Robin Hood comes from an 800 year old English legend about an outlaw in the Sherwood Forest in conflict with the Sheriff of Nottingham. There has been evidence that the person the sheriff was battling was someone named "RobertHod" or "RobinHod." Yet there are several example of a Robin Hood scattered across a hundred years or more, my guess is that they may have been inspired by the legend and borrowed the name. According to the University of Rochester's (UK) website project on RH, references to an outlaw began appearing in chronicles of the times in the mid 1400s.In the 1700s and 1800s, English writers began searching through their ancient history in order to find folk heroes (probably a sign of the growth of nationalism or love of one's country). English historians have also tried to find out RH's true roots as well, and this website concludes:
"Despite the efforts of authors like P. Valentine Harris (see case 5), no verifiable Robin Hood emerged from the historical record. Today, most scholars accept Robin as a literary invention, based in part on other figures like Gamelyn and Fouke fitz Waryn, as well as real-life outlaws. Any search for the ideal Robin Hood, a dispossessed noble who robs from the rich to give to the poor, is doomed to failure. That Robin is a modern figure whose individual characteristics were added in different stages, which are roughly represented in this exhibit" (http://www.lib.rochester.edu/camelot/rh/RH%20Exhibit/pref.htm)
In the 1800s, he appeared in plays, songs, and operas as well as novels. Because of the lack of solid facts on RH, it appears that artists have fit him into almost any context that they have wanted to, placing him within the Anglo-Saxon invasion or in today's movie version, a returning archer from the Crusades. An author named Pierce Egan in 1838 wrote a series of adventures that added Robin's Merry Men to the myth. Sir Walter Scott also included RH in his classic, Ivanhoe (1820). The two most recent American movies Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves (1991) with Kevin Costner in the lead role along w/ Morgan Freeman and Alan Rickman. The other was Mel Brooks' farce, RH: Men in Tights (1993) which had its best moment when Cary Elwes, as Robin Hood, cracked, "unlike other Robin Hoods, I can speak with an English accent." Costner's portrayal of RH was criticized for losing his lame British accent half way through the movie. The first movie goes for serious drama and action and includes a Moor from the Crusades (Morgan Freeman's character), while the other movie shreds the Robin Hood convention with tons of jokes.
Your questions:
1. Why do you think a country like Britain that had a strong tradition of law and loyalty to the monarch would honor such a popular rebel hero who stole from the rich and gave to the poor?
2. The current RH movie that we just watched could be viewed in the time period that it was made: Britain had withdrawn from the Iraq War by 2008, their once popular Prime Minister (Tony Blair) was booted out of office for his decisions to go to war and among other things like a bad economy. Do you think that the director of this current RH, Ridley Scott, made the movie with the intentions of using some of the movie events to reflect current events in Britain (King Richard returning from a "failed crusade" as Robin called it = leaving Iraq; King Richard dying before returning home = Tony Blair losing his job; terrible economy, poor and starving people = disastrous bank failures and economic crash in 2008)? Why or why not?
These are some deep questions, so if you need help, ask your parents.
Due Tuesday, October 19th. 200 words minimum.
41 comments:
Elizabeth Hentschel
I think that a country like Britain that had a strong tradition of law and loyalty to the monarch would honor such a popular rebel hero who stole from the rich and gave to the poor because there were more poor people than rich people in England at that time. The poor people weren’t treated with such a luxury that the rich people were treated with and since Robin Hood was a nice man to them he was very popular. He probably wasn’t so popular with the rich people but since there were more poor people they made him to be considered a hero. I think that the director of this current Robin Hood movie made the movie with the intentions of using some of the movie events to reflect current events. This was probably because he knew that if he related the movie to something that was happening currently in Iraq, more people could relate to it and understand the movie. This way the movie would get more views and it could be taken in to be a “deeper movie”. Even though I didn’t make the connection between what was really happening and the movie I still really enjoyed the movie because it was well directed.
Blog #25 Alina S
1. He was like there hero figure because they saw him as the man coming to save the day. They could all count on him to step up to the king and do what’s right. There were also many more poor people who wanted to be treated fairly then there were rich people who were happy with the king’s rule. The people new he would do what they were to afraid to even think of doing. They didn’t have elections like we do today, their rulers were picked by inheritance so when someone especially like King John was elected they weren’t happy to begin with. Plus Robin was more like them he didn’t have much money he wasn’t very high up in class. He was much more relatable to the common people.
2. I’m kind of torn I think that though these events do seem similar I don’t think that was his main intention, most of them were things that had to happen to keep the movies pace moving along. Like if King Richard the lionhearted didn’t die then King John wouldn’t have been elected and Robin and his merry men wouldn’t have run away. It also does have an element of the present day like the whole thing about not having grain or enough money which hints to the economy struggles we are going through today. The solder coming home from a failed crusade could have hinted to the troops coming home from Iraq without a victory. The idea about the king dying having to do with Tony Blair losing his job seems kind of irrelevant to me because its part of history that King Richard dies and I’m sure Ridley Scott tried to keep as much of the real history as possible. Some of the parts of the movie seem to be a mere coincidence to these real life scenarios, but other things like the failing economy seem to be put there on purpose, he probably thought of adding some of these things as a way to help people relate and get into the movie if he showed some of the current themes happening today Though this may not have been his intention this movie could defiantly be put into today’s time period using those thoughts and ideas as background.
