanks. They made a total of 11 movies together, of which this one and "The Iron Mask" are the best known ones which they did together.

It stars Douglas Fairbanks as the main lead, so of course this movie is a swashbuckler with plenty of action in it but what sort of disappointed me about the movie was that it wasn't really always an entertaining one. It seems to me that the movie is a bit too serious at times, instead of adventurous, entertaining and action filled. The movie is often more emotional and dramatic than fun to watch really. This is mostly why I still prefer the 1938 Errol Flynn Robin Hood movie version above this one, no matter how great it's all looking.

It's really the movie its second halve which still makes this such a fun movie to watch. The story becomes more light and even a bit comical. It's fun seeing Robin Hood being chased around in a castle by a bunch of soldiers. Of course Douglas Fairbanks was doing all of his own stunts again and he shows some dangerous antics again in this movie, like only he could back in his days. The movie is quite long though and the movie just never gets fully over its contract between its first and second halve.

A wonderful looking and great, yet really not perfect, swashbuckling entertainment from the 1920's.

8/10

http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

Robin Hood as you've never seen it before...

[Snow4849 · 7/10 · 11 November 2006]

...and may never want to see it again.

My biggest problem with the movie was the strange pace. In the beginning, before the Earl of Huntingdon becomes Robin Hood, things move as slowly as a snail. The movie is just over two hours long and could have been much shorter. For example, it opens with a long jousting tournament that could have been completely removed. But after Huntingdon goes AWOL on King Richard's Crusades (which are disturbingly glorified in this movie) to protect England from the tyranny of evil Prince John and adopts the alias Robin Hood, things suddenly start moving at break-neck speed.

Douglas Fairbanks shines in this film, creating a Robin Hood with surprising heart and humanity for a silent movie. But in a movie that was a big-budget blockbuster for the 1920s, Fairbanks's star is often eclipsed by needless pageantry, as well as by his own less-talented co-stars, particularly Wallace Beery as King Richard, the so-called "lion hearted" king who spends most of the movie laughing. He laughs when he sees that Earl of Huntingdon (Robin Hood) is scared of women, he laughs when he defeats the Muslims in the Crusades, he laughs when he discovers that Robin Hood is Huntingdon is disguise, and he laughs as he tries to barge in on Robin and Marian's wedding night in the final scene. Before long, you'll be wondering why the heck everyone in Nottingham reveres this guy, or you'll be asking the question I heard someone sitting near me in the theater whisper: "What is so funny, anyway?" Enid Bennett, playing Lady Marian, seems like a good actress, but it is hard to tell, as she's given little more to do than faint whenever a fight starts and wake up once the action's over. Her romance with Robin Hood, however, is definitely worth watching. My favorite scene in the whole movie was their first kiss: When Robin leans in toward her, she modestly turns away, and he settles with kissing the hem of her sleeve instead.

some dated histrionics, but still impressive almost a century later

[mjneu59 · 7/10 · 29 December 2010]

This early silent epic was actually the sixth version of the classic English fable to reach the screen, and it remains, even today, by far the biggest. Every shot is framed to highlight the extraordinary production design, which included a full-scale medieval castle built just off Santa Monica Blvd in Los Angeles, reportedly the largest set ever constructed for a motion picture. The film draws heavily on the romantic heritage of chivalry, and favors the origins of the character over his legendary exploits, following the Earl of Huntingdon (not Locksley, as in later films) into the Crusades, where he and King Richard are marked for death by the treacherous Sir Guy of Gisbourne. It isn't until the fourth (or fifth) reel that Douglas Fairbanks (in one of his definitive roles) finally exchanges his suit of armor for Robin's trademark feathered cap, and goes (literally) skipping through Sherwood Forest. Viewers more accustomed to the Errol Flynn archetype may find it an odd interpretation of the role, depicting Robin Hood as a girl-shy, over-age adolescent, liberated when he turns outlaw. And Fairbanks, always more acrobat than actor, all but dances through the part.

Good Entertainment & An Ideal Role For Fairbanks

[Snow Leopard · 10 May 2002]

The Douglas Fairbanks version of "Robin Hood" is still good entertainment despite showing its age at times. The role gives Fairbanks a perfect chance to display his energy and charisma, and he is helped by lavish sets and scenery that recreate the world of medieval England. Wallace Beery as King Richard also is a nice complement to Fairbanks. Later versions, such as the Errol Flynn version which is still the best of all the Robin Hood movies, had many resources available to them that this one didn't, but this older version works well and is more enjoyable than most of the more recent movies based on the legend.

The story and characters are familiar from many other books and movies. But it includes some interesting scenes that cover or add parts of the legend that are not in a lot of other versions - for example, about the first half of this movie takes place before any of the events in the Flynn movie. It makes it interesting to watch even if you've already seen plenty of other "Robin Hoods", and amongst other things it gives Beery as Richard a lot more screen time. It is acted in the somewhat exaggerated style of many of the silent melodramas of the era, but in this case that tone, while perhaps providing an occasional unintentional chuckle, fits rather well with the subject matter. It's also worth paying attention to the grand sets that were constructed for the film. They were apparently rather renowned in their day, and they still do a good job of evoking the right background. Overall, it was a very good film for its time and one worth watching today.

