• LavaPlanet@sh.itjust.works
    38·
    3 months ago

    Is this so we don’t get any ideas? Turn Robin Hood into the bad guy. No, everyone, it’s bad to steal from the rich, oooh, look at this boogeyman to deter you! (Lol)

    • funkless_eck@sh.itjust.works
      2·
      2 months ago

      I’ve done a fair amount of research into old 'Binhead. He really was no hero a lot of the time. There is also no consistent plot in the ~700 years we’ve been writing stories about him. This one, Men in Tights, and Disney’s Foxy Fox version are all as accurate as the extremely pious catholic Gest of Robyn Hode and the extemely mercurial, murder hobo in Robin Hood and the Monk, where he just kills random passers-by for fun.

      • LavaPlanet@sh.itjust.works
        1·
        2 months ago

        Absolutely, I wasn’t really putting forward commentary on “his” legitimacy or truth in retelling, I was more focusing on the fact that big corporations (that, as a sweeping generalisation are behind most of the world’s atrocities, currently) are trying to simultaneously give us bread and circuses to distract us, and take away our bread and circuses. Have you heard of the licensed critic? It’s when the “state” (usually the state responsible for whatever is happening) sanctions a “critic” to perform criticism of the current status quo that people are unhappy with, but within their boundaries and that criticism usually has no hope folded in to the end, to give the people a message to not try to rise up. Luigi, for instance, seems like a bit of a Robin hood (by legend, not the actual tale) they then make a “actually Robin Hood was the bad guy” movie. (I don’t debate it’s historical legitimacy) more that it seems like a very obvious “don’t get any ideas” by the powers that are currently trying to oppress us.

  • IWW4@lemmy.zip
    372·
    3 months ago

    Holy hell, they just wont stop making Robin Hood movies.

    • Codpiece@feddit.uk
      28·
      3 months ago

      Well you’ve got to really. The real story of robbing the poor to line the pockets of the rich doesn’t have the same ring to it.

        • chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world
          161·
          3 months ago

          He’s a character from folklore which is a bit different. He isn’t owned by any one author. He may be based on historical people with certain details embellished or altered, and then more fictional stories added on over time.

          His stories do include references to real historical people and events, such as the kings Richard I and John. The 1938 film (starring Errol Flynn) weaves these two into a story about Robin Hood leading a peasant revolt against John, tapping into Anglo-Saxon identity as a form of English nationalism.

        • binarytobis@lemmy.world
          8·
          3 months ago

          I’m pretty sure they’re saying that this fictional story about a fictional character is necessary be because the true story would be about Bezos and people would hate it.

        • Ledivin@lemmy.world
          51·
          3 months ago

          He’s a fictional character.

          Sorta? He’s a folk legend, which are often based in reality but highly exaggerated (more and more over time). So mostly yes, but probably at least partially no

  • JcbAzPx@lemmy.worldEnglish
    151·
    3 months ago

    So, if I remember right, he comes back from the crusades with some sort of disease. Does some bloodletting which doesn’t help much. Then shoots an arrow a pretty long way for a dying guy.

    Kind of a downer part of the story for a movie.

  • MidsizedSedan@lemmy.world
    2·
    2 months ago

    Logan. Les Miserables. Death of Robin Hood.

    Spoilers

    The Prestiege

    Is Hugh Jackman the new Sean Bean of dying on screen?