Critics complain about Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's boring Netflix series Polo but not all feedback was negative

Key Critiques:

Underwhelming Execution: Critics such as Stuart Heritage of The Guardian (who rated it two stars) described the series as "destined to fall through the submenus into obscurity at the speed of light." Its overly niche focus and failure to engage broader audiences have been widely criticized.
Minimal Sussex Presence: Despite being executive producers, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have surprisingly limited screen time. Harry only appears briefly in the opening credits and again in Episode 4 for a short conversation, while Meghan’s appearances are even scarcer. Their absence led The Telegraph’s Ed Power to remark that there wasn’t “enough of the Sussexes to make this anything other than a dull indulgence about a rich person’s pursuit.”
Focus on Polo Players: The documentary centers primarily on players like Adolfo and Poroto Cambiaso, Nacho Figueras, and others, overshadowing Harry. While these players may intrigue die-hard polo fans, their stories have failed to resonate with a broader audience.
Missed Opportunity for Broader Appeal: Comparisons to popular sports documentaries like Disney+'s Welcome to Wrexham and Netflix’s The Last Dance emphasize what Polo lacks—relatable human stories and universal themes that transcend the sport itself. By focusing on polo’s elite and exclusive nature, the series alienates viewers unfamiliar with or uninterested in the sport.

Audience Reaction:

Viewers echoed critics, with many taking to social media to describe the series as “boring” and “unrelatable.” However, a small number of viewers appreciated its technical insights into polo, particularly for those already invested in the sport.

Conclusion:

Polo seems to have been a misstep for Harry and Meghan in their ongoing Netflix partnership. By sidelining their own star power and focusing narrowly on a sport with limited mainstream appeal, the series has failed to captivate audiences or leverage the potential of their celebrity status. To avoid further setbacks, the Sussexes might consider pursuing projects with broader relevance and more personal involvement.

In one scene, Harry and Meghan share a sweet kiss, but the event in Florida was already photographed back in April

In his two-star review for Polo, Ed Power of The Telegraph criticized the series for its lack of presence from Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, despite their roles as executive producers. He highlighted the “bafflingly little” appearance of the Duke, who is featured briefly and mainly in background scenes, a stark contrast to the high expectations set by their involvement in the project. Power described the series as “a tedious inside-look at posh polo” and noted that the absence of the Sussexes from the spotlight made the show feel more like a “dull indulgence about a rich person’s pursuit” rather than an engaging sports documentary. While the series showcases the intense nature of polo through its players, Power felt it lacked the personal connection or star power of the Sussexes to make it compelling to a wider audience.

In its review of Polo, Decider strongly recommended viewers to "skip" the series, describing it as a "mostly boring look at a sport that very few people outside of elite circles have any particular interest in." Critic Joel Keller noted that the first episode was particularly challenging to connect with, as it presented a world that was both unrelatable and dull to most viewers. However, Keller acknowledged that for those specifically interested in the technical aspects of polo, the series might provide some value, offering insights into the "nuts and bolts" of the game. Despite this, the overall sentiment was that the series fails to engage a broader audience, particularly due to its focus on an elite sport with limited mainstream appeal.

In his review for The Guardian, Stuart Heritage was highly critical of Polo, labeling the sport itself as “the stupidest, most obnoxious sport known to humanity” and describing it as a “playground of the rich.” He expressed his belief that the series would quickly fade into obscurity, describing it as “clattering and niche” and more suited for background viewing in a show like Succession. Heritage compared the documentary to a spoof, suggesting that its elite focus and lack of universal appeal would result in its quick fall through streaming platforms' submenus. He also criticized the series for setting up a sequel in its final moments, stating that viewers “don’t deserve that,” implying that the show lacked enough substance or merit to warrant further exploration.

The Guardian labelled polo 'the stupidest, most obnoxious sport known to humanity' and a 'playground of the rich'

Viewer reactions to Polo have been mixed, with many expressing disappointment and boredom. Some viewers took to X (formerly Twitter), calling it “one of the most boring series ever on Netflix” and criticizing it as “five hours no one can get back.” Others felt frustrated by the lack of excitement, with one person remarking that they couldn’t understand why anyone would choose polo over more engaging sports like horse racing.

Reaction: It wasn't just critics who were left unimpressed by the five-part series, with some viewers also labelling Netflix's Polo 'boring'

However, not all feedback was negative. A small portion of viewers found themselves captivated by the series, with one person stating they watched all five episodes in one sitting, unable to pause, and praising the show for its production.

But it wasn't all bad reviews from viewers, with some insisting the show had them 'hooked', with one person writing: 'Watched all five episodes in one sitting. Couldn't pause even if I wanted to. Great job and well done to everyone involved!'

Harry had previously explained that the series aimed to offer “an unprecedented, behind-the-scenes look into the passion and determination” of elite polo players, emphasizing the “grit behind the glamour” and showcasing the high-stakes nature of the sport. Despite the mixed reviews, it seems that the series successfully drew in some viewers intrigued by the professional world of polo.

Jane Fryer's review of Polo in The Telegraph offers a sharply critical take on the series, describing it as a dull and overindulgent glimpse into the elite world of polo. She contrasts the show’s promise—teasing drama, tension, and the lifestyle of glamorous, muscular polo players—with its actual delivery, which she finds lacking. Despite its initial hype, the show’s focus on muscular players, their expensive hobbies, and lavish lives fails to connect with a broader audience, leaving it feeling flat and "boring."

Harry and Meghan's blink-and-you-miss-it appearance in Polo comes at the beginning of episode five, when Harry plays a charity polo match for his non-profit Sentebale

Fryer critiques the portrayal of polo as an exaggerated, elitist sport, dominated by wealthy individuals whose antics seem out of touch with everyday viewers. She finds the absence of Harry and Meghan in their own show—beyond brief cameos—striking, considering their roles as executive producers. The absence of much of the couple throughout the series makes it feel more like a showcase of polo players’ antics rather than an insightful or engaging project.

Nacho Figueras and Delfina Blaquier with Meghan and Harry at the Royal Salute Polo Challenge benefitting Sentebale in April

She concludes that Polo struggles to fulfill its lofty promises of offering "content that informs and gives hope," instead coming off as a tedious and pompous documentary with little of the charm or intrigue that would make it worth watching. The show, she suggests, could have been transformed into a fun, guilty pleasure series if executed differently, but it ultimately falls flat.

Royal Leaks