Robin Hood

[CinemaSerf · 7/10 · 12 September 2022]

This is probably the most complete of the cinematic tales of this hero of 13th Century English folklore. Douglas Fairbanks assumes the role of the fabled Earl of Huntingdon before King Richard (Wallace Beery) heads off on the Third Crusade. It is only whilst on that holy mission that he discovers the brutality being carried out at home by the King's errant brother Prince John (the superbly ferret-like Sam de Grasse). He feigns an excuse to the King to return home without explaining why, but falls foul of one of John's spies and is left, injured and betrayed, to rot in a foreign tower. Luckily, "Little John" (Alan Hale) is also left and soon they are free, home and rallying the people against their would-be-usurper and his fiendishly horrid sidekicks "Guy of Gisbourne" (Paul Dickey) and the High Sheriff (William Lowery). The former of these two glorified hoodlums takes a shine to the "Lady Marion" (Enid Bennett) but can Huntingdon - now adopting the moniker "Robin Hood" save her from his evil machinations, and thwart the power hungry ambitions of Prince John in time? The biggest budget of the time ($1.5m) went into this and it is easy to see how - the sets, especially around Nottingham castle, are superb; the cast plentiful and the end to end action scenes really are a joy to watch. Fairbanks thinks nothing of scaling an hundred foot wall or fighting off dozens of the Prince's (admittedly pretty hopeless) soldiers as he determines to free his land from oppression and return it to true government. Bennett is beautiful as "Marion"; she has a feistiness that you don't always see in the frequently soporific heroines of the 1920s where the eyes were the prize. The star is at the top of his swashbuckling game, indulged totally by Allan Dwan and Arthur Edeson's grand scale - sometimes intimate - but certainly rousing photography. Fabulous entertainment, this....

The Ideal Man Of His Times

[bkoganbing · 10/10 · 13 January 2008]

Watching Robin Hood today, I realized that I had seen it in the only venue for it to be shown, on the big screen with organ accompaniment. A film like Robin Hood loses so much on the small tube.

It was one of the most expensive films ever done during the silent era, the castle set for King Richard the Lion Hearted must have been cost a mint or two. But given the popularity of Douglas Fairbanks, probably at the height of his career, the producer knew they'd get their money back and then some. The producer being Fairbanks himself had infinite faith in his prowess at the box office.

Alan Hale made the first of three appearances as Little John in various Robin Hood films. He was also Little John with Errol Flynn in the Adventures of Robin Hood and with John Derek in Rogue of Sherwood Forest. Little John here has a very extensive and different part, Hale is first seen as Fairbanks's squire before circumstances force Doug into outlawry.

Fairbanks is the Earl of Huntingdon, favored knight of Richard the Lion Hearted. But the usual Robin Hood villains Sir Guy of Gisborne and Prince John are doing their worst. John as played by Sam DeGrasse covets his brother's throne and Gisborne played by Paul Dickey has designs on Lady Marian Fitzwalter (Enid Bennett) beloved of Fairbanks.

Fairbanks and Dickey go along on the Crusade with DeGrasse left to mind the store and steal the kingdom. Fairbanks gets word about the stuff John's pulling from Lady Marian and tries to leave. King Richard imprisons him for desertion. Of course Fairbanks escapes and the real meat of the film begins.

All the sidebar stories about the various characters among the Merry Men join Robin are not included in this film. Fairbanks and Hale escape and go back to England where he becomes the legendary Robin Hood.

Wallace Beery is a most unusual Richard. He's quite the merrymaking king indeed. Of course the closest Richard has been played in real life is by Anthony Hopkins in The Lion in Winter.

Millions throughout the world fell under the sway of Doug's charm and athleticism. This Fairbanks film as did the others he made had a great message about right coming out on top, good triumphing over evil and good embodied in the clean living physical specimen of Douglas Fairbanks.

It's hard to imagine, but in the silent screen era as in no other, movie stars were placed on a pedestal as they aren't now. Douglas Fairbanks and Mary Pickford were the closest thing to royalty we had in America. Tom Cruise&Katie Holmes, Brad Pitt&Angelina Jolie, don't rate anything close to those two. They even lived in a magic castle known the world over as Pickfair. Mary lived in it in fact until she died in 1979 after the fairy tale marriage fell apart in the more sobering decade of the Thirties.

I could not have had the experience of Robin Hood that I did had I not seen the film at a special screening in Shea's Theater in my city of Buffalo. The musical score as played by a live orchestra in some places or even the single organist as the audience heard in this case. Andrew Wos, who is president of the Buffalo Chapter of the American Theater Organ Society played his own score in accompaniment to the film. I asked him afterward whether he was playing the original score from Robin Hood and he said it was his own composition. If it wasn't the original score, it should have been. He told me that it was easier for him to do his own score than learn something else.

Hopefully this score will accompany even a television viewing of Robin Hood to heighten your experience. And you will get some idea in watching Robin Hood as to why Douglas Fairbanks was the ideal man of his times.

Impressive pageantry, but not THEE Robin Hood!