Sara Pawloski
Robin Hood was a man with a great heart. He thought of others before himself, which is why part of why he was so popular. Other factors of Robin Hood that people admire are that he is brave and eager to fight for his cause even if the law gets in his way. I think that a country like Britan that has a strong tradition of law and loyalty to the monarch would honor such a popular rebel hero who stole from the rich and gave to the poor because they respect Robin Hood for trying to make a difference even if he has to break the law in order to accomplish it. Also, there are a lot of poor people living in Britan who looked to him with thankfulness and respect for what he does for them. However, the wealthy did not agree with Robin Hood’s methods and wanted him to be arrested.
I think that Ridley Scott did use some of the movie events to reflect off current events in Britan because he wanted people to understand the events of the movie and relate them to what was happening in Britan currently. He wanted people to watch the movie and really grasp what everyone was going through back then.
Lily D 1st hr
1. It could be that Britain was so fearful they would try anything. They knew that they needed to destroy enemies, and Robin did this. The monarch herd a lot of stories about how great he was. Knowing this, they thought we can and will destroy our enemies with this secret weapon. They probably would have faced even bigger issues if they didn’t have Robin to destroy the enemy.
2. I think it is definitely possible but, might have been unintentional. I don’t think that this occurred because all of this was based off of the old story of Robin hood. All these events were luck to be some what similar. You could argue that the economy has been bad for years, and this movie could be based off of a few time periods. Britain didn’t die before leaving (like King Richard). Britain gave up and went home. I think that those are very different scenarios. People will always be starving; some people will always be losing a job, that doesn’t mean that the movie is based off of this time period, again coincidence. To check if my hypothesis was correct, I did a small amount of research. I am still not 100% sure if I’m correct. They started writing and working on the script in January 2007. This was before Britain left. It is still possible that it is based off of for these reasons. Maybe they re-did some things in the script later. Maybe they entirely changed the whole script. There are still some possibilities on why it could be based off of the time period today. I do think that it is highly unlikely.
Sarah C.
A country like Britain that has a history of loyalty to its monarchs might honor Robin Hood because people can get sick of a king really fast especially if there was a better king before him. King John took power and people got sick of him really fast. No one likes heavy taxes or having no food. Robin Hood would be accepted greatly by all the poor people because he was giving them money and helping them survive. He was working to their advantage. But of course he was an outlaw because the rich don’t like being stolen from. I would love if someone gave me money and having it come from the people I hate who always got luxurious things.
I think that Britain pulling out from the Iraq war could have something to do with the movie. It might have blended with the movie very well but I don’t think that was the original intent. That part of the movie was a little too small to be the base of the movie. I don’t think that the movie was originally made to fit into the war, I think it possibly could have come up in the process. And everyone’s economies have been down so I think it was just a coincidence. I don’t think it took away from the movie if it was directly related. I still enjoyed the movie a lot.
Rodney Winkler
5th
1. I think Britain would honor a story like this because while Robin Hood was an outlaw King John was ruling the country. The only reason Robin Hood became an outlaw was because King John was jealous of Robin Hood. King John was jealous because when Godfrey betrayed John and invaded with France England won the battle. When the French troops surrendered King John thought they were surrendering to him, but really it was to Robin Hood. John decided to make him an outlaw and claimed it was because of Robin Hood pretending to be Sir Robert Loxley. Another reason I think England would honor a story like this is because they liked the idea of somebody giving to the poor. The King would tax the poor so Robin saved them with his good deeds.
2. I think he did have intentions of relating it. My guess it that the director, Ridley Scott didn’t like the Prime Minister, Tony Blair. I’m sure that Ridley Scott decided to relate these subjects so people who were watching the movie could relate it to what’s going on now. Ridley Scott was relating Tony Blair to King Richard by showing how Tony Blair got fired from office when he withdrew from Iraq. When King Richard was going to withdraw from the crusade he got killed and this put King John in power.
Nick P.
I think that the reason a country with such strong tradition and belief in great monarchs would honor a thieving rebel because of just how bad some of the kings were at the time and hope embodied someone who “stole from the rich and gave to the poor”. Since taxes bled everyone dry and they were all in need of extra money the idea of a hero was probably necessary to keep rebellions from happening. It is kind of ironic in fact, without such an iconic person the kingdom might not have lasted as long as it did because of uprisings and riots but in the movie it is Robin himself who tries to level down the kings’ power by forcing him to sign the Magna Carta. As to relating the movie to Iraq I don’t think that it was intentional, but it was alike in some matters such as pulling out of Iraq or Britains prime minister loosing his job after being one of the most popular prime ministers for a long time. In the end it’s all a matter of opinion when asking if Robin Hood is based on real events or if it was just another reinvention of the classic story.
Judy K.
1. I think that a country like Britain that had a strong tradition of law and loyalty to the manarch would honor such a popular rebel hero who stole from the rich and gave to the poor because in the 1700s and the 1800s, English history lacked stories that talked about the life of commoners and poor people. It was very rare to find a character in English literature that was admired by the poor folk. So writers searched through their ancient history in order to find folk heroes. That is why they created the character if Robin Hood, to be the answer for the poverty and the difficult situations after the crusade wars that most of the village lived through. The stories of Robin Hood started to be a way writers can critize the government and their laws. The poor people were able to vent their frustration against their government by reading and acting the Robin Hood stories.
2. I think that the director of the Robin Hood movie, Ridley Scott, made the movie with the intentions of using some of the movie events to reflect currect events in Britian because he wants the government and the people of England to learn from the past history and hopefully find the solution for the currents events. This is very common in the history of writers to use historical stories and novels to address current events.
Kevin B
5th hour
Blog 25
1.The character of Robin Hood tried to represent the common people in England. Traditionally the monarchy did not look out for the lower class. Robin Hood had a desire to help fulfill his fathers plan of having the Magna Carta signed which would give more power to the people and less power to the pour. Even though he is said to have stolen from the rich he represents the possibility of everyone being given the same opportunities. He was trying to do for the people what they could not do for themselves.
2. Even though Robin Hood is a fictional movie and some say the character is fictional a director such as Ridley Scott would have to show some parallels in a movie from history. Both King Richard and Tony Blair were very popular figures. The timing of the movie was probably not a coincidence. King Richard spent most of his reign at war trying to protect his people. He gained the respect of his followers. Tony Blair took his country to war and was not rewarded but kicked out of office. Neither one could complete their plans to help their country. Robin Hood is used as a heroic figure to represent the things these two men never could.
Lauren M.
1st Hour
I think Britain would honor a person like Robin Hood because they thought of him as a hero during very hard times. If the people were really poor, then something needed to be done to help them. Like people always say, “desperate times call for desperate measures”. The Character of Robin Hood helped these extremely poor people by giving them something needed to live, even if Robin Hood went against the government, and stole money from the wealthy. If they had a choice, they most likely would go the legal route and work to earn money. But in this case, they didn’t really even have that choice. They had to take what they could get to live, even if it was stealing.
I do think that the director made the movie with intensions of using movie events to reflect current events. Based on the information in the blog prompt, I think they did do this on purpose to make it relevant to the viewers. As we talked a bit about in class, the movies of Robin Hood have been changed slightly throughout each movie made, but they always have the same basics to the story. This movie for example may have been made to reflect the current events going on and emphasized more of the wars and kings rather that the stealing of the money. Even though that was an important factor in current events and the movie, it also reflects the kings and the wars that were fought. As said in the prompt, the failed crusade, bad economy, and the killing of the king can be associated with Tony Blair losing his job, leaving Iraq, and the bad economy during both time periods. I think this movie that we just watched reflected the events of Britain and Iraq in 2008. I think this is an interesting point that may be perceived as coincidence to some, but I believe it’s not.
Khalil Hall
I think that Britain, a country with a strong tradition of law and loyalty to the monarch would honor this rebel hero they could use him as a way of showing that they recognized their wrong doings of making the poor stay poor and keeping the wealthy wealthy. Robin Hood could have been something along the lines of being sort of a publicity stunt, and represented the fact that an economy with more social mobility would be supported by the government, giving it (the government) more support from more people, especially because the majority of the citizens were poor.
I think that the main goal of the director, Tony Blair, was to more or less try to relay the overall story of Robin Hood, and make a modern movie out of an old folk tale. However, he could have seized an opportunity to try and make the movie reflect some of the current events in Britain. I think this because even thought there may have been some vague similarities to modern times, they weren’t very outright. I also think this because when the movie was originally written, Britain may have still been at war in Iraq, and Tony Blair may have still been in office (but I don’t know for sure).
Lily Doolin 5th hr.
1.) I think that Britain honored Robin Hood because he was a better ruler than King John. People didn’t like how King John was selfish and rude, but Robin Hood took charge and was brave. They also like Robin Hood even though he stole money because he gave to the poor. The rich people didn’t like that very much but since there were more poor people than rich, more people like Robin Hood.
2.) Yes, I think that Ridley Scott made the movie with intentions of using some current events so that people could relate what ws going on in the movie, to what Is going on in our world today. It makes people really pay attention, an keeps them interested In the movie. I noticed in the movie that it related Tony Blaire and King Richard. They both wanted to withdrawal.
I personally found the movie very confusing, but parts of it were interesting and the movie was made well.
1.)I think a country like Britain would honor a rebel like Robin Hood because he resembled that there will always be people that don’t agree with the choices made by the king/ruler but there will always be one person who actually does something about it and makes a change. I also think that they would honor Robin Hood because he shows that even if the way of government isn’t fair then there will be one person to basically “reunite” the community, and that’s what Robin Hood did in these so called “legends”.
