Robin Hood: Ghosts of Sherwood (2012) User Reviews

total junk.. Land fill material

[mdcplas · 1/10 · 4 June 2013]

This is so bad.. The only reason I rented it was because the cover looked pretty good and all the movies I seen of Robin Hood were pretty damn good..

They need to pay people to watch this..

The acting and lines are atrocious I couldn't watch more then 5 minutes of the movie I even skipped ahead to see if it got any better but no..

This is more like a Elementary school acting with adults..

save yourself the money watch something else.

This movie is so bad I made an account here to just post how really bad it was.

I would be ashamed to have my name on the credits.

Robin Crap : Ghost of Sherwood

[margitholm · 1/10 · 26 November 2012]

I really don't understand, why anyone would make something like this. This movie is so bad and so badly acted, that is will make your eyes and ears bleed. The story is terrible, the acting bad, the costumes are a joke, and the special effect and fight scenes are bad ... even for a B movie.

Give the local kinder garden a phone cam and some money for costumes, and i am sure they would do a better job. This movie really have to be one of the worst ever made!

So, if u don't wanna waste your time or money, stay away from this crap movie...

WTF just happened to my screen?

[Movie-Misfit · 1/10 · 14 July 2014]

Holy god in heaven above...

As a film maker, I hate to hit hard on other independent directors, but for the sake of humanity, sometimes... just sometimes, you have to!

The cover looked great, a holographic ghost-faced Robin Hood. The fact that it made it to distribution pulled me another step closer... and then I found it brand new in Poundland.

For a pound yes.

I have seen thousands of films in my time. I have seen some sh*t in my time. Some critics and film buffs would go on to say I have made some sh*t in my time... but knowing what went into this, and what we put into ours, well, I don't think I need to take it to heart!

Oh yes, the film. From the opening scenes you begin to wonder what did you just buy, then, even by jumping chapters and giving them a chance, you soon find out as your eyes start bleeding at the embarrassingly poor performances from everyone (including FX legend and major Richard head Tom Savini who should just give up), the awful action scenes, FX - yes, even with Tom involved in the film you reckon they would have had a chance.

I could go on!

Robin Hood: Ghosts Of Sherwood is fitting, as anyone that buys this film is getting robbed!

I can't even put it in the so-bad-its-good category...

Beyond Belief of even the most fanciful viewer

[james-gray-800-750746 · 1/10 · 24 September 2013]

I have only myself to blame...

A colleague said to, "last night I watched the worst film ever made", to which I replied "are you sure? I've seen some pretty awful films in my time".

He lent me the DVD... ...after 20 minutes I tried gnawing my own leg off while trying to hope that the film would improve, but it then performed the impossible accomplishment of getting even worse! DO NOT fall for this trap!

The ONLY person involved with this film that deserves any endorsement is the person who designed the DVD Box (which is really rather good).

Good cover & Very bad movie with no real identity.

[Domino76 · 1/10 · 7 July 2013]

This movie is not even remotely good. I appreciate a good low budget or even micro budget film. This is not that! The acting is brutal, line delivery is like listening to a customer service line where the English is forced at best with extreme limited understand-ability, and there is no coherent direction for the film. It's a comedy ... no it's an action flick ... but wait it's a zombie movie. I mean it can be all three if meshed together and apparent. This is not meshed at all. It goes in one direction then another and another. Serious, scary, fun, silly, or just plain no good? Guess.. I'm not a big fan, but I did watch the whole movie & the special features which made me understand the quality a bit.

Robin my time and energy

[cheetor75-1 · 1/10 · 8 January 2013]

Have you ever watched a tearjerker? One that was so traumatizing that it tugged at your heart and made you think about it well after you had watched it. Well, folks this is definitely one of those. This movie is so bad you will really cry. The action, acting special effect are all just horrible...

WHY KANE HODDER? WHYYYY????? ZOOZOO.....cricket, WHAT THE HECK IS THAT???? It should have been used to prevent this movie from being made. Please keep to what you do best...Hack N Slash. You didn't have to do this.

For anyone who reads this I give you fair warning it is one of the worst movies of 2012...... No, of all eternity. For your sanity don't watch it unless you want to lose all friends and family.