[cutter-12 · 7/10 · 24 July 2002]

Fantastic production design which set the standard, and still probably does for Medieval epics. The Castle Fairbanks had constructed stone by stone, the costumes and the literal "cast of thousands" in the opening hour are second to none. Great attention to detail. The story itself however is half and half. Fairbanks was a great choice to play Robin Hood, it's just too bad we don't get to see him swing into action as the bandit of Sherwood until after a long, drawn-out first half concerning King Richard and Huntingdon (Robin) heading off for the Crusades. There is just too much time spent setting up how/why Huntingdon becomes Robin Hood to make it enjoyable as a purely Robin Hood movie. Errol Flynn's version improved on it by a mile in 1938, leaving out the fat and concerning itself only with Robin's adventures in Sherwood, and adding more heart and humor if not replicating the grand scale of pageantry depicted in this version.

Providing a link between both films, of course, is Alan Hale Sr. playing Little John. Again, his most preferable portrayal is in the '38 version. As far as other cast members, Wallace Beery is memorable as King Richard and Sam de Grasse is a perfectly snide Prince John. The other cast members are adequate enough.

The DVD edition of this film provides a very nice print and is well worth viewing if you enjoy old silents, or are a fan of the Robin Hood legend as I am. Many purists have complained about the musical soundtrack but not being an aesthete of Silent films myself I found it to be not too bad.

Not the classic version of Robin Hood on film but still, there are many things to like about it.

Historically speaking, a mess...but sometimes you just have to say "who cares?!"!

[planktonrules · 10/10 · 21 June 2010]

I am a history teacher, so on one level, films like "Robin Hood" make me a bit crazy. However, it is so entertaining and fun that, for once, I need to just chill out and enjoy the film--and keep pesky reality from interfering with enjoying a darn fine film! Let's briefly talk about the film's MANY historical inaccuracies. Like all Robin Hood films as well as the various Ivanhoe films, King Richard I (a.k.a. "the Lion Hearted") is shown as a virtuous and good king, while his brother, John, is shown as a conniving dog. While history has not been kind to John (and it probably shouldn't be--especially as he unwisely took on the Church and lost as well as the Barons), it has somehow created a myth about Richard totally undeserved. In my opinion, he was the worst kind in English history and I assume most historians would agree that he at least was in the top 2 or 3 of the worst. He cared less about ruling England and spent almost his entire reign in his French territories or out massacring people in the Crusades. Now this does NOT mean that Richard was any sort of religious zealot. Instead, he was an opportunistic maniac who simply liked killing people!! His atrocities while on the Crusades are simply amazing for a supposedly Christian king--massacring entire towns and breaking pretty much every one of the 10 Commandments!! He was a horrible, horrible person in every respect--and NOT the hero he's portrayed to be in films.

As for Robin Hood, he didn't exactly exist. Now there was a crook who was similar in some ways--though he lived later than the hero of legends and had the pesky habit of stealing from the rich and giving to himself!! Instead, the Robin we know about is passed down from legends and songs and as a result, there are many differing (and often diametrically opposed) stories about this swell guy--all of which are pure hogwash.

Now you'd think after my complaints that I couldn't have possibly liked the film. Well, this isn't the case simply because apart from the historical license, this is a perfect film--and as good a silent film as you can find. While I have some doubts as to the truth of contemporary stories that Douglas Fairbanks did ALL his own stunts, the stunt-work in this film is as good as any silent film--and better than what you'll even find today. That's because whether it's always Fairbanks or not, the physicality of the stunts is amazing--and even better than Fairbanks' other great films. Plus, if it ISN'T always him doing the stunts, it's integrated so well that you could swear it was! Now if all the film consisted of were great stunts, it would not be a great film. I personally hate films that are all stunts and with lousy plots ("Mission: Impossible" is a great example of this). Howeverr, the film also features some of the loveliest film work I've ever seen--with cinematography that is breathtaking and highly artistic. For you artists out there, the camera work, sets, costumes and style is pure art nouveau come to life--like it was lifted right off a painting from this craze of the 1890s and early 1900s. The plot is pretty good as well--and I especially like how the lion's share (nice choice of words, huh?) is about how Robin came to be an outlaw--something even the wonderful Errol Flynn version failed to do (though it, too, is a classic). In addition, grand acting, a huge cast and a well-spent budget all worked together to make a perfect film...provided you can ignore the historical inaccuracies. Any person who considers themselves a connoisseur of silent films must see this film--it is that important and that ground-breaking. A delight from start to finish.

By the way, that IS Wallace Beery as King Richard!

After 100 years definitely worth watching

[Philipp_Flersheim · 7/10 · 15 April 2022]

I have seen many Robin Hood-films and this is definitely one of the better ones. It has lavish production values and some great acting, notably by Wallace Beery (King Richard) and Douglas Fairbanks (Robin). I also liked Enid Bennett as Maid Marian. The one weak point is the plot, or rather, part of the plot. The film consists of two distinct parts of about equal length. The first concerns what most other Robin Hood picture treat at best in passing: the backstory that explains how the earl of Huntingdon becomes the eponymous outlaw. The second part is about the exploits of Robin and his merry men up to the return of King Richard. This part is excellent; it is fun and fast-paced. By contrast, the first half drags and fails to generate much suspense (on the upside, it offers Beery more screen time, and he is definitely worth watching). Still, I am rating this part 6 stars. The second half gets 8 stars, which gives me an average of 7. Good film, all in all, and definitely worth watching 100 years after it came out!

Another Legend Brought to Life by Douglas Fairbanks

[Ron Oliver · 10/10 · 8 February 2000]

King Richard leaves for the Holy Land on Crusade, taking with him the flower of England's knighthood. Left behind, his wicked younger brother, Prince John, quickly turns despot & begins to oppress the people. Only the Lionheart's dearest friend, the Earl of Huntingdon, has wits quick enough to thwart John & protect the Kingdom until Richard's return. This he does in disguise as an outlaw, taking the name of ROBIN HOOD.

This was Douglas Fairbanks' exciting homage to one of our greatest legends. The film is full of pomp & pageantry and if Fairbanks' style of acting seems to have dated, that does not in the least detract from the pure enjoyment of watching this silent epic. The archaic wording of many of the title cards can be a trifle annoying, but it's important to remember that Fairbanks was trying to impart an authentic medieval flavour to the film.

Wallace Beery is a bluff & hearty Richard. Sam De Grasse makes a fine villain as John, while Enid Bennett is lovely as the Lady Marian. Alan Hale plays Little John, a role he would assume again 16 years later in the Errol Flynn version.

Huntingdon does not become Robin Hood until more than half the film has passed. Then the action really livens up & Fairbanks is allowed to display some of his best athletic magic. One of the biggest & most impressive sets ever constructed for a silent film - Nottingham Castle - is featured here. Fairbanks does not allow it to dwarf him. He leaps & prances from battlement to balcony, climbing ivied walls & sliding down huge draperies, lithe & active & exuding charm. Just what we expect from Douglas Fairbanks.

How the king of Swashbucklers Douglas Fairbanks made the legend of Robin Hood immortal with his Magnum Opus

[SAMTHEBESTEST · 7/10 · 27 January 2024]

Robin Hood (1922) : Brief Review -

How the king of Swashbucklers Douglas Fairbanks made the legend of Robin Hood immortal with his Magnum Opus. I wanted to say that maybe it's time I forgot Michael Curtiz's "The Adventures of Robinhood" (1938), but I don't think it is easy to forget that classic swashbuckling entertainer. Douglas Fairbanks' 1922 version of Robin Hood was responsible for making me even think about that crime. The silent era Magnum Opus would have been different if there were no Douglas Fairbanks. We all know what Robin Hood's tale is, and some lucky fellas got to see it in the 1912 silent short version, but for the majority, this Douglas flick was a proper introduction to the legendary tale of Robin Hood. Later, Curtiz made it universal with his all-time classic talkie. Robin Hood seemed to be 15-20 minutes longer, but I can't decide which scenes I would have wished to be cut. The opening sequence of the fight and then the way girls surrounded Earl of Huntingdon were so damn fascinating. I mean, I have seen many movies copy that scene over the years, and I wasn't aware that it was used so early here in this movie. The same scene has his to-be lover-another evergreen cliche was created there. Robin Hood's first run-for-me battle with troops was hilarious and so grand. The entire film was grand, by the way, but there were 2-3 segments that made it an epic big-screen spectacle. The idea of a stranger coming into the picture in the last portion of the film was phenomenal. You also see a sweet love story that has been copied many times by others. Fairbanks was such a legend when it came to bringing legends to the screen. His persona was really something. I have seen Wallace Beery in many talkies but never imagined him as King Richard in this silent, or, let me admit, I didn't recognise him. That colossal physicality. I don't wonder why Allan Dwan's Magnum Opus was such a big hit back then. I mean, this is what we call "Big Screen Entertainment!"

RATING - 7.5/10*

By - #samthebestest.

Another Fairbanks triumph!

[David-240 · 9/10 · 10 January 2000]

What other actor could leap around Sherwood Forest like Doug does? It is almost skipping! Certainly Errol Flynn was too butch for such things - and Kevin Costner couldn't do a jig if his ass was on fire. But beautiful balletic Fairbanks proves here that he was the ultimate swashbuckling hero - skipping and all! Needless to say his stunts are superb, the sets amazing and the crowd scenes crowded (have there ever been that many merry men ever?).

Allan Dwan was not the greatest silent director - his visual style is not as strong as say Fred Niblo or Rex Ingram - but there are some memorable visuals - and a particularly gorgeous final image.

The film gets off to a rather slow start - I could have done with less of the build-up to the Sherwood scenes, which are certainly the highlight. But Wallace Beery, Enid Bennett and Alan Hale (he played Little John again in 1939) are all excellent. Special mention should go to Sam De Grasse as the villainous Prince John - he is terrific. The rest of the characters don't get much of a look in - it's Fairbanks all the way - and who can resist that?

The Man From Sherwood Forest

[Prince-P · 6/10 · 21 September 2023]

At the beginning of the last century, Douglas Fairbanks was one of the best-paid actors in the world. But in 1919, when a new decade knocked on the door, "The King of Hollywood" ran into problems. Fairbanks' popularity was beginning to wane, and his employer, Paramount Pictures, refused to renew his contract. Fortunately, Douglas Fairbanks was a creative guy. Together with Mary Pickford and best pal Charlie Chaplin, the actor instead formed his own movie company. Soon, United Artists was a power to be reckoned with in Tinseltown.

Douglas Fairbanks kick-started his career at the new company with two popular swashbucklers. And as "The Three Musketeers" and "The Mark of Zorro" became big hits at the box-office, he continued in the same way. With one important exception. When the actor did "Robin Hood", he wrote and produced the movie himself. Like his good friend Charlie Chaplin had done before him, Douglas Fairbanks wanted to control as much of his pictures as possible.

The movie was shot just outside Santa Monica in California. In an open field Douglas Fairbanks had a near-life-sized replica of the 12th century town of Nottingham constructed. The giant castle that dominated the set was more expensive to build than most pictures of the 1920' cost to produce. But that didn't stop Fairbanks. The star knew exactly what he wanted his film to look like, and he wasn't going to let trivialities like financial considerations get in the way.

The film was based on the stories of Robin Hood and his Merry Men. It was one of the first productions to feature the medieval adventurer who would become immortal to movie audiences worldwide. But for the King of Hollywood, it didn't end so well. Although Fairbanks was considered one of the biggest stars in America in the 20s, his career quickly declined with the advent of the "talkies". Douglas Fairbanks was almost forgotten when he died in 1939, only 56 years old.

Overlong, overacted, not Fairbanks's finest hour

[TwoTooth · 4/10 · 26 February 2012]

Douglas Fairbanks's Robin Hood starts with more than an hour of backstory, ponderously paced with heroes and villains alike hulking around in chain mail declaiming in mime that is way over the top. Sets and costumes are ludicrous (people would freeze to death in the main castle's great hall, which looks like it takes up a couple of sound stages and is virtually empty). Lady Marian trails looooong veils and trains, which it's a wonder she doesn't trip over. Wallace Beery is horribly miscast as King Richard; the actor playing Prince John, Sam de Grasse, is actually pretty good, though he too indulges in occasional broad mime. Douglas Fairbanks transforms from a galumphing knight who's afraid of women to a jumping bean when he removes the chain mail and becomes Robin Hood. The Robin Hood parts of the movie are few and far between; we get barely a nodding acquaintance with the usual cronies--Little John, Friar Tuck et al. Favorite absurdity: Robin Hood bouncing around, climbing down a castle wall holding a bag of gold between his teeth. Must be great teeth. There've been a lot of better Robin Hoods since this flatfooted film (Errol Flynn and Richard Greene to name my two reference points). Of minor historical interest only.

Great fun and the second best Robin Hood

[TheLittleSongbird · 9/10 · 11 May 2014]

The definitive version of Robin Hood will always be the Errol Flynn version to me. There are shortcomings to this 1922 film, it does take too long to get going and Wallace Beery for personal tastes plays Richard too broadly with the laughter overdone, but it is the second best of a mostly entertaining bunch of Robin Hood films. The film looks big and grand as well as lavish and detailed, one of the best-looking Douglas Fairbanks films, even without Technicolor it looks absolutely great. The music is appropriately rousing and really enhances the action, if admittedly not in the same league as Korngold's for the Errol Flynn film, which is one of the greatest films scores of all time as far as I'm concerned. The story is a lot of fun on the whole, the first 45 minutes or so are rather ponderous but once we get to Sherwood the pace really picks up without a single complaint really to be had. That we know more than any other version of how Robin Hood came to be is one of the film's biggest interest points. The action, while none as classic as the climatic sword-fight in the Flynn version, is hugely exciting and sometimes nail-biting, just love the game of conkers using the noblemen on ropes, and the stunts are just as dazzling. Douglas Fairbanks is as gallant and athletic as ever, showing a huge amount of charisma and bravado and an infectious smile. Enid Bennett is both charming and affecting as Maid Marion though with not a lot to do. Alan Hale's Little John here and in the Flynn film is unmatched, his imposing height(very true to character) helps while being hearty and loyal. Paul Dickey is appropriately loathsome as Guy of Gisborne, if not as much as Basil Rathbone, and William Lowery enjoys himself as the Sheriff of Nottingham. But other than Fairbanks the best performance comes from Sam de Grasse, whose snide and despicable nature as Prince John makes him a worthy predecessor to Claude Rains. Allan Dwan's direction has little fault as well. In conclusion, a terrific amount of fun and compares very favourably to the Robin Hood films out there, much of the Sherwood scenes are very imaginatively handled. 9/10 Bethany Cox

Exhilarating silent swashbuckler. Perhaps Fairbanks's best.

