It's About Israel-Palestine?

One of the annoyances of geopolitics and fiction is when people try to neatly fit the latter into a hot-button conflict with the former. This is the case with Superman. The movie’s quite good, better than anticipated, yet you’d think the themes of optimism and hope would be front and centre. And they are! But some less-than-savoury folks have also speculated about one of its subplots and tied it to real issues unhelpfully. For this, I have to discuss spoilers. You’ve been warned.

The film’s secondary antagonist is the leader of a country called Boravia. An ally to The US, Boravia wishes to annex Jarhanpur, its neighbour, using funds that Lex Luthor’s been secretly funnelling. Initially, its intentions are only known to Superman, making him a threat when he confronts Boravia’s leader. However, when Boravia invades Jarhanpur and threatens to massacre its citizens, the ruse is up. There’s a clever commentary here about genocide, and some people have compared it to the situation in Gaza.

I’m not a fan of what Israel’s doing in Gaza. Like, at all. I’ve been transparent about that for some time. I’m also not making excuses for it, especially when I’ve heard plenty from people in my own community. If what I’ve read from Israeli sources is true, it’s a war crime. This is despite also recognizing that Hamas isn’t helping.

That said, comparing The Boravia-Jarhanpur Conflict to Israel-Palestine, while noble, does a disservice on two levels. Superficially, there have been many genocides historically: Armenia, Kurdistan, Rohingya, Darfur, East Timor, to name a few. In this century alone, there’s been South Sudan and Ukraine. Genocides aren’t hard to find, and while it’s worth calling them out, they’re also carried out for various reasons. Comparing this conflict to Gaza, especially given its circumstances, is disingenuous.

On a deeper level, the comparison fails once you draw parallels. For example, is Boravia invading Jarhanpur because terrorists murdered 1200 of its citizens? Is Jarhanpur being governed by terrorists? And is there an ongoing land dispute between Boravia and Jarhanpur dating back centuries? These are questions that’d have to be asked, and we wouldn’t get any answers.

Even within the film’s text, little details don’t add up: Boravia’s leader speaks English with an accent, while Bibi Netanyahu doesn’t. Jarhanpur isn’t led by a Hamas-like government. And while the citizens of Jarhanpur are dark-skinned, they have more in common with Pakistanis than Palestinians. This isn’t accidental, as I doubt James Gunn’s brazen enough to comment on one specific conflict. Instead, he’s keeping it general.

That’s why the Gaza connections fail. Besides, having a general conflict works better. People seeing two fictional countries going at it, all while broaching a serious subject, will get them to think. Make this a direct parallel, and you get more questions than answers. Not to mention, it doesn’t address the issue fairly.

This isn’t the first time people have conflated works of fiction to Israel-Palestine. The subtext of The Last of Us franchise has been questioned over this, made worse by its creator being Israeli. Even the Ghorman subplot in Andor, particularly its conclusion, has been compared to Israel-Palestine, with the Ghor being stand-ins for Palestinians. This is honourable on the outset, but it always falls apart under scrutiny.

Above everything, it’s also tiresome. Not every genocide in fiction is Israel-Palestine-related. Not every oppressive regime in fiction is Israel-Palestine-related. Not everything is Israel-Palestine-related, period! Israelis and Palestinians aren’t the main characters of everything that goes on, and claiming otherwise feels like “Getting Boss Baby vibes from this!” in its analysis.

If a work of fiction could be better used to parallel Israel-Palestine, it’s Romeo & Juliet. Think about it: two families, The Montagues and The Capulets, in a generations-old feud centred on trauma, one that annoys everyone and can’t transcend the love of its youngest members? Ignoring that last point, wouldn’t that fit better? It’s still tone-deaf and falls apart under scrutiny, but there’s something there! And it’s more tangible than what people normally use!

