Robin as the author of the Magna Carta

It's one of my favorite bits... but contrary to you, I just love it when historical fiction rewrites such things and makes fictional characters play huge parts in History. Like the Three Musketeers thwarting Richelieu's evil plans.

"Occasionally I'm callous and strange."

That scene definitely took me out of the moment. It's like Robin Hood had to be directly involved with everything that happened. King Richard's last act before his death is to punish Robin, Robin first came up with the concept of the Magna Carta, etc. He shouldn't have been a part of that film except possibly to play peacekeeper in the end.

---
"In literature, it's called plagiarism. In the movies, it's homage" ~ Roger Ebert

To me, there is a pretty fine line between history and entertainment though today the line continues to get even blurrier - just look at some of the crap programming on the history channel. The only issue I take is when movie-makers try to advertise as "the real, true story" and it is nothing but. People need to be skeptical enough to not believe everything they first see/read about something.

That said, I have to agree with pol-edra on this one though. Movie-making, for entertainment purposes, is a form of storytelling at its most basic level. If they take liberties, however extreme, it is done in effort to ultimately entertain, not inform. It is a classic tradition going back to the storyteller by a campfire: tall-tales, folk heroes, stuff like that and even older. Plus, the more people who tell the story, transcribe it, translate it, etc, the more changes there are.

I get the "insidious" angle of misinforming the less educated but that is a bigger can of worms entirely. I mean, someone who thinks Forrest Gump actually did any of those historical things or even existed at all speaks to the major failings of society in lifting the shroud of ignorance from certain people.

Ultimately, people pay to be entertained rather than informed otherwise non-fiction and documentaries would the most popular type of book & visual medium respectively.

What annoyed me more was King John being shown to destroy the Magna Carta. Unlike Robin Hood, John was a real character, and I don't like it when real characters are wrongfully demonized.

It wasn't the actual Magna Carta Robin's father made, but the basis of it, that the people of England should be involved with the law making of England. The document John torched was that. Not the Magna Carta. This story basically propelled the barons and land owners to push what eventually would become the Magna Carta.

No. Walter Loxley informs Robin of the existence of a proposed charter. Robin mentions one at the conference and a lot of the nobles look at each other knowingly.

You must have missed the part about the charter's pre-existence while you were shaking your head in angered incomprehension. BRRRRRRRRRRRRRllllrllrlrlllllbrlrlrr!!!!

@Twitzkrieg - Glasgow's FOREMOST authority

"I actually starting angrily yelling at the screen despite my normal composure in movies."

I'm sure your fellow audience members in the theater loved that, lol.

But I agree, it was really silly making Robin Hood the one responsible for Magna Carta.