[rick_7 · 18 May 2012]

The Earl of Huntingdon (Douglas Fairbanks), who's ace at jousting but scared of girls, goes off to fight in the Crusades as Richard the Lionheart's (Wallace Beery) second-in-command. Then his new bird (Enid Bennett, who's a perfect Marian) sends word that replacement monarch Prince John has turned into the most terrible tyrant, inspiring our hero to leg it back to Nottingham – though not before being shot and imprisoned in a tower. Once home, he reinvents himself as the bouncy, proclamatory, green-wearing outlaw of the title, robbing from the rich, giving to the poor, and generally running around imploring people to chase him. This lavish, wonderfully entertaining swashbuckler offers a different and arguably more realistic portrait of the hero than the more well-known talkie versions – not even introducing the "Robin" alter-ego until the 74-minute mark – but myth-makes through moments of spellbinding imagery. The film is set in "the time of faith" and its arresting visual sense draws memorably on Christian iconography, particularly when Robin and Marian are reunited in the grounds of a nunnery under shafts of light streaming through the trees and, later, when she cowers by an altar in Richard's castle. Such artistry is complemented by a serious sense of fun, with Fairbanks in irresistible form and his usual fondness for a good stunt much in evidence – the scene where he leads John's men on a merry dance around the castle is a delight, and the climax spotlights both his athleticism and his idiosyncratic swordsmanship. "Five-year-old in the back yard", that's all I'm going to say. The music by Victor Schertzinger might not quite match Erich von Korngold's famous score for The Adventures of Robin Hood (the 1938 film, with Errol Flynn in the lead), but it's pretty damn great. Old movie nerds will want to know that the costumes were made by cult '30s and '40s director Mitchell Leisen, while fellow helmer Robert Florey has a rare bit-part as a peasant. Alan Hale reprised his role as Little John in the 1938 film where, unlike here, he got to fight the hero while standing on a log.

Douglas Fairbanks Makes Merry

[wes-connors · 8/10 · 3 May 2008]

In Medieval England, before he goes off to fight in the Holy Crusades, dashing Douglas Fairbanks (as the Earl of Huntington) draws thousands of spectators in a jousting contest win. Among those cheering and jeering are: the people's beloved King, the generous Wallace Beery (as Richard the Lion-Hearted); his sinister brother Sam De Grasse (as Prince John), who covets Mr. Berry's throne; and, the fairest maiden in the land, Enid Bennett (as Lady Marian Fitzwalter). Eventually, circumstances lead Mr. Fairbanks to become the legendary hero of the oppressed - "Robin Hood". With his band of merry men, Fairbanks' "Hood" steals from the rich to give to the poor.

A typically huge 1920s production, from Fairbanks and company, "Robin Hood" almost collapses under its own weight. The principals are introduced well - then, you have Mr. De Grasse usurping the King's throne, while Berry and Fairbanks fight the Crusades. Of course, there is romance - between our hero and Ms. Bennett ("I never knew a maid could be like you," Fairbanks tells her). For most of the running time, the film is laboriously paced; and, some of the directorial shots are lingering and unimaginative.

After Fairbanks becomes "Robin Hood", the film picks up (it takes well over an hour); and, it becomes much more exciting. Notable merry man Alan Hale (as Little John) reprised his role, for both Erroll Flynn in "The Adventures of Robin Hood" (1938), and John Derek in "Rogues of Sherwood Forest" (1950). Now, that's loyalty.

******** Robin Hood (10/18/22) Allan Dwan ~ Douglas Fairbanks, Wallace Beery, Sam de Grasse, Enid Bennett

Good luck storming the castle!

[barbb1953 · 9/10 · 17 September 2019]

Everyone should watch this just to see Douglas Fairbanks single-handedly storm the castle. It only gets him so far, but still -- well done!

This is an excellent movie that every Fairbanks Sr. fan and Robin Hood aficionado has probably watched and enjoyed dozens of times. If you haven't seen it yet, it's online in several websites(it's the "symphonic" one) -- this seems ludicrously over the top at first, but it really picks up the overall pace and gets you into the properly expansive mood. Also they play for the full intermission.

The story's timing is perfect, particularly near the end: your heart sinks when you realize that the Merry Men aren't going to get there in time. Robin Hood surrendered too soon!

Some overlooked gems here are:

1. Sam de Grasse's Prince John: this man registers volumes just getting up out of a chair. He's my favorite bad guy of the silent era. And his body language in that last shot is perfect.

2. The "weasel" -- the guy who goes to get that bag of gold and ends up hanging out for a while, so to speak. He's in several Fairbanks movies and always is so delightfully slimy (in this movie, especially) and crazy (as in "The Black Pirate").

3. The subtle nuances of Wallace Beery's portrayal of Richard. Yes, they're there -- things like his affection for the fool (it's not obvious but present: we only realize how angry he is at Huntingdon during the tent argument when the fool shrinks away from him in terror); and his inability to understand complex things like Huntingdon's request to head back to England -- notice how Beery conveys that with his hands -- and how he doesn't discipline John at the tournament when the prince turns his back on Richard and stalks away. Richard, we realize in retrospect, has to take some blame for the problems in this story precisely because he is a buff muttonhead. The eventual pail-over-the-head knightly disguise underlines that, intentionally or not.

4. The costumes, props, and sets: geometric patterns, rich materials, jewels galore, lots of decorative details. This movie would have been a feast for the eyes if it were in color!

