Sep 281946
 
two reels

The elderly Robin Hood finds tyranny once again in England in the form of the Regent (Henry Daniell). He reforms his band of merry men and calls on his son Robert (Cornel Wilde) to lead the fight. When the Regent threatens to kill the young king, Robert devises a rescue with the help of Lady Catherine Maitland (Anita Louise), who, it being a swashbuckler, he naturally falls in love with.

Though made by rival Columbia studios, The Bandit of Sherwood Forest is a sequel to the classic The Adventures of Robin Hood, with all the positives and negatives inherent in sequels. It was to be titled Son of Robin Hood but legal wrangling over who owned the rights to the name “Robin Hood” left it with its less streamlined name. Like its predecessor, it is a lavish (if stagy) Technicolor Swashbuckler, with those beautiful colors never found in nature. It has plenty of well choreographed fencing and archery, and, of course, romance. There are chipper heroes riding here and there and fighting for king and country as well as Machiavellian foes out to harm the little people. The cast is jam-packed with recognizable and talented studio players fronted by the charming Cornel Wilde. As an ex-member of the Olympic fencing team, he knows what to do with a sword.

That’s being generous. Like most sequels, it also pales next to the earlier film. The story meanders, seldom eliciting excitement. The tension is low and the suspense even lower. The music is pleasant, but forgettable and the direction is standard for a B-movie. While the supporting actors are all decent, none stand out except Henry Daniell (The Sea Hawk) who oozes evil. The fights are enjoyable and plentiful, but never rise above the level of competent. As for Wilde, he is indeed charming, but in a second-tier way. He’s no Flynn, and when not swashing and buckling, he has a hard time carrying a film with a lackluster script.

Grand epics can’t be made on the cheap, and everything about The Bandit of Sherwood Forest proclaims that no corner was left uncut. This is most obvious when viewing the townspeople—there are hardly any. This is Robin Hood after the plague wiped out nine-tenths of the population. I feel sorry for the regent.  He rules a country, but has only a handful of guards, only a couple courtiers, and no servants. No wonder he’s grumpy.

While The Bandit of Sherwood Forest is only mildly entertaining, it is an important anthropological record. Before seeing it, I had no idea that silk stockings were common in the early twelve-hundreds. When Robin observes Lady Catherine’s legs by the river, he comments on her silk stockings. You won’t find that kind of history of women’s leg-coverings anywhere else.

Other Robin Hood Swashbucklers I’ve reviewed: The Adventures of Robin Hood (1938), Rogues of Sherwood Forest (1950), Sword of Sherwood Forest (1960), Robin and Marian (1976), Robin Hood (1991), and Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves (1991).

Back to Swashbucklers

 Reviews, Swashbucklers Tagged with: