* In most versions of Robin Hood, Robin heads home to England from Jerusalem during the Crusades. Was that possible in real life? I find it especially jarring in the Prince of Thieves when he escapes imprisonment and heads back home instead of heading towards King Richard armies.
** He's probably had enough of the Crusades what with the imprisonment and horrific torture/ near loss of his hand. It's not unreasonable to expect that he would just want to go home and see England again.
** It's called desertion.
*** Militaries weren't exactly as formal back then. As a knight he presumably did owe fealty to the King and would be in violation of his oath for leaving but that's not quite the same thing. In any case King Richard presumably included that in his pardon.
** It's also not found in a lot of version where Robin becomes an outlaw because he refuses to go.
* The song "The Phoney King of England" refers to "Robin's wily pack", i.e. the Merry Men. And yet the only Merry Man the movie has seems to be Little John, with Alan-A-Dale and Friar Tuck as part-timers. I'm not sure you can call these three a "wily pack."
** Perhaps they're counting Skippy in the group as well?
** He could be informally including the group listening in. Most of them joined in the fight at the archery contest, after all.
* Arrow-splitting: it was awesome and impossible and exciting, but it does NOT win the game. Other dude hit the target dead centre, Robin hit the target dead centre with bells and whistles. That round was a DRAW. They should continue play. The contest was hit the centre of the target It was not a bells and whistles contest.
** I've always presumed it was a case of the score being close, and only a dead-centre hit on Robin's part would get him a win. Since there was already an arrow there...
** The skill needed to hit the point of an arrow and actually pierce all the way through it may be considered enough to tip the scales in his favor. I'm not sure, since I'm not an archer myself, but that may be the reasoning behind it.
* This is minor, but irritating. When Robin and Kate first meet, it's pretty clear that they've never met before. He calls her "young lady" before she introduces herself, and she says, "You're Robin Hood!" in the tone of one who is meeting someone they've heard about for a long time, but never actually seen before. Yet Robin has previously been shown to be a very hands-on Lord of Locksley, on first name basis with all of his servants and practically every single serf who lives in the tiny village, and Robin even ''explicitly calls'' her mother "Rebecca" without any introductions. How can he recognise and know Rebecca and not Kate? [[DawsonCasting Is Kate apparently so young]] that she and Robin don't know each other from the ''first'' time he went on Crusades; which by the show's rather tenuous time-line, would have been eight years ago?
** So I guess my question is - how old is Kate meant to be?
* Allan's death. Dear God, this was the absolute worst case of DroppedABridgeOnHim I've ever seen, especially for the only character left on the show that I didn't want to beat around the face with a heavy object. Getting shot down by the man who killed his brother, failing in his attempt to warn his so-called "friends" of the approaching army, and dying alone on the side of the road was horrific enough, but the only reason this even happened was because the rest of the outlaws (once again) proved themselves to be ''complete idiots''. If Isabella had been paying Allan to act as TheMole inside Robin's gang, then ''why would she announce his pardon to the entire population of Nottingham''?? Geez outlaws, you don't think that the woman who has been double-crossing you for the last six or so episodes just MIGHT be trying to stir up dissent among the ranks?? If Allan had been the only one left standing at the end of the carnage (having nicked everyone's stuff and hitchhiking back to Will and Djaq in the Holy Land), I would have considered it a perfect ending to the show.
** Given she'd been "double-crossing them for the last six or so episodes", it is not equally possible (from the outlaws' point of view) that she double-crossed Allan by announcing his pardon in the knowledge that the outlaws would learn of it? Robin promises to come back and "sort it", he doesn't make any decision on Allan's guilt or not.
*** Then couldn't they have ''said'' that? As it played out, it was clear that that option simply hadn't occured to them. It grates that a) the outlaws ''knew'' that Isabella wasn't trustworthy, and b) Robin was prepared to implicitly trust the man who shish-ka-bobed his wife and yet not give Allan the benefit of the doubt.
*** Little John insists they can't trust Allan and it snowballs from there. I think the writers were sort of going for mob mentality.
*** Oh yeah...Little John insisted that Allan couldn't be trusted...''one episode after Allan saved his life.'' Thanks John, your one and only contribution to season three was to be an ass and get your friend killed. That and insist to Robin to that he should hook up with the Shrieking Harpy of Despair.
* So I'd like to know what happened to all the other outlaws from the first two episodes, the one's that Little John led, all of a sudden, it's just John, Roy, Allan, and Will. what happened to the rest of the outlaw bunch, did they just say "okay, Robin's here, let's leave?" I'd hate that this was the director's way of doing some major screw up