I took off one point for a few dated things here and there . . . and also because Richard should have given that other dog something at the feast, too - it wanted that treat so bad!

My favorite Robin Hood film

[Jgirl2688 · 10/10 · 16 December 2013]

The best Robin Hood movie I've ever seen! Fairbanks is perfect for the role, and I'm glad he played it. With his physical skills and sense of timing, he was able to pack the movie with action. He wrote it too, which is cool, I loved how we got to see how he became Robin Hood and what was going on in medieval times. I had never seen another Robin Hood movie do so much of that so well. (Whether or not it is historically accurate according to some of the others here. It's a bit of literature, so I don't think it matters that much.) The sets, costumes, and everything were really spectacular. I loved this movie, and as I said, it's my favorite Robin Hood film.

Movie Odyssey Review #032: Robin Hood

[Cyke · 20 July 2006]

032: Robin Hood (1922) - released 10/18/1922; viewed 1/24/06.

Mohandes Gandhi is arrested in Bombay and sentenced to six years for sedition. Construction begins on Yankees Stadium in the Bronx. The Lincoln Memorial is dedicated. The Irish Civil War begins.

BIRTHS: Carl Reiner, Ray Goulding, Christopher Lee, Judy Garland, Sid Caesar, Jackie Cooper. DEATHS: Hermann Rorschach, Alexander Graham Bell, Michael Collins, Bob Elliott.

DOUG: We watched a featurette about this movie narrated by Rudy Behlmer that came with the DVD for Errol Flynn's 'Hood.' I didn't enjoy this one as much as Zorro. One thing that bothered me is how long the movie spends with the Earl at the Crusades before he becomes Robin Hood. When Robin Hood finally arrives (roughly two thirds in), the movie comes alive with Fairbanks' trademark swordfights, stuntwork, and bravado. My favorite moment had Robin battling one of the Sheriff's henchmen, and he strangles him against a rail. Big Bad Wallace Beery makes a good King Richard, and this film spends more time with Richard than any other I've seen, but his subplot failed to capture my interest. It was a pleasure to see Alan Hale as Little John (he would reprise the role in Adventures, and again in Rogues of Sherwood Forest), but was disappointed that he and the other Merry Men receive little introduction.

KEVIN: I definitely did not enjoy Robin Hood as much as Zorro, and of all the versions of Robin Hood that I've seen, I think I enjoyed this one the least. The real problem was that it took far too long to really get going. Huntingdon (as he is known in this version) doesn't become Robin Hood until two-thirds into the film. Up to that point I had a lot of trouble staying awake. However, the moment Robin Hood comes into the story that bares his name, everything is fantastic. Fairbanks inhabits the character as well as any I've seen, leaping and bounding and fighting bad guys at every turn. That's what I wanted to see! Also, this is the only version I've seen that chronicles Prince John's takeover within the narrative, as the film starts with King Richard (Wallace Beery) leaving for the Crusades. That's something I've never seen before. I guess I can forgive the film's shortcomings, as this was the earliest production of the legend I've seen and there was much room and many chances for improvement in the years to come.

Last film viewed: Mark of Zorro (1920). Last film chronologically: Nosferatu (1922). Next film: Safety Last (1923).

The Movie Odyssey is an exhaustive, chronological project where we watch as many milestone films as possible, starting with D.W. Griffith's Intolerance in 1916 and working our way through, year by year, one film at a time. We also write a short review for each film before we watch the next, never reading the other's review before we finish our own. In this project, we hope to gain a deeper understanding of the time period, the films of the era, and each film in context, while at the same time just watching a lot of great movies, most of which we never would have watched otherwise.

The Best of All of The "Robin Hood" Movies!

[zardoz-13 · 10/10 · 20 November 2009]

Hollywood has immortalized the fabulous Robin Hood legend on celluloid many times. Ironically, the best version of this adventure epic is "Sands of Iwo Jima" director Allan Dwan's silent "Robin Hood" with the ever agile Douglas Fairbanks, Sr. Reportedly, Fairbanks produced this movie for the staggering sum of one point five million dollars and he penned the screenplay, too. Now, you're going to say "no way" can a creaky old silent saga top the incomparable Errol Flynn Technicolor classic "The Adventures of Robin Hood." Nevertheless, the Flynn "Robin Hood" lacks the spectacle of the Fairbanks' version. Dwan stages several big battle scenes. Moreover, none of the later "Robin Hood" pictures devote over an hour to the Earl of Huntingdon's back story. In fact, the first time that we see him he is referred to as the Earl and he is shy where Maid Marian is concerned. Clocking in at over two hours, "Robin Hood" covers a lot of ground and Fairbanks flaunts his athletic skills as he climbs the ropes that hoist the moat bridge and he leaps about with carefree abandon. Wallace Beery makes a definite impression as King Richard and the villains are truly villainous. Indeed, there is far more spectacle here, especially when Robin makes his first appearance and eludes his enemy at King John's castle. The only drawback to this 1923 masterpiece is that it doesn't have Technicolor like "The Adventures of Robin Hood" and film as a cinematic art had not developed as much by 1923 as it later did by 1938. The interesting thing here is that Alan Hale not only played Little John in this outing, but he also co-starred as Little John in the Flynn yarn. In fact, Hale's last performance was as Little John in director Gordon Douglas' "Rogues of Sherwood Forest" with John Derek.

