Robin and Marian (1976)

 There have been many versions of the Robin Hood story on both cinema and television all of which have essentially kept within the familiar timespan. Richard Leser’s 1976 film however takes up the story twenty years after those events introducing us to older versions of the characters. I suppose it’s a sequel to all of those versions that had gone before and after. The concept is definitely an intriguing one with the potential to explore a hero after their heroics are over, facing middle age and different problems. As it turns out, this is not quite that film but it makes a bold attempt to be different from the Robin Hood story we know.

 

Showing an older Robin Hood is a risk because audiences don’t really want to see heroes getting older. We have a fixed image of who they are- in Robin’s case it’s the green clad marksmen flitting from tree to tree- and deciding to show them with aching joints and thoughts or mortality was definitely a bold decision in the mid Seventies. Casting a former James Bond – another character people feel should never age- made it a double risk yet its one that pays off.

Two decades since the Sherwood shenanigans we find Robin and Little John in France fighting for King Richard who turns out not to be quite the just and noble king they’d perceived him to be in his absence. Close up they get to see the viciousness of his character, his arrogance and poor treatment of prisoners. When he unexpectantly dies of poisoning after someone literally throws an arrow at him (one of several plot points which may make you raise your eyebrows!) the duo return to England ostensibly to retire.

Yet an old outlaw’s work is never done and they are soon plunged into new problems caused by their old nemesis the Sherriff of Nottingham acting on behalf of King John. Actually they are old problems as the plot does tend to parallel at least some of the markers of the classic story. The result is a film that is the polar opposite of the famous Kevin Costner 1991 epic. Whereas that was edited tightly, moved with speed and purpose and was as polished as the kind of music video it seemed to be copying, Robin and Marion is messy, natural, not without humour and most of all tries to be more realistic. The films are similar in employing a high calibre of actor to their cause, but whereas Costner and co all seemed to be in different movies, here there is a unity of purpose. I do like the Costner movie by the way, but it really lacks substance and has little new to add to an already familiar tale.

The 1976 cast brings together some actors with fearsome reputations- Sean Connery is Robin in his forties, a man with painful joints as well as mental scars. As is his wont Connery plays this with levity, as Robin shakes off aches and pains in an attempt to win back both Nottingham from the yoke of the Sherrif and Marian from her surprising new vocation as a Nun. As Marian, Audrey Hepburn’s vows seem to have included getting her hair styled – when she finally removes her wimple it is to reveal a perfectly coiffured cut direct from the Seventies’ trendiest stylist. Yet her religious vows are not to be broken by Robin’s cavalier return.

Well, actually, as we know they will be, they are in what is a very subtly developed second courtship. It’s a wonderfully scripted look at a relationship amongst people who are no longer in their salad days but have never truly fallen out of love whatever they say. The actor’s on screen rapport works this up superbly and you can believe that, whatever they say, these characters have been in love with each other even when apart for twenty years.

Sean Connery was not always the most versatile actor yet he really suits the still gung ho Robin ignoring his ageing body and still acting like he’s twenty years ago. His chemistry with Audrey Hepburn works really well and you can believed in their shared history. Nicol Williamson is John, a role that’s the complete opposite of his memorably crazy Merlin that was still five years away. It says something about his skills that he’s just as good here playing the loyal, steadfast John who remains committed to follow Robin even when he’s advised him not to take a particular course of action. Williamson’s stillness acts as a counter to some of the other larger performances.

The Sherriff is Robert Shaw by then an international name thanks to Jaws, and his interpretation of a character often turned into a hysterical tyrant is much subtler. He is playing an older Sherriff calmer and practical yet still ruthless. The inevitable confrontation with Connery’s Robin brings out the best of both of them even if its not quite what you expect. Although receiving prominent billing Richard Harris is only on screen for about ten minutes but it’s a worthwhile, busy ten minutes in which he clashes with Robin, orders mass executions, is hit by a poison arrow and then dies in his throne room, something which saves Robin and John from being executed Its melodramatic stuff of course but good nonetheless. Unfortunately, his premature exit means he doesn’t get to share scenes with Robert Shaw which would be something.

With even the supporting characters being played by familiar names (Ronnie Barker, Peter Butterworth, Ian Holm, Kenneth Cranham) there is a strong bedrock for James Goldman’s often light dialogue. King Richard aside, Goldman prefers more naturalistic dialogue, little asides, observations rather than long speeches. This fits in well with Richard Lester’s approach allied with David Watkin’s cinematography.

The opening sequence is terrific showing a scene whose full aspect is not immediately clear before it opens out further and further finally revealing what is happening and where we are. When Robin and John get back to England the contrast with the European scrubland and the green fields is emphasised. Every scene is impeccably mounted with no attempt to make things too sanitised to the point where sometimes you can almost smell the countryside. Sherwood Forest itself, rather than the sun dappled idyll of the 1991 film, is ordinary looking.

One scene sees Robin and Marion visiting their old “house” as she calls it though its just an area sheltered by a tree. She’s surprised at how small it is and this is echoed in other scenes. It seems a deliberate choice by the filmmakers to puncture the glossier parts of the story and show that living and fighting in a forest is far from `merry`.

While there are some conversations about ageing, I was a little disappointed it wasn’t leaned into more though at the end when Robin and the Sherriff get to engage in single combat to decide the outcome of a siege, they do so with weary awkwardness. I’m sure it was choreographed but the actors and director focus on how difficult it is and by the end both men seem to want it to finish though neither can bring themselves to do so. The film isn’t overly concerned with showing large spectacle. While we do see a long trail of soldiers heading to battle, caravans or bustling villages these are fairly fleeing and the focus soon returns to the characters.

The only extended action sequence around the ramparts of a castle wall is an early indicator that the combat we see will be as realistic as possible and not slick dance like sequences. This feel encompasses the various characters we meet briefly as well; they don’t exactly get comedic lines but they are ordinary people bantering as they would. It just feels natural which I think must have been Richard Lester’s watchword for the whole movie. Later when asked about the film in a Guardian interview he said: “Instead of filming the love scene I’d like to see the maid taking the sheets off and taking them to the laundry the next morning. I’m more interested in not what the person seems to be but the other side of the myth.”

The ending is grim indeed as Marian takes an injured Robin back to the abbey ostensibly to tend to his wounds; however in a middle-aged version of Romeo and Juliet they both die after drinking poisoned wine she has administered to him and drunk herself. Earlier there is a scene where Marian refers to a suicide attempts  she made after Robin left twenty years ago. It’s an unexpected gambit that works because it seems like Robin has won but Marian knew he would never recover from his wound. Audrey Hepburn, whose role has been a little unevenly written- not least the speed with which she abandons her religious zeal- flourishes in this heartbreaking scene as she brings together the strands of her past to make her shock decision.

The movie opens and closes with a shot of rotting apples perhaps to show that this is a bittersweet story which has something even for those who are fed up with countless Robin Hood iterations. As a sequel to one of the world’s best known stories it is a huge success.