Robin Hood : The Ghosts of no Budget...

[Deliberate_Stranger · 19 December 2012]

I have to say, I was looking forward to see this movie since I first heard of it. Storyline seemed to be really interesting. Finally I was able to catch the German DVD release of 'Robin Hood: Ghosts of Sherwood' and I must say it was a huge letdown for me. The biggest problem with the movie is It's non existing budget. They shot it in 3D which was probably quite expensive alone but sorry to say, it was just a waste of money and those money could(and should) be spent on something else. You simply can't do a movie set in a medieval times with knights, sword fights etc without the real budget. It's not about putting 4 guys in the armors, give them fake swords and tell to 'make an impression'. I knew from the beginning that It's gonna be really bad movie, when I saw sword fights(well 'fight' is not an accurate word) in the first 5 minutes. There was no choreography whatsoever and it looked so amateurish it hurts. It reminded me various 'castle tournaments' I have seen many times. The difference is, those shows were done for 5 years old kids and no one cared how badly they looked but this is a movie, serious one....well at least it tries to be. IMDb states that budget was around 200 000 euros which is impossible, highly doubt it could be more expensive than 100k, rather less. It was shot in Germany and must I say - locations look great. The forest is really interesting, castle looks cool so does the river but unfortunately the locations and a score are the only good things about this film. Since it was shot in Germany, it has German cast and the director decided to go with English dubbing which unfortunately doesn't work and is superbly annoying. It would work better if the makers would go and hire German actors who could actually speak in English. Most of the cast are amateurs(director's friends I guess) and we have two exceptions. FX Legend Tom Savini plays sheriff of Nottingham and Kane Hodder plays Little John. I know that Savini likes to act in low and no budget movies and to be honest he can even give a nice performance but here, he's just awful like everyone else plus his screen time is extremely limited. Little better can be said about Kane Hodder who also has a strange tendency to appear in a movies as an actor lately. Well, I know he is Jason Voorhees, he is Victor Crowley etc but for God's sake he is a stuntman, without any acting talent. Surprisingly he's probably the best actor in the entire movie. Appears on screen 20 minutes before the end but from then, he is in pretty much each scene. If you are looking for a horror movie, better look somewhere else. It's being promoted as a horror movie but there are very few horror elements in the entire movie. For the most part It's just an adventure movie(boring one) with German woman and gay looking Robin Hood slowly falling for each other. The horror part starts in the last 20 minutes or so. Robin and his pals are turned into flesh eating zombies and run no budget havoc in the forest(which means they don't do anything really). There are few cheap gore tricks and two nice decapitations but It's just non existent for a movie which lasts for almost two hours. I really wanted to like this, I knew It's gonna be low budget but it was beyond bad, mostly because it was boring and English dubbing sucked big time. I know for sure that I won't watch this again in my life. I have seen worse movies but still it was very close to the bottom of filmmaking. I will give it three because of a beautiful locations, nice score and two names which were still kind of relief when compared with dubbed amateurs.

Lost hope

[beef-638-121436 · 1/10 · 17 June 2013]

I had some hope for this movie, as the first two minutes were not too bad action in a fast pace, but then... the titles, two minutes of stills. No panning even. That really pulled me back to my original bias, that this would be a badly done movie. Yep. Some minutes later Robin and Marian have a dialog. Both performances are truly beyond every grade of awful. The conversation dry and unable to catch my interest in any way. At this point, I see that any further watching of this poor excuse for a movie, would be a real pain. So I deleted it, and decided to write this as a warning. Even if you are a Robin Hood fan, or like to grab a low budget movie once in a while, do not watch this one. It is a f*ckload of diseased crap.

Pathetic retelling of an old legend

[toolman2007 · 1/10 · 19 June 2013]

I have been using IMDb for years and have never bothered writing a review for anything. But, for this film, I felt a duty to warn people. Robin Hood The Ghost of Sherwood, sounds simple enough. From reading the back of the box it sounded like it was just a low budget version of the tale. Now for the problems: The acting was horrible. The film was shot in Germany with unknown German actors who had no talent whatsoever. To make matters worse the film was shot in German and they used English dubbing, (which made it even worse). When the actors delivered a line it reminded me of someone just saying the lines out loud to confirm that they had it memorized. There was no emotion, no acting at all. I've had more fun watching paint dry.

