Robin Hood: Prince of Sherwood
1994

1964
Director
Christian-Jaque
Runtime
115 minutes
Average Rating
No ratings yetSynopsis
Aristocrat Guillaume de Saint Preux leads a double life as a masked bandit known as the Black Tulip. The Black Tulip only robs rich aristocrats, so the local peasants regard him as a hero. Baron La Mouche is convinced Guillaume is the Tulip. During a robbery, he scars the Tulip's face, and hopes to use this to expose Guillaume, but Guillaume is one step ahead.
Overall Score
Limited
Category Breakdown
LGBTQ+ Representation
The film adheres to heteronormative romantic structures typical of 17th-century period adaptations. The narrative focuses on the romantic pursuit between the protagonist and the female lead.
Gender Representation
Traditional gender hierarchies drive the narrative architecture. While Rosa serves as an emotional catalyst with romantic agency, men primarily navigate the external spheres of political and botanical conflict.
Racial & Ethnic Diversity
The film features a homogeneous European cast consistent with its 17th-century Dutch setting. There is no evidence of color-blind casting or non-Anglo-Saxon characters.
Religious & Cultural Diversity
The story offers a nuanced critique of institutional power by framing the antagonist as a corrupt official. This disrupts the idea of infallible authority within a classical adventure framework.
Disability Representation
There are no prominent depictions of physical or neurodivergent disabilities. No such traits serve as central character arcs or plot drivers in this production.
Strengths
Areas for Improvement
AI Analysis
The Black Tulip is a traditional historical adventure that prioritizes classical storytelling and romantic idealism. It functions as a period-accurate reflection of mid-century European cinematic conventions. While the film provides a moderate critique of political corruption by challenging the absolute authority of the state, it lacks intersectional complexity. The narrative remains rooted in individualist heroism rather than progressive social frameworks. Ultimately, the film lacks demographic breadth and fails to subvert established gender hierarchies, resulting in a score that reflects its adherence to historical and era-specific norms.
1994

1952

1952

1963

1928

1971

1961

1956

1967

1952

1961

1943
No reviews yet. Be the first to share your thoughts on this movie!
Use the rating form above to leave a star rating and optional review.