2.)Yes, I do think that he did that on purpose, like he had a hidden message in the movie (well not hidden but the overall story line of the movie is very similar to the current events in Britain). But also, he could have done it without knowing.
Overall, the story line had a happy ending and did these events in Britain have one also?
Rachel Steffes
In answer to the first question, I think a country like Britain that had a strong tradition of law and loyalty to the monarch would honor such a popular rebel hero who stole from the rich and gave to the poor for many reasons. To start, if a follower wasn’t loyal to the king, or didn’t abide his laws, that person could be sentenced to death (such as in the movie when they said that if a common person killed a deer, they would be stealing from the king, making the punishment death). In other words, loyalty equaled survival. Another fact was that the rich owned most of the land and the poor worked on it, or leased it out from the lord. There was also an extremely high tax, and the fact that the common people had no rights, or couldn’t vote, which all leads to the truth that “honor” of the king would only go so far if people were starving. Robin Hood was fighting on the people’s behalf, which gave them hope. If your family had been starving, you had no money because the king taxed it all out of you, and your home was threatened, you would resort to some hope from a man who believed and was giving everything back to you. In answer to the second question, yes, the director of the movie, Ridley Scott, made the movie with intentions of using some of the movie events to reflect current events in Britain. I agree with all of those ideas listed (King Richard returning from the “failed crusade”, King Richard dying before returning home, terrible economy, poor and starving people, etc.), plus, to add on, there was a very high unemployment rate (approximately seventy percent http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=12) and foreclosure rate, just like in the movie. It is a very good parallel because banks hold all the wealth (like the king) and the common folk have little to no power (the common people in the movie).
Blog #25 - What does this new Robin Hood movie mean?
By: Jeffrey Couger
A country like Britain that had a strong tradition of law and loyalty to the monarch would honor such a popular rebel hero who stole from the rich and gave to the poor because it was a society of classes. The poor didn’t really have chances for advancement in society because the Rich were always at the top; Monarchy at work. Robin Hood gave them a chance to stick up for themselves and not let the
King take all their crops, etc… He gave the citizens, not only the poor, voice in the country where the only voice was coming from the castle.
Although the movie can be portrayed in modern time I don’t believe that it affected the writing of the movie or tried to reflect current events. I think this because not only is our time period so culturally different that it is almost impossible to replicate it to an accurate extent in the past. But also because the movie kept the basic form of Robin Hood. In contrast to the other question, in today’s world the rich are for the most part at the top again. Although this is true, I believe that the monarchy more negatively affected the citizens in the past than they do today, It is easier now to use your’ voice and spread your opinion.
1: I think that Britain really had no intention of letting a story such as Robin Hood’s go as far as it did. At best, they have just tried to make a folk lore story. However, it turned into what many people believed to be true. It may have started out as just a man who protected the truly innocent, but turned into a story of a man helping those in need, by stealing from those in power. We have no way of truly knowing. In the books, the movies and plays, he is portrayed as a hero, a vigilante. And I see why this may be. Because people at that time, when Britain was corrupted by those in power, may have needed some hope. And this Robin Hood may have been that hope for them.
2: In a way, I think it was meant to be portrayed as that. Though the details aren’t exact (because I don’t think Tony Blair lived in the 1400’s, but you never know) they do have similar connections. But I don’t 100 percent believe that, because not everything connects, and the things they do, in my opinion, weren’t that strong of a connection. The ones mentioned above were good, but weren’t exact. A failed attempt at something (in this case, a crusade) means that you tried and your efforts weren’t good enough to go all the way through it. In Iraq, we left because there was not much else we could do. We had lowered the numbers a bit, but had not put a halt in its entirety. But either, the messages in the movie were conveyed as a similar problem that is occurring at this moment.
Connor Stein
Mady Tyldesley, 5th Hour
1. A country like Britain would honor a rebel like Robin Hood because his heart was in the right place. Sure, he was doing a lot of illegal things such as stealing from the rich, but what made him honorable is that he was giving the money to the less fortunate. This action made Robin Hood someone to be honored and or remembered based on your opinion of his existence. Robin Hood is the perfect good-guy hero.
2. No, I think that the director decided to take a twist on the story of Robin Hood. The fact that some of the things in the movie seemed to reflect on current events involving the economy and the war doesn’t mean they were intentionally for that reason. The comparison to current events and this movie in my opinion, is overanalyzing. The story of Robin Hood has no direct connection to the current events from 2008. It may seem that way if you choose to look at it from that perspective but I don’t think that the similarities were planned or maybe, after the movie was made, the similarities were noticed. But, while making the movie, I don’t think that the comparison was the intent.
Blog #25
Colin Connelly
10/17/10
1.I think a country like Britain that had a strong tradition of law and loyalty to the monarch would honor a rebel that stole from the rich and gave to the poor because people se robin hood as a hero not a villain because he give to the gives poor.
2. yes I think Ridley Scott had the intentions to relate movie events with current events. I think he did this because the events that happened in the movie are similar to current events I think he did this to show wars make bad economy’s.
Sam Y.