The plot was the worst part. About halfway through the film Robin Hood and all of his men are killed by the Sheriff's soldiers. Marian and Little John were the only ones to survive and it just so happens that Marian knew of a witch that could bring the dead back to life. So, they go there, kill the witch, take all of her potions, go back to camp and give the potion of the undead to everyone. Well, they got there too late and while Robin and all of his men come back to life, they now have a craving for human flesh. Yeah, you read that right, Robin Hood and his men are now zombies and the run around Sherwood Forest eating people. Marian and Little John still have bags of the witch's potion, so they find some that they can use. So now the two of them are running around Sherwood Forest while Little John throws rocks, yes rocks, at them and says some dumb word to make the rocks explode on impact (sipzoso, I think it was) or something to that effect. Oh, and of the potions caused a meteor shower. They use one of the potions to trap Robin and his men in the forest, then Marian goes to the Sheriff and tricks him into the forest so that Robin can kill him.

I would have given this movie zero stars but one star was as low as I could go. After watching the first half hour of the movie, I seriously considered turning it off, but I thought, it can't get any worse. Well, I was wrong. It got worse. A lot worse. Anyone who likes Robin Hood or an adventure movie in general, avoid this like the plague, there are a lot better movies out there about Robin Hood than this.

If you want to see Robin Hood, check out the 2010 version starring Russell Crowe or Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves starring Kevin Costner made in 1991. There was also a television series made in the UK that started five or six years ago. It only went for three seasons, but it was very enjoyable and well made. Any of these are a better choice than this garbage.

Hell ought to be a better place

[nogodnomasters · 1/10 · 24 January 2018]

There aren't any ghosts. They are more like zombies, or flesh eating undead and there is very little to see as it comes late in the film.

This film goes from Robin (Martin Thon) rescuing Maid Marion (Ramona Kuen) up unto his death and a bit afterwards if you catch my drift. Most of the film concerns the relationships of the living individuals. The punkish Robin lives in a commune and gives a long speech that makes Marx look like a Rockefeller. To create Old English effect they play around with the syntax and apply accents that would get rejected from a small town Renaissance Fair. The dialouge and acting was terrible with actors limply reading their lines. The opening fight scene looked like a cross between an Asylum film and a Monty Python production.

The editing was a major WTF as they ran some credits 10 minutes from the end, then continued with 5 more minutes of the film, then the final credits. Kudos for thinking outside of the box on a credit roll, but there is a reason why no one runs closing credits 10 minutes before the film is over. Really.

Parental Guide: No F-bombs, sex, or nudity.

Really pathetic

[TheLittleSongbird · 1/10 · 28 March 2015]

This was a classic case of the DVD cover being vastly better than the movie itself. The DVD cover looked absolutely great and from it Robin Hood: Ghosts of Sherwood with decent execution had potential to be a guilty pleasure at least. However, the promise it initially showed was completely squandered by terrible execution all round to the extent that it is far too amateurish to remotely pass as a guilty pleasure.

Robin Hood: Ghosts of Sherwood is badly made for starters. The scenery is alright and the cinematography reasonably good but with such disjointed and confused editing and very drab lighting it was difficult to enjoy either. The music is completely overblown and a long way from rousing, in fact a lot of it is a monotonous bore. Further hindered by erratic sound quality, sometimes overbearing and sometimes distant, all the time drowning out the dialogue. Not that the dialogue is worth hearing, because it high in cheese and low in wit and fun and so awkward in flow that it sounds like it was improvisatory. The story is equally disastrous, too thin to sustain the running time and too many scenes like irrelevant padding, if you are looking for any entertainment or excitement both are nowhere in sight.