I’m sure some of you are ready to chastise me for deconstructing this headcanon. “Let people enjoy stuff!”. Here’s the problem, though: this isn’t harmless. Calling Drax from the Guardians of the Galaxy films “Autistic-coded” is harmless. Suggesting that Perfuma from She-Ra and the Princesses of Power is trans is harmless. Taking a real conflict with history and trying to force in 1:1 parallels isn’t harmless. Real people have died over Gaza, some not even living there, and comparing the Boravia-Jarhanpur situation from Superman to it is an example of poor media literacy.

I get it: you feel helpless about Gaza. You feel like our political system’s making it worse. You feel as though speaking up is putting a target on your back. Welcome to being Jewish. Take a number and have a seat.

However, if you want to help? If you want to feel useful? If you wish to make positive change? There are avenues. It won’t get better right away, nothing worthwhile does, but that doesn’t mean you don’t have outlets. And they’re more effective than shoehorning a real situation into a movie to score brownie points. Life doesn’t work that way.

Exploring Free Roam

As I’ve stated before, I’m not a fan of 100% completing video games. Occasionally I make exceptions, but it has to be really enticing. The primary reason is that it feels like homework. And given that I play video games to escape from reality, that’s not something I want to think about. Once I’ve beaten the campaign, that’s usually where my investment ends.

However, what happens when the entire point is to collect stuff? What if there’s no main story? What if the game’s about traversing the world and collecting everything at your own leisure? That’s the hook of Mario Kart World, a game for the Switch 2 that has little in its main game, but a lot in its Free Roam mode. That includes its collectibles.

I’m as surprised as you. Normally, throwing me into an open world with no guidance is a good way to piss me off. It’s one of the many frustrations I have with Zelda games, especially in 3D entries. But this feels like an exception. Between the Hidden ? Blocks, P-Switch Challenges and Peach Medallions, the first group being the only ones I know the exact number of, I’ve spent a good month playing Mario Kart World and have yet to acquire everything. And I’m not mad.

Perhaps the reason I’m so invested is that this game allows me to collect everything at my own pace. With many collect-a-thons, I find they fall into two categories: obnoxious side-quests, or optional-yet-somewhat-mandatory. In both cases, they break the flow and become a hinderance. Sometimes, as with the LEGO Star Wars games, sections are purposely closed off so that you have to come back later. I get the appeal, but when you make collecting a chore, then there’s little incentive to return.

That’s what makes Free Roam unique here: sure, I can play the different cups, or even engage in Battle Mode, but that’s not the bulk of the game. Rather, it’s Free Roam where it truly shines. Because while the aforementioned is fun, Free Roam’s where most of my time is spent. And it helps that Free Roam’s the first option available when I boot the game up. Forget racing, especially when you can drive around and see what has and hasn’t been accomplished!

This progress is monitored through stickers, which are accessible in the home screen. Whenever you collect a Peach Medallion, find a Hidden ? Block or complete a P-Switch Challenge, you earn a sticker. Sometimes, you even earn stickers for driving long enough, collecting enough coins or doing a certain number of tricks. The variety of stickers as you traverse the overworld keep me coming back constantly. In that sense, Nintendo’s made me feel like a child again.

While the overworld’s massive, comprised of many areas and connecting stretches of road, you’re not required to traverse all of it. In the overworld hub, you can even choose which places you want to visit. This doubles as a chance to see your progress, with the Hidden ? Blocks showing up as yellow once you’ve found them. It’s a great way to see what’s been done versus what’s yet to be done, and it makes compartmentalizing objectives easier.

The P-Switch Challenges also vary in difficulty, yet are great primers for learning the overworld’s layout. They’re timed and are either objective-based or collect-a-thons, but they never feel monotonous. In some cases, I find myself gritting my teeth because of how nail-bitingly difficult they are, hoping that this time I might complete them. I can’t begin to describe how frequently I’ve replayed challenges, kept making the same mistakes for hours, and then miraculously completed them in a blind run without knowing how I pulled it off. And yes, the switches do change colour once the challenges are completed!