A country like Britain would honor a popular rebel hero that stole from the rich and gave to the poor because they hope the image of a hero would attract more people to come to the country. Poor people would come to the country with the hope that a hero would help them, and spread the wealth. Since poor people were in a majority, it would give them hope. It is nice for people to think somebody is always on their side. Robin Hood was a very popular person with a good heart, and was greatly loved.
I think the director of the current Robin Hood made the movie with the intention of using the movie’s events to reflect current events in Britain, and then people would make connections with current times. Ridley Scott is showing that history tends to repeat itself and that we have made the same mistakes in the past. We should try not to repeat them in the future. I also think Ridley Scott is sending the message that we all need to act like Robin Hood by giving to the poor. There is always somebody lower than us, and needs more help than we do. Even though we might be having trouble, other people are having more trouble.
Alysse F.
5th Hour
1. I think a country like Britain had a strong tradition of law and loyalty to the monarch would honor such a popular rebel hero who stole from the rich and gave to the poor because they needed to destroy their enemies. Robin Hood was a popular hero and I think they were in need of him. There are a lot of poor people who loved what he did because he treated them well, and I think many wealthy people appreciated his work too..since he can help their society and defeat their enemies. I think that he didn't intend to be horrid to the rich and steal from them. He was probably thinking that since the king had deprived them of deer, etc., that he should be able to get food for the needy because the king had been unfair to them this whole time.
2. I think Ridley Scott made the movie with the intentions of using some of the movie events to reflect current events in Britain because he wants us to realize what is going on in Britain at the moment. I think he wants us to understand everything that happened then and relate it to what is happening now. Some of the points in the movie are a little “iffy” to relate to what is going on now but I think he was definitely trying to relate some points of view to everything that's happening in our world.
Alex S
5th hour
Blog #25
1. I think that Britain would honor a popular rebel hero such as Robin Hood because they were in a time of need and there were so many poor people in this time period. He helped the poor, which was helping the economy by stealing from the rich. The poor people honored him for doing nice things for them but the rich people and the government saw this as an injustice. What was actually unfair was that the king would not let them have any deer in the woods or let the people have any input in the government. Robin Hood was a great leader who wanted all people to be treated fairly. He is honored because he is on the poor people’s side and he would fight the enemy. He did good in his country and he also fought back against the poor government at the time.
2. I think the director did make the movie with intentions of using it to reflect to real events because he may have wanted viewers to understand what is going on in Britain in the current time period now. He probably was trying to show us that what happened in history relates to what is going on right now. We should not make the same mistakes that happened in the past; we should try and learn from them. We should have a better government and society and help out everyone around us. We should not be selfish or rude but help out other people in need.
1. I think that a country like Britain, which had a strong tradition of law and loyalty to the monarch, would honor such a popular rebel hero who stole from the rich and gave to the poor because this hero saved Britain, and had many important characteristics like bravery, generosity, leadership. Also the story is just an amazing story of a hero looking out for others, and keeping justice. In a way if the country of Britain would not have supported what Robin Hood did, Britain could have been looked down upon by other countries for being shallow, and other selfish traits.
2. I think that Ridley Scott made the movie with the intentions of using some of the movie events to reflect current events in Britain because it’s not only giving information on what could have happened with Robin Hood, but it is also helping to inform viewers of history of Britain.
Alex B. - 5th Hr.
Mason C
5th hr
I think Britain would honor a rebel like Robin Hood because they wanted to have change and more fairness in their country. Also many were poor and were starving and could not feed their families to to the king’s selfishness. Robin Hood helped certain people that were poor and deprived, which was a lot of the community. Most at that time thought the king was unfair, and such a brave figure like Robin Hood would surely be honored throughout the community for his brave deeds to benefit the poor and un wealthy. Robin Hood was very brave and people probably respect that he put himself and his own safety and life on the line to help the people of England.
I think Ridley Scott could have very well related the old events of Britain like King Richard returning from a failing crusade to Tony Blair withdrawing from the current was because they are both very similar. In addition both deal with the leaders having a bad outcome for themselves and their country. They both had good intentions but were maybe too eager to go to war. They thought it was for the greater good but it turned out the opposite. Tony Blair was fired, but King Richard was killed.
Jackie Feist
5th hour
They honored an outlaw like Robin Hood because through all the good monarchs and the bad ones Robin Hood kept them in line and worked for the people. It shows that no matter what someone will remain good and faithful to the people of England. They honored him because he was like the Hollywood character Zorro, an outlaw who fought for the people who where suppressed and poor, the people who needed someone to represent and speak for them, someone who leaves and impression. The figure of Robin Hood has generated a lot of books, tales, and movies in the past century. The Robin Hood Figure was said to bring hope to the poor and devastated people, by his kind actions and bold spirit. I think that this new Robin Hood movie was made in relation to modern day England to show how that history can sometimes repeat itself and how we need to learn from the past. It showed that hope even back in that time when the people of England were poor, starving, and had a corrupt ruler they had hope, but now we do not need an outlaw to represent us and give us hope.