It is also interminably dull, the movie is less than two hours but feels like an eternity. The action is incredibly lazy in choreography and have no suspense or fun whatsoever, actually on par with poorly executed action from an Asylum movie and even worse. The direction is stunning in how inept it is, while the characters are devoid of any engaging likability or personality, almost like human robots. The acting across the board is stiff with line delivery that reads of just reading their lines or last minute learning. Overall, as much as I hate ragging on movies and try not to be too hard on low-budget movies, taking into account the inevitable flaws and what to expect, but Robin Hood: Ghosts of Sherwood was really pathetic. 1/10 Bethany Cox

This is not the Legend of Robin Hood, this is the fairy-tale of the Brothers Grimm

[muravieff · 9/10 · 2 November 2017]

After reading critical reviews I decided to look. You know, ladies and gentlemen, Hollywood decayed all of you. This film is very good. Only the name confuses the viewer, that's how with the film "Saint Barbara" 2012, where from the life of St. Barbara 0.6% is left. If you do not start from the name and the original legend of Robin, then left a good fantasy fairy tale. Well someone admire of the Lord rings and the War of Thrones, and nothing, but you made a wild hate here. If see how much recently in Hollywood filmed inadequate films ... there really want to puke, but ... special effects, special effects ... this sweet gravy helps swallow everything. But here it is not. And I fully understand why American spectators is put into a stupor: propaganda of communism :), witches, dead-men, dismembered (all fans of the fairy tales of the Brothers Grimm will like the movie), reasoning about Christian morality are present, even the fall of meteorites is ... I repeat the film was not on a green sheet. Dialogues are interesting, especially with the witch. Attempts of sorcerers-half-educated to dissolve that porridge, which they brewed ... everything is super. It is instructive. And most importantly, humor: "If they see me using magic, then they recognize me as great wizard, and if you, you are burned like a witch." (Hansel and Gretel with inadequate salvation from witches of the inhabitants of their parents who killed them more horseradish than this fairy tale.) And I got great pleasure from its viewing. I repeat, they call the film differently, he went would be to cheer, because I have more associations with fairy tales of brothers Grimm than with Robin Hood.

Ed Wood is alive and well and living in Germany

[Fudge-3 · 7/10 · 1 April 2013]

Yes, that famous director of horror B movies must be back because this is certainly his style. Subtract four marks if you don't like Ed Wood movies.

The story idea is fine but it takes a while for the undead to arrive and until then there is just regular Robin Hood. The editing is disjointed in places (worse toward the end). The photography is good but there is little or no post-production colour work, you get it as it was shot. Audio wise the voice dubbing is poor while the music is reasonable though a little over blown in places. The special effects are low budget, like everything else, and do not knit in very well.

By the end of the film the actors were starting to get the hang of it and the costumes look more realistic after a few weeks real wear and tear. However, they must have run out of money because it doesn't really end, the action stops and there are a couple of scenes stitched on that don't give a satisfactory conclusion.

If the director had just said, 'We're making a pantomime here, lets really ham it up,' it would have gone a lot better.

Terrible dubbing makes it even worse

[ladybug2535 · 2/10 · 30 June 2015]

This really is a bad movie. Given how much dialogue and inane chatter the film contains honestly, the terrible dubbing (the film is German) that makes it even worse....though the dialogue (OMG, the dialogue--no the propaganda!)the dubbers babble on and on is definitely part of the problem. Plays like a bunch of medieval re-enactors who decided on a lark to put a movie together; in other words, amateurish. If anything it's a political communist manifesto--and I mean in the fundamental sense: they talk about the system; sharing and share alike (no need to set guards! We share everything here!), "everyone is equal and no one person is better than another" and on and on and on....."Snooze". And on. I rarely, and I mean almost never turn off a movie before it's finished, let alone write a review, but this one is just so....so.....so.....Ack!

Don't waste your time!!!! 😡

[andyjames_gibson · 1/10 · 6 November 2019]

First of I only signed up to imbd to review this movie because it was so bad I thought I should warn people! Do not buy/watch this movie (if you can call it that) the acting is terrible, it's asif the actors are reading there lines of a piece of paper for the first time, the special affects are a joke the costumes are even more laughable it's so bad I didn't know whether to laugh or cry and it's ridiculously long it just goes on forever and the whole time your waiting for it to get better but it just gets worse, everyone involved with this film should be ashamed with even the likes of horror legend Kane Hodder. This is by far the worst movie I have EVER seen and being a horror fan I've seen some low budget but this beats them all hands down! Avoid this movie like the plague.

