Not My Robin Hood

"This latest adaptation of the legendary story of the thief who robbed from the rich for the express purpose of wealth redistribution feels intended to undermine the idea that a folk hero would rise against the one percent, not out of personal motivation but because it's the righteous thing to do. In Robin Hood, co-created by Jonathan English and John Glenn, everything about the titular hero, from his name to his ideology, is impressed upon him by others;"

"In our age of politicians craving the power of kings, an ever-widening gap between social classes, and history's first possible trillionaire making his money off anti-union labor, Robin Hood is a natural fit, an entity whose moral judgment aligns perfectly with our widespread affordability crisis. Pop culture can only do so much, but it can also do a lot; a series that was incisive in its understanding the Robin Hood legend might have provided some catharsis."

The MGM+ adaptation portrays Robin Hood as lacking an independent moral framework, with his name, tactics, and ideology imposed by other characters. A convoluted origin arc strips the outlaw of organic motive, making his rebellion seem engineered rather than righteous. In episode six, the archer modifies his campaign to support Queen Eleanor, signaling a shift toward monarchist sympathies and a compromise with ruling classes. That trajectory reframes wealth redistribution as negotiable political theater rather than principled resistance. The adaptation bypasses the character's traditional appeal as a champion against systemic inequality, missing an opportunity to connect the legend to contemporary affordability and labor crises.

Read at Vulture