1. I think that the reason that they honored him was because he gave the people a voice and took action, because they knew they would be killed if they did. I also think that even if he wasn’t real, this could be a hidden protest of poverty. I do think though that he was (most likely) real, so if someone gives you money or food, you’re going to like them. If you look at our country, you see how we have honored our presidents, and now it’s a lot different. I see it as RH as one of the young conservatives, and president Obama as the new King and Bush as lion heart. Bush got us into the war and helped plump us into dept, then his term end /king dies, and Obama comes into office and just makes it worst.
2.I think that he could have filmed it that way, because the fact that he filmed how Robin Hood became, and that is an original idea, so yeah, I think he did, and how he did it/made it fit together is rely cool.
Nathan Christian Gaenssle
Carolyn Kovach1sthour
Blog Questions:
1. I think that a country like Britain would honor someone who was such a rebel who stole and gave to the poor because, when Robin hood stole from the rich and gave to the poor, there were a lot more poor people that would support Robin Hood’s actions. Since the rich made the poor stay that way, by giving them taxes and high costs of goods. When Robin Hood took those things to give to the poor, it made him a lot more popular because someone for once was actually giving them a chance instead of just shutting them down. Although Robin Hood was not giving them the rights to owning their own land, I think that it made the poor even more happy when they knew that what they were getting was something that was from the rich. That something for once was taken away from them and its not always the poor with the short end of the stick. Bad things can happen to the rich too.
2. If the director intentionally made hidden messages in the movie, that was very clever of him to do. Now that someone points it out it does make sense that there were a lot of poor people in that movie that struggled for food and the only type of happiness they had in their life was the people they loved, could be the case of some families now a days. If the director did not do this on purpose then it was a really good coincidence. Maybe they director was trying to show that even though those event happened a long time ago, doesn’t’ mean that the times have changed to much. Yeah there is different technology and medicine, but when it comes down to it, people struggle to survive and there are wars that are starting and wars that are ending. There will always be battles to face.
Natalie Schaefer 5th Hour-
1) I think Britain would honor such a rebel even when they had a strong tradition of law and loyalty to the monarch because it showed Britain to be caring for its people. It made them seem like they cared about them regardless if they did or not. Robin Hood made sure everything was as it should be for the common people and that was the image britain wanted to promote. He also showed that the when the British government became unruly the people had the power to fix it. Robin Hood was truly a symbol for the people.
2) I believe the director did make the movie with the intent to connect it with the current events of the time in England. Whatever is happening in the world influences what you think and do and it probably influenced the director. Also, by bringing in current events it connected people to the movie and allowed them to feel what the characters felt. They were able to understand the movie more and the director knew that was important for the success of the movie. A lot of the time a movie goer won't even realize the connections but will still get more out of the movie.
1. I think that a country like Brittan would have a rebel hero, such as Robin Hood, because even if they do have a long tradition of loyalty to their monarch, they are still people. I’m sure that at least some people would cheer a person on when they are helping the poor from a king in the wrong. Robin Hood showed people how to do the right thing in a tough situation, even if the right thing to do is frowned upon by others. Also, not all of them might care for the monarch figure that is in charge.
2. I believe that creators of this movie may have seen some of the similarities that they just experienced and made the connections between real life and the old tale stand out more than they would if it hadn’t happened so close to the creation of the film. This may be because the people of Brittan would understand the emotions more of the characters in the movie since they went through some of the stuff that is in the film. However, I don’t know if the similarities were put in there for the enjoyment of the maker, Ridley Scott, or to hopefully get better reviews from the critiques in Brittan.
Alex B
I think that Britain had a strong traditional of law and loyalty to the monarch would honor such a popular rebel here who stole from the rich and gave to the poor because he was one of the few poor in England and most people around that time were rich. I also think it was because then in England know one really cared about the poor it was all about the rich people. The last reason I think this is because he was doing what was wrong to do what was really considered right. I think the writer of the current Robin Hood movie may have wanted the events in the movie to reflect on times now but there is also a chance that it was not. I think if he was trying to make it like that the people who watch the movie would have a better understand on it because of what was happening. If he was nit trying to make it seem like what was happening now he would have just accidently thought of it being like it is. I morally think that this movie had the intentions of being like what is happening now because otherwise it would not have been made how it is.
Joel S.
5th Hour
1.) I think that a country like Britain would honor a popular rebel hero like Robin Hood because its simply the right thing to do. I mean, even though the country of Britain has a strong tradition of law and loyalty to the monarch, they can still celebrate and honor someone who does good for the common people. I don't think that Britain would punish Robin Hood for doing the things he did. Yes, it is wrong to steal from the rich, or steal in general, but Robin Hood was doing bad for the good, which is a good thing.
2.) I think it is obvious that the director of the Robin Hood movie we watched in class used some reference points from the current events that are going on in Britain. It actually is a pretty good idea, because he wasn't there when the events with Robin Hood were going on, so it makes sense to get an idea from current events to simulate the events from back then. If the director of the movie were not to get ideas from the present day, he would have no real connections with violence and that would effect the quality of the movie extremely.