Of course, the penalty for failure’s non-existent, another feature that makes Free Roam compelling. Far too frequently, the penalty for failure in a game can be harsh. It often feels like you’re being mocked for failing. With Mario Kart World, the consequence for not completing a P-Switch Challenge is the option to try again. This makes failure feel less like a failing and more like an opportunity, this time (hopefully) learning from my mistakes. It’s also an opportunity to practice rote memory.

Above all else, touring the overworld is fun. Seeing the same enemies and cars for the umpteenth time can feel repetitive, especially when you know how to interact with them, but it’s worth it to see environments in a different time of day or weather condition. Nintendo collaborated with many other developers here, and it shows with the attention to detail. This hub of seemingly-unconnected areas feel alive and lived in, further enhancing the immersion. As does hearing remixes of classic Mario tunes, even if I wish you could control the different tracks.

Is the experience flawless? No. Lack of control over tunes aside, I don’t like how hard it is to slow down your vehicle. I also wish the ability to unlock costumes via lunch bags was more controlled, as opposed to being a lottery based on the various regions. Finally, I wish some of the collectibles weren’t tedious to find. I know the different areas have Binoculars to see the world from above, but they don’t always help with the Hidden ? Blocks and Peach Medallions.

However, those are minor inconveniences. Mario Kart World isn’t flawless, but no game is. Nevertheless, if these are its biggest issues, then I’ve got nothing to worry about. Free Roam did the impossible and made collecting fun! Even a month later, I’m still finding secrets and learning tricks, and I’ve yet to 100% complete it. If I’m not bored after a month, then this game’s doing something right!

A Corrupted Dream

I feel conflicted.

On one hand, I know the author The Sandman is an awful person, and he has no remorse. On the other hand, I owe plenty to Neil Gaiman, even using the format of The Ocean at the End of the Lane as a template for something I’m hoping to get published. He’s really talented, and he taught me a lot. So I’m upset and frustrated that one of my literary heroes let me down…again. But I guess that’s what happens when someone with Scientology affiliations writes British fiction.

I mention this as pretext for the second season of The Sandman. I wanted a second season for some time. I enjoyed the first season, and I was hoping to see a continuation of its cliffhanger involving Lucifer. But given what I’ve learned about Gaiman since, I was uncomfortable watching the newest season. Nevertheless, he was a small cog in the production, and everyone else seemed equally uncomfortable. That, and it’s a sin to waste a good dream, of which this show feels like in droves.

I won’t delve much into the season’s story arcs, of which there are several small ones, as well as two major ones. Instead, I’ll share my overall feelings, as well as what kept invested. Because while Gaiman’s involvement has left a sour taste in my mouth, it’s not like he has final control. He’s not JK Rowling, a woman who rules over her IP with an iron fist. Gaiman’s involvement feels secondary, really only there so that his comic translates to television. He’s not the be-all-end-all, so it was more palatable.

It's also easier to swallow because Gaiman could’ve been removed as overseer and little would’ve changed. The creative team’s the best you can get, and the end-result’s really powerful. It shows that, while not irrelevant, the author’s work often transcends them, and that audiences attach to it in ways that are personal. The Sandman, a dreamlike story about family, responsibility and imagination, is one such example, as it moved me.

The underlying core, about how dysfunctional families are still families (for better or worse), saves this from being a waste of time. The first season was a surprise hit for Warner Bros., and it had a tough act to follow. Its best episode, about an author abusing a muse to become famous, was about the dangers of artists preying on others. If that was Season 1’s apex, Season 2 had lofty expectations. It doesn’t entirely live up to it narratively, but thematically it works. It even got me to cry at the end.

