Robin Hood: Ghosts of Sherwood

2012
1.8| 1h55m| R| en
Details

After selling his soul to a sorceress Robin is killed in battle. Distraught over these horrific turn of events Marian and Little John attempt to resuscitate Robin and his Merry Men. In doing so they inadvertently have turned the one-time heroes into the living dead and worse, the ghostly reincarnations are now hunting down Marian and Little John. So the pair attempt to seek out a new potion that will free these tormented souls from their demonic possession.

Director

Producted By

Tom Cat Films

AD
AD

Watch Free for 30 Days

Stream on any device, 30-day free trial Watch Now

Trailers & Clips

Reviews

Lovesusti The Worst Film Ever
Konterr Brilliant and touching
Casey Duggan It’s sentimental, ridiculously long and only occasionally funny
Tayyab Torres Strong acting helps the film overcome an uncertain premise and create characters that hold our attention absolutely.
Michael Ledo 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.
Braindead09 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.
highlander1592uk 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.
cheetor75-1 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.