Jason Bittker
1.I think a country like Britain that had a strong tradition of law and loyalty to the monarch would honor such a popular rebel hero who stole from the rich and gave to the poor because Robin Hood was such a fearless warrior, fighter, and a selfless man. Also, they were amazed that Robin Hood was willing to commit a crime to help those in need. Additionally, Robin Hood was a middle-class member in society. Since there was a tremendous amount of poverty in the region, many middle class men were looking for ways to get themselves more money instead of donating money. Next, Robin Hood didn’t always listen to the kings orders, but did what he thought was the right thing to do. He was brave enough to complete many tasks that others wouldn’t think of doing. For example, he stayed true to his word and returned the sword to Sir Walter Loxley even though there were other things that he needed to do.
2.I think that the director of this current Robin Hood, Ridley Scott, made the movie with some intentions of using the events to reflect current events from 2008 in Britain. I don’t think that Ridley Scott was trying to base the entire movie on Britain’s failures in 2008. Instead, I believe he was trying to link the movie to a current event that people would relate to and understand. As you mentioned in the blog, people would see the terrible economy in the movie and make connections to the bank failures in Britain. Therefore, the movie would seem more realistic.
Marie
5th hour
1. A country like Britain, with a strong tradition of law and loyalty to the monarch, would honor a rebel who stole from the rich and gave to the poor for the same reasons our society has embraced the likes of John Dillinger or even Spider-man. Because he’s a typical average person who becomes an amazing person. He isn’t a king or a noble; he is part of the people and helps the people. Most of the England’s population at the time was poor, lived in extremely bad conditions and envied the rich, who had no worries. But they felt like, because of their low social status, they could do nothing to get back at the wealthy. It’s not about the money he gives to those in need, because most of those who acclaimed him never got anything from him. He is one man; there I no way he is able to bring help to all the needy around him. It’s the mere idea of an average, poor man breaking the restraints of social status and rebelling, that makes Robin Hood popular to this day. This idea gave the people the most important thing: hope. Hope that they could change things. It took the nobles off of their high pedestal and made them seem more- and I can’t find the right way to say this- more less enviable, more realistic and human. The idea of being able to control one’s situation is what makes outlaws like Robin Hood so admired.
2.Robin Hood is a legendary character. We have seen movies, comic books, action figures and more all dedicated to him. Imagine the amount of movie scripts focusing on Robin Hood trying to get produced in Hollywood. If this one made it, if this one was overall a success, it’s because it wasn’t your typical one-dimensional historical movie. It was trying to make people think deeper into it, to make them reflect on what, of the things done at the time, was right or wrong. This movie was meant to make people think about our present situation in Iraq. In truth, we know very little about what was going on in Britain during that time. There is no way a movie this detailed can be made without having to imagine some things up. The director saw this as an opportunity to twist the story and fashion it so it would resemble what America is going through with Iraq. It would have been a great way to influence people all over America, but unfortunately the film had its faults, and turned out a little bland.
David Airhihenbuwa - 1st hour #25
I think a country like Britain that had a strong tradition of law and loyalty to the monarch would honor a popular rebel hero who stole from the rich and gave to the poor because there were probably more poor people who liked these rebels than there were rich people who didn’t obviously like the rebels. The poor people would like them because these rebels are trying to help them and show that they should get as much rights as the rich people who take everything for themselves. If every one and everything was equal, they probably wouldn’t be any stealing going on, and there probably wouldn’t be any rebels in the first place.
I don’t think the director of the current Robin Hood had intentions on using some of the movie events to reflect on the current Britain or comparing King Richard to Toni Blair, because first of all, if he was reflecting on that topic, he probably would have made the movie to be more focused about King Richard than on Robin Longstride, and would have reflected more on the bad decisions that King Richard made. I think people are just trying to connect the King Richard to Toni Blair because they both had downfalls.
Beau Harms
1). I think a country like Britain even though they had a strong tradition of law & loyalty would honor a rebel like Robin Hood because he stole from the rich and gave to the poor. This would actually help Britain with their economy because their were less wealthy people in Britain than poor people. This would balance out the economy and then britain could collect taxes from the unwealthy. From Robin Hood being such a generous person he became popular person to the unwealthy.
2). I believe that the director of the new Robin Hood, Ridley Scott, did relate the movie with some current events. So that the people watching the film would really get a better understanding of what happened by relating it to current events. Back in the day of Robin Hood the economy was not doing well just like it has been. Or when King Richard fled from failing once again by a crusade. They could relate this to the war in Iraq and would really have a big impact on people who were in the war. They would really know what it was like leaving a battle like in the movie. I believe that yes Ridley Scott did intensionally intertwined current events and events that happened in history.
Hour 1
I think Britain would honor a rebel hero because even though he did steal, he did it for a good reason that most of the country admired. Robin Hood fought injustice, and justice is what many people want.
I do not believe that the director intentionally made the movie relate to any current events in the world today. The main point of this movie is to tell the story of what happened before Robin Hood because the outlaw he came to be and to never give up. It is the viewer’s job to make any connections – to take to moral of this movie (to never give up) and apply it (if they wish) to their lives.
