I thank for a links . Unfortunately, no trailers will force me to accept Robin in this version. :/  But I still hope to see worthy Gisborne.  :paladin:

Descriptions of series are not deprived interest. But I doubt, it will look well on the screen. In descriptions I have seen stamps, concerning  Skarlett's   family and cruelty of Gisborne.
Robin  is amusing, but  he isn't  hero. He looks similarly to the boy plays Robin Hood.

Richard still causes interest.

Here are some more articles from several todays TV magazines (some of them mentioning Richard and his portrayal of GoG i-m_so_happy: ):

http://richard-armitage.com/Magazines.htm

Hi ghostinthefog!
I am glad to see you again! :give_rose:

Unfortunately, I didn't look this new film for the personal reasons. I saw only some episodes, read responses.
The main reason of that I cannot accept it - absolute unreality. Why film for children should be silly and ridiculous?
The BBC promised a historical drama. We see a farce.
I saw suits, I heard speech of heroes. 
All this has no attitude to  Robin and to 12 century.  :rtfm:

Any of heroes does not inspire trust. With one of them I would not go to fight.  no.gif
They look, as actors from cheap buffoonery. 

Sir  Guy. By responses, he to care of general hatred to himself and he does not overlook to emphasize and remind associates, that the villain.
I since the childhood don't love unequivocal images.
Robin more convincing and alive.

As a whole, all this looks as inept plagiarism.

We are brought up and spoilt other films.
Carpenter wanted to see the Middle Ages in еyes of heroes. Heroes of the ROS were alive, they and now alive and true.
They till now cause disputes.

Can be, women see something another in similar films. Beautiful appearance, sexuality. The actor should be attractive, I agree. But the вeauty it only a small part of success.
I don't see sense in this film. I don't see a life. I see fashion parade and competition of beauty.
Richard and Lussy are in the lead. :fans:

Unique plus of a serial is music. 

I hope, we can continue discussion when Milka   will express opinion.  She saw six series.

Good morning Milka and Bobby (and all the other who might read this)!!! :bye:

Just a short reply this time:

The BBC obviously never wanted to try to make a historical accurate series (unlike RoS).
On the contrary: They said from the beginning (as you can find in several press articles) they wanted to make a version of the old legend with a contemporary feel to it and even a bit of street style. And from what I have seen so far viewers got what it said on the tin.... the question is if one likes it or not. I for my part (and a lot of other people) like it but others don't.

I agree with you about some of the costumes. They are quite bizarre sometimes.  :haha:  But some of them fit the style of the whole series and I don't mind too much. Other things (heavy make-up, striped t-shirts etc.) makes me go: "Huh? Whats that???". But I started to believe the producers did all this deliberately (as some kind of joke) and not because they didn't know better. Again a question of personal taste. Some people don't mind others hate it  :yes: .
The fights are sometimes very stagy and unbelieveable but I have seen some good ones too (e.g. ep. 6).

When it comes to the characters I agree with some of the things you pointed out but not all of them.
As I said before I like Marians character very much. Yes, she is very feminist and tries to stay independent and that is all so historical incorrect but I don't care. I wanted exactly a Marian like this!

The sheriff is very comical (and I like that) but very menacing and cruel too. So I think he is doing a great job. But I know there are several people who don't like him (most of them because they just don't like Keith Allan  ).

With Sir Guy it is a bit more difficult. He is a nasty bastard but when it comes to Marian he starts to "melt" . I like the way Richards portrays this character. I find Sir Guy repellent and appealing at the same time. Really strange in fact   :swoon:  !
And from people I know and forums/livejournals I have read I think one can say that he IS able to find the way to women's hearts  . This of course does not include Marians heart but that is understandable...

Alltogether I can say that I like the way this version tries to tell the legend in a new way (and doesn't take itself too seriously). And from the viewing figures it seems some 5-6 million other people like it too. In fact the BBC seems to be pleased with the figures they start to think about commissioning a second series. good.gif

i think you are right ghost. I dont think that i'll be able to see new series of RoS soon but i'll make sure to see them in the future and whatever the script is, i'm pretty sure Richard is doing his best.