Going back to the familial aspect, Season 2’s strength was leaning into Dream’s dysfunctional relationship with his siblings. Destiny, Death, Destruction, Dream, Desire, Despair and Delirium all have a tough time being together, yet they all share the same goal of working for humanity. Yet it’s their attitudes toward their work that creates conflict. Some, like Death, Desire and Despair, enjoy their tasks, while others, like Dream and Destiny, feel it an obligation. And then there’s Destruction, who desperately wishes to not be part of it. The entirety of Season 2, therefore, delves into why.

This dynamic is palpable to anyone who’s struggled with family. We all have different relationships with siblings and relatives, some healthier than others, and at times that causes conflict. Yet we regularly try to get by, occasionally offering olive branches for the sake of peace and harmony. It doesn’t always work, but it’s not without trying. And if Season 2’s MVP, Delirium, is indication, it’s the childlike innocence of the youngest member that creates balance.

It also speaks to me as someone who still lives with his parents. A while back, I wrote about Encanto and discussed one of its songs. Its dissection of expectations was powerful and sad, and I felt it as a middle sibling with the weight of societal expectations. Destruction in The Sandman hits home for similar reasons; after all, why conform to expectations when they make you feel guilty? It’s a reasonable question.

But while Destruction’s dilemma’s sympathetic, we’re not meant to agree with him. Not liking your role in life is understandable, but abandoning it is the wrong choice. Why neglect your skillset if it’s too difficult? No one said life would be easy, and Dream’s critique of Destruction is a reminder of that. Doubly-so when you remember Dream’s relationship with his own son, as well as its inevitable resolution. Without spoiling anything, that was where I cried.

I think that’s why I could somewhat overlook Gaiman’s involvement, even if I feel dirty. Because while an awful human being, he still created something timeless. Like my thoughts on Rowling and the Harry Potter series, I can’t deny the impact Gaiman’s work has had on me. He’s simply too influential to do that. I’m sure I’m not alone, either.

If it sounds like I’m dismissing what Gaiman’s done, that’s not intentional. Gaiman will have to answer for his behaviour, and it won’t be pretty. I also think his victims deserve justice, and that he should accept accountability. But I can’t pretend his work hasn’t impacted me. Because he truly touches on the power of dreams in a beautiful and honest way. And it’s a sin to waste a good dream, of which this show feels like in droves.

When Bigotry Prevails

Riri Williams was going to be controversial from the moment she was first introduced. Not only is she an Iron Man fan, she’s also black. And she’s a genius like Tony Stark. Combine that with many nerds being bigoted, see GamerGate and Comicsgate, and the hate basically wrote itself. One Twitter user even claimed that “melanin and estrogen” were viruses that infected Iron Man simultaneously, ignoring basic biology and hormones. Riri never stood a chance here, essentially.

Now that bigotry’s been extended to Ironheart, an MCU series that’s been well-received critically, but was review-bombed by trolls. You’d think sites like Rotten Tomatoes, which have dealt with this nonsense before, would be prepared, but that doesn’t mean they weren’t attacked. It’s was so bad that many of the reviews were also copy-pastes. It was embarrassing. Why does a black woman bother people?

Rhetorical question aside, this shouldn’t bother me specifically. And normally it wouldn’t, as the internet isn’t reality. However, this has ripple effects. Studio execs take notes of feedback, even when it’s trash, and they respond in kind. So while it shouldn’t matter, in the end it still does. That’s worrying, as I’ve watched Ironheart and think it’s great.

Perhaps the best example of how online trolling has ruined a franchise is Star Wars. Star Wars has a history of caving to fans anyway, but the situation’s gotten worse under Disney. When the first entry in The Sequel Trilogy released, the underlying meta-narrative was about legacies and expectations. Rey and Kylo Ren were fans of the Jedi and Sith respectively, and The First Order was a hollow imitation of The Empire. None of this was subtle, even being called attention to in-movie.

Then the next entry took this meta-narrative to interesting places. If the first movie was “too familiar”, the sequel was “too unconventional”. Minor choices were chastised for bucking expectations, while bigger ones were considered character betrayals. I happened to like the movie, even if I took issue with some parts, but saying that out loud sparked backlash. It felt like the online world was influencing the real one.