The action unfolds in Medieval England at a jousting tournament with Robert, the Earl of Huntingdon (Douglas Fairbanks of "Thief of Bagdad"), competing against the unscrupulous Sir Guy of Gisbourne (Paul Dickey) who ties himself into his saddle to avoid being unhorsed. Gisbourne's skulduggery is for naught because the Earl topples him and is rewarded by Lady Marian Fitzwalter (Enid Bennett of "The Vamp") for his victory. During the jousting match, King Richard challenges his brother, Prince John (Sam De Grasse of "The Black Pirate") who is depicted as a wicked fiend from the moment that we lay eyes on him. King Richard (Wallace Beery of "The Champ") gathers an army to go on his Crusade to the Holy Land and Huntingdon accompanies him and proves his valor several times over. Meanwhile, Richard has left John in charge of England and John exploits this opportunity for everything that he can get and he steals and turns into a tyrant. When word of this reaches Huntingdon from Maid Marian, he entreats his lordship to let him return to England on a personal mission. Richard refuses to part with the Earl and he puts him in prison in France until he can return from Palestine. Little John helps Huntingdon escape and they return to England to fight King John.

All the familiar characters, such as Allan-A-Dale, Will Scarlet, and Friar Tuck are conspicuously present when Robin and his Merry Men redistribute the wealth to the poor and the needy.

Douglas Fairbanks is appropriately flamboyant as the protagonist. The enormous set interiors for the castles and the sprawling scenes in the forest give this movie an epic feeling.

The world's Best Robin Hood!

[JohnHowardReid · 10/10 · 6 November 2017]

Made at a staggering cost - every penny of which is up there on the screen in the superb, full-length Alpha DVD which runs 120 minutes (equivalent to around 140 minutes at theatrical speed) - "Robin Hood" is a movie that simply cannot be surpassed for acting, characterization, plot and spectacle.

At first glance, producer Douglas Fairbanks may seem to be an odd choice for Robin Hood, but this of course is a silent movie and Fairbanks is not hampered by his American voice and his somewhat strange and rather stagey delivery. In fact, he seems to fit the role perfectly.

Wallace Beery is also ideally cast as the murderous Prince John, while Alan Hale enacts the first of his three performances as Little John. Hale repeated the role in both the 1938 "Adventures of Robin Hood" and the 1950 "Rogues of Sherwood Forest".

This action-full movie actually cost $1,500,000 to make - and it's all up there on the screen! Nonetheless, this was a really staggering sum way back in 1922 - but fortunately, the movie was super-popular (and so it deserved to be). Rentals returned more than $2,500,000 in the USA alone.

This movie is available world-wide on an excellent Alpha DVD.

The Silent Robin Hood

[movie-reviewer98 · 8/10 · 30 January 2019]

Robin Hood shows how silent movies improved over the years. The budget was significantly larger than other silent films, with the castle and all of the extras in the film. The film helped you understand it better with more title cards than other silent films. The film is the first of many Robbin Hood movies. After this was released many more followed in it's place and they probably won't stop coming out of the box office. It's an entertaining silent film.

Gets better every time I see it

[MissSimonetta · 10/10 · 15 September 2022]

I used to think this Robin Hood was fun but overlong. However, on my third rewatch, I've come to put it on par with the more celebrated Errol Flynn version, though the two movie have different tones and different strengths.

Both movies are visual feasts. The Flynn film has its rich Technicolor look, but the Fairbanks film is clearly influenced by 19th century painting and romanticism, especially in those gorgeous wideshots of the beautiful sets. It helps to sell the mythical feel of the story.

Speaking of myth, I love how straightforward this version of Robin Hood is. No postmodern "deconstructions," no cynicism-- it's a heroic story in which chivalry, loyalty, and love are celebrated (even if-- being a myth-- it absolutely isn't historically accurate, particularly in its idealized portraits of King Richard and the Crusades-- but once again, it's a myth, not a documentary).

Lastly, Fairbanks is excellent, though I like his performance better when he's Huntingdon, the jolly but more dignified knight, rather than his alter ego Robin Hood. Fairbank's Robin is a bit grotesque, skipping, grinning, and generally acting like a coked up elementary schoolboy. It doesn't kill the movie, but it is a bit jarring.

Still, great movie. Maybe Fairbanks finest epic.

One of the best adaptations

[jamesjustice-92 · 10/10 · 3 December 2022]

Another classic with Douglas Fairbanks, in the titular role of Robin Hood. All of you know Robin because the legend has been adapted for over fifty times throughout the cinema history.

This "Robin Hood" was shot in 1922, the year when silent movies had already transformed into something more than just entertainment. Unbelievable set and decorations, tons of costumes, superb script and of course the actors - they all made this movie a box office hit a century ago. There were other good adaptations of Robin Hood's story such as 1938's "The adventures of Robin Hood" but this one is simply beyond compare.