Devil Dog Zombie Lake"

[Braindead09 · 1/10 · 28 May 2015]

In the early 1980s when the VHS was starting to take its place in every UK home, video libraries were springing up all over the place. In my household my brothers and me were allowed to pick 4 films a week at £3 each and the were watched every day during the week hire period. Gradually we moved away from the man with his van, to using a town centre video store who offered 4 films for a fiver and over the course of a weekend they would get watch. Gradually with this new price structure we and our friends got to see hundreds of films and first all a truly rotten movie was awarded the status of a "Zombie Lake" and a title that disappointed based on its box, synopsis and anticipation got awarded the title a "Devil Dog" and if "Ghosts Of Sherwood" was about in the early 1980s it would have become a new breed of film a "Devil Dog Zombie Lake".

The dubbing on this film reminded me of a late night continental movie on the UK channel ITV and it absolutely killed the entire film with its flat monotone delivery and over explanation for each sentence spoken.

Bad films can develop a cult following, and this one does not deserve to classed in that division of so bad its good. Its just bad.

It is horrible to do this, considering a lot of people work hard on a film but i have to state.

The film is best avoided.

WTF happened

[tomislavjankic · 1/10 · 8 November 2020]

To be honest, I don't know where to start.

The entire acting performance - 0 Story - lies in the basement (0, zero) Special effects - do they even exist?

There are good films and there are bad films. And this one is so bad. It is a shame that a brilliant man like Tom Savini is playing along.

No, just no....

[charliehmi · 1/10 · 18 January 2021]

I don't really like to criticise low-budget titles too much as I know the amount of effort that goes into making a feature film, especially given such tight constraints, but this one is just awful.

Despite the warnings on here I gave it a go, but had to give up halfway through. The acting is almost non-existant, and the msucial score will drive you mad... Time passes VERY slowly when watching this, it's a real slog.

If this is a movie then i was born on Mars

[nocheblanche · 1/10 · 15 August 2019]

Every movie usually has something to like or hunt out for . This does not have anything on offer other than to beg stop play mode. What on earth was Kane Hodder doing in this ? The dvd box in 3D you want to like but is dashed shortly whem you place in your entertainment device . Rubbish.

The WORST MOVIE EVER

[willfang · 1/10 · 20 August 2018]

I remember getting this movie at a redbox center some years ago, and thinking, "hm. 2012? That's not that long ago, I haven't heard of this robin hood movie but if it was made in 2012 it can't be that bad". I was wrong. Now I'm young, so I can be a little more judgemental when it comes to movies made in the 1900s , but Oh. My. Gosh. This is the worst movie I have ever seen, and I've seen some pretty bad old movies, and they deserve a 10 star rating compared to this. The whole thing was bad, the acting, the effects, the storyline, the everything. Now, I was willing to overlook some of the stuff in the movie, and said to myself before the last parts, "this movie is really horrible, but I've seen worst". But OH WOW really? You're gonna kill basically every main character at the end? Seriously? I think theres some storyline in the original robin hood books/scripts that end in the same way, but you can't be a horrible movie, and end in the most horrible way, you gotta be one or the other, not BOTH. Imagine travelling to somewhere in another country, using only your GPS, expecting to reach a pretty cool destination/location/building/place/people, but instead, for some reason you just reach this lake full of poop that you must swim over, so you do, only to reach another lake full of poop, soon you find out that your gps is totally wrong and after that experience you swim back, find the nearest airport and go home. Now times that by 10 and that's exactly what this movie is like.

Little John? Where for art thou?

[oterry16 · 4/10 · 2 June 2013]

I have waited to see this movie for almost 2 years, and was under the impression it was a horror movie...it is not. I watched most of the movie confused until I finally laughed out loud. Oh, I exclaimed, this is a comedy. If only Kane Hodder had been in the entire movie, he had me rolling with laughter, he is very funny. If you enjoy interactive movies, the kind where you audibly argue with the characters and shake your head wondering what kind of idiot idea that was to try an rob the Sheriff of Nottingham, then you will enjoy this movie. If you like to critique poor acting, bad costumes an horrible dubbing, this is your movie. However, the film quality seems nice with beautiful scenery and nice music, except the singing part.

Fun and enjoyable as long as you accept it on its own terms

[highlander1592uk · 7/10 · 25 March 2013]

Okay... First things first - what I was expecting was a professional movie on an impressively low budget, possibly tongue in cheek, similar to such recent Scandinavian greats as Rare Exports and Troll Hunter. What I got was actually more like as very earnest student film made, it would seem, with virtually no budget at all. That being said, and given what it is, it was actually very good!

While the acting wasn't the best I have ever seen, it was at least forgivable. It sounded like a lot of the dialogue was dubbed but their lips were matching the words so I assume it was re-recorded after filming with the actors lip-syncing their own lines. I understand this is done quite a lot in mainstream movies too but probably something in the way it is done makes this less noticeable. There seemed to be very little thought gone into the casting beyond the four leads (Robin, Marian, Sheriff and Little John), throwing up such oddities as the wicked old witch being played by an obviously young woman, giving the whole thing a "school play" kind of feel but again, after the first half hour or so I stopped noticing and just enjoyed the story.

The story itself, I thought, was very intriguing and well-written. I would say that the writer was a fan of the 80s "Robin of Sherwood" series. There were a few odd elements which seemed to have been put in just for the sake of it, resulting in some of the scenes which were clearly supposed to be emotionally charged just seeming a little odd. Otherwise, the story was engaging and quite original although I could have done with a little less throwing magic potions at the monsters while saying nonsense words - such things may work in video games but no so much in movies. I won't say much more about the story in case people want to watch it for themselves.

The costumes seemed most likely to be whatever the actors (sourced from local re-enactment groups perhaps?) already had so there was quite a mix from impressive and historically plausible to some that were not far off a Robin Hood Halloween fancy dress costume but I did not find this as distracting as I thought I might. The forest where most of the action took place was beautiful and the camera-man made good use of it with some lovely shots. The Castle, on the other hand, was mostly a ruin and looked like it, rather than a real, active castle. It reminded me a little of 70s Jesus Christ Superstar movie where the actors played out the scenes in the ruins. This, I'm afraid, spoiled my enjoyment a little.

When the promised zombies put in an appearance, their make-up is very impressive for the non-existent budget. There are occasional scenes with proper "zombie makeup" in close-up but mostly the are just made up to look corpse-like, with blackened skin from the congealed blood. They were surprising effective which is why it was a little odd to see a few later on wearing "monster masks" with orc-like features! Oh well... There was very little in the way of special effects but the two scenes that made use of them were very well done indeed. One involved a very graphic decapitation and the other involved a zombie ripping off a victim's arm and then eating parts of it. I'm tempted to say that any budget they had was used on these scenes alone which was a bit of a pity but I guess they were fun to do!

So, in conclusion, I really did enjoy this movie and will be watching it again. If you are expecting a professional horror movie then you will be disappointed but if you approach it from the point of view that it's made by amateurs with little or no money you will find it to be a very enjoyable and entertaining way to spend pass a couple of hours.

Ugh

[noahpeaslee · 1/10 · 22 September 2017]

Well, to be short and honest, this was the worst movie I have ever seen. And I've seen bad: Gigli, Batman v Superman, Emoji Movie.

To be long and honest, a seventh-grade Charlie Brown Musical would have better acting and costumes than this. Some people from the MPAA had to sit through this and give it a rating. They had to see the horrible story, acting, costumes, music, and acting (Did I already say that?). They probably spent more time, money, and energy on the cover art, which is not actually that bad and the reason I got it from Red-Box.

Dire

[rhumour-77469 · 7 October 2020]

After six decades of watching movies, have finally found one that has not a single redeeming quality.

Zero stars is the only option, it doesn't even raise a laugh by being awful, but when in one scene some actors were vomiting, the only question was did they puke because the script and directing were rancid garbage?

Those actors that managed to last through the whole movie must have qualified for bravery awards and are doubtless still afraid to go out for fear of being pelted with the inevitable rotten tomatoes.