North and South is an amazing movie. I DO agree with you guys that Richard Armitage is an extremely talented actor. Surely he's handsome but i wouldnt have cared if he wouldnt been able to play so greatly. i'm not much into movies like "Pride and Prejudice" so i took time before i finally watched "North and South" but i didnt regret. Sorry for talking about this here, but i really have to honor his talent. You were completeltly right - the one should see him in action to judge. He makes the audience feel for his character and he can think in the shot which is so rare. bravo! i hope he didn't disapoint you with Sir Guy. I surfed through some comments about the RoS and it seemed to me that people are not quite happy about the movie, especially the new "Robin team". I can judge only from pictures cause my internet connection is low and i can't download anything to judge myself. But i really hope that Richard did his best cause i'm very grateful to him for such a great character that he delivered in the "North and South".

p.s.And by the way i DO agree that the final scene between John and Margaret is one of the most romantic scenes i've ever seen, and on my humble opinion it's only Richard's merit. I'm taking off my hat before him. I have never ever seen anything comparable to such play before. He managed to combine the precision of the jeweller, intuition and a great artist's art into a minute scene. His play of this scene was beyond praises, so fine and mouving.  :give_rose: I only wish him more great roles. I'm sorry for being off topic but i really had to come back to this and make sure you know i admit he is a brilliant actor.

Отредактировано Cathy (08-12-2006 13:58:42)

ghost, i would say even more. first of all i didn't have any intention to watch the new RoS (not because i love dearly the RoS with Michael Praed but because i just wasnt interested much) but now i think i'm willing to watch it because of Richard. although i should wait for the DVD to come out (if it's going to happen at all) cause i havent got the BBC1 channel here in NZ. the more i think about North and South, the more i appreciate it (and i think i'm going to rent it again to savour this masterpiece and characters :yes:  i-m_so_happy: ) and think that he's able to play greatly whatever the script is. he's got a gift and he's such an intelligent guy. I'm really intrigued about his Gisburne. And walking the edge with combining vulnerable emotions and brutality at the same time as you said might be an enormosly interesting work. Sir Guy as a brutish bully? Very interesting. I've noticed this ability to combine opposite emotions at the same moment and shot in N&S and was fascinated with it. I'm too old to become a fan lol but i'm old enough to appreciate his art and passion for the profession. Thank you for advising me N&S, it's going to become one of my favorite movies ever. And i'm looking forward to watch the new RoS. how the rest of the cast is doing there on your opinion?

Whether it seems to you, we assimilate to grumbling old men?  We know true?
I wish to trust, that we know. Good film forces to love that it illustrates. It forces to experience and trust in an event.
I didn't look and I'll not look this new film. There is quite enough descriptions. 
Fans of actors can, and will think out for certain the variants, to explain inexplicable acts of heroes, but what value of product? Here the subject is secondary. The main thing - presence of favourite actors. But should be on the contrary.
Really, absence of a subject, absence of sense and a core, I can see in descriptions.
It is sad,  similar films are created. Hence, there are the people, ready to look similar films..
As to real value " Robin Of Sherwood ", for me it was obvious always.   

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robin_Hood

In many stories Robin's nemesis is the Sheriff of Nottingham. In the oldest legends, this is merely because a sheriff is an outlaw's natural enemy,[2] but in later versions, the despotic sheriff gravely abuses his position, appropriating land, levying intolerable taxation, and unfairly persecuting the poor. In some tales the antagonist is Prince John, based on John of England, seen as the unjust usurper of his pious brother Richard. In the oldest versions surviving, Robin Hood is a yeoman, but in some versions he is said to have been a nobleman, the earl of Loxley (Locksley), who was unjustly deprived of his lands.[3] Sometimes he has served in the crusades, returning to England to find his lands pillaged by the dastardly sheriff.

Отредактировано Cathy (12-04-2007 06:42:29)

how about serving in crusades? i've never heard of it. thought it was coming only from scripts of BBC