Justin R.
10/19/10
World History
!st hour
1. Why do you think a country like Britain that had a strong tradition of law and loyalty to the monarch would honor such a popular rebel hero who stole from the rich and gave to the poor?
They honored someone like Robin Hood because they reminded them of themselves and people were honored to have someone of like a middle class stand up for them. People liked robin because he was not scared to stand up to many important kings and people who were fighting in battle. He was a hero and was deemed very brave to many people because of his courageous acts and the way he lead many people during battle and in many other experiences robin and his people faced. Even though he maybe was deemed bad in the rich eyes but he was deemed amazing and a hero to the poor because he had gave so much to them and helped them out tremendously.
2. The current RH movie that we just watched could be viewed in the time period that it was made: Britain had withdrawn from the Iraq War by 2008, their once popular Prime Minister (Tony Blair) was booted out of office for his decisions to go to war and among other things like a bad economy. Do you think that the director of this current RH, Ridley Scott, made the movie with the intentions of using some of the movie events to reflect current events in Britain (King Richard returning from a "failed crusade" as Robin called it = leaving Iraq; King Richard dying before returning home = Tony Blair losing his job; terrible economy, poor and starving people = disastrous bank failures and economic crash in 2008)? Why or why not?
Yes, I do think that he was comparing it to current events. I think this because it drags in the person watching it more and makes people relate better to the movie. I think that also the director did this because it is easier top understand when people explain to in resent events than just talking in the past especially in current today. I think he also talked a lot about the economy due to the problems also today and people relate to the past and how it is happening now and what is occurring in present day. I believe that the Robin Hood movie was a great movie and directed very well in people to relate to the events.
The movie Robin Hood showed how the rich and poor got along with each other. It meant that the peasants thought the new king was devious and he treated them horribly. The peasants got over taxed and had barley enough money to live. So they turned to religion for everything and used it as outsource for their worries. When good things happen they could never be happy about that but they thought a miracle happened. But many people used church to pray for their husbands or sons that are soldiers that go off to war. Also the king was never really in connection with the other lands in his kingdom and never knew what they needed. This showed that some kings had bad ideas for the kingdom. Also some kings were hypocrites. The king in the movie, king john had never gone to war and most of the war he sat and watched the peasants fight. Also people who do good things for the people but bad things for the king become outlaws of the kingdom like Robin Longstride.
Mark G
Caleb H. 5th Hour
I think a country like Britain would honor such a popular rebel who stole from the rich and gave to the poor for many reasons. Most people were poor, which made them the bigger audience. I think they honored Robin Hood because of what they wanted to see happen, and because he supported them. I think the rest of the population began to accept Robin Hood because he was already a popular character in plays and other forms of drama, and most might have found his story amusing. Also, I think that people honor Robin Hood because he is part of English culture, whether being authentic or not.
Yes, I do think Ridley Scott made Robin Hood with the intentions of using some of the movie events to reflect current events in Britain. I think he did this with the thought of Robin Hood becoming such a big success. I think he did this because he wanted to give his movie a deeper meaning than others, and to make the movie a popular discussion topic among critics. I also think Ridley Scott attempted to reflect the movie's events with today's events in Britain because he wanted to educate the world about some of the UK's current events and how they are affecting the world.
Robin Hood was a great person. He thought of others before hisself. I thought he was brave to act like someone elses husband. Robin Hood was a brave, kind, and loyal person. I think Britain would honor Robin because what he did was brave and will set an example even though he was a rebel and even though he stole from the rich and gave to the poor. I also think that the director was comparing the RH so that viewers could compare it to the current events.
During a time of intense power and hierarchy in the loyal country of Britain, Robin Hood stole the spotlight. The country was under rule of a conceited and over powered king who was selfish and undeserving of his title. The laws he made causes suffering to those less fortunate which left the people in the town struggling to make ends meet. Robin Hood took charge of this situation by fighting back for those he cared about, and the common community. He was not seen as a rebel by those in the country because in their eyes the king was a menace that only cared for himself. With the help and bravery of Robin Hood the poor and needy were given a light of hope.
The current Robin Hood movie directed by Ridley Scott portrayed many similarities between past historical events dealing with Robin Hood as well as the subtle images of the current events in Britain. My personal opinion is that current movies that are being produced have a better rating and audience connection is when it can be tied into the movie when dealing with present day events and worldly situations. The examples that you listed are subtle imprints that the director planted in the movie to relate the issues of the past and tie them in with the present day issues. They weren't meant to define the movie however is was a creative ploy to address his own personal opinions through other characters.
Robin Hood was a great person. He thought of others before hisself. I thought he was brave to act like someone elses husband. Robin Hood was a brave, kind, and loyal person. I think Britain would honor Robin because what he did was brave and will set an example even though he was a rebel and even though he stole from the rich and gave to the poor. I also think that the director was comparing the RH so that viewers could compare it to the current events.
Post a Comment