This reached a fever pitch with the trilogy’s conclusion, which felt like Disney overcorrecting the meta-narrative. In particular, a key character, Rose, was relegated to the sidelines, making her character buildup be for nothing. Ignoring the hate her actress, Kelly-Marie Tran, received, shafting Rose, not to mention the weird choices the movie made, in order to please a militant-yet-small base was a slap to the face. I say that as someone who enjoyed the movie anyway.

This toxicity resurfaced with The Acolyte, a Star Wars series suggesting that The Jedi suck. This show was review-bombed because it starred a black woman. It got so bad that Acolytes, a property completely-unrelated, was also review-bombed, leading me to wonder if these trolls knew what they were mad about. It didn’t end up mattering, as Disney cancelled its second season, leaving us with a frustrating cliffhanger.

I mention this because Ironheart, at least initially, appeared to be following in the same footsteps. And yes, it’s not 1:1: not only was Ironheart meant to be self-contained, complete with a beginning, middle and end, it ended up having a flood of fans rush to its defence. Yet the hate for Riri Williams was persistent, showing that bigotry doesn’t disappear so easily. Considering that Disney has already cancelled several MCU projects recently, that Riri’s presence could be downplayed or erased is a real fear.

I’m not saying you have to love Ironheart. Every MCU venture has issues that hold it back from perfection. This show, which improves with each episode, is no different. However, if you dislike it, it should be for legitimate reasons. Hating Ironheart for starring a black woman isn’t one of them.

I’m also not an expert on Hollywood. I know they’re a business, and that they care about money, but I can’t claim to understand half of what goes on without sounding pretentious. I only know what I read, nothing more. But I know studio executives listen to feedback from audiences. They don’t always take the right lessons from it, but they listen. That’s why we should be careful.

As a final note, I wouldn’t be as frustrated if our current climate weren’t so hostile. Claims of “DEI hires” have made their way to the highest reaches of office, and they’ve been rubbing off on entertainment. Even Disney, who caved to their shareholders, had a brief period where they were sanitizing their output to not get into trouble, and we’re still seeing some of that. So while it stopped quickly, it can happen again.

The bigotry around Riri Williams and Ironheart is real. It’s real, pervasive and, unfortunately, concerning. And while it shouldn’t matter that much, as movies are about more than review scores, it’s troubling because studio executives take notes. They also often take the wrong lessons from the feedback they receive. That’s the real issue, and that’s why this bugs me so much…even if the trolls bit off more than they could chew here.

Young Pauline Debuts!

(Note: the following deals with sensitive subject matter. Please read at your own risk.)

You ever see a game that has you excited, only for its discourse to weird you out? That was me with Donkey Kong Bananza. The conversation around Young Pauline makes me weary of how people perceive teenagers. Because Young Pauline is 13 years-old in the game, and people are being gross about it. But let’s give context:

Pauline appearing in this game was a nice surprise. The initial footage had Donkey Kong travelling with a sentient rock, so Pauline was a great twist reveal. She actually goes back to Donkey Kong in 1981, having made her debut alongside Mario and DK, but she’d largely been forgotten until several years ago. So to feature alongside DK? That’s huge.

It's especially huge because while Pauline has had a popularity resurgence because of her cameo as Mayor of New Donk City in Super Mario Odyssey, she hasn’t really had depth or intrigue for a while. She could sing, but that was it. And while her adult design looked nice, showing a natural progression from her arcade days, everything about her was surface level. She didn’t even have a backstory for why she went into politics.

Pauline being a teenager in Donkey Kong Bananza, complete with a redesign and personality, changes everything. She has actual motivations, as well as depth. Sure, her desire to return to the surface world isn’t deep, but it’s something! This is Pauline as an actual character, not an avatar. What’s bad about that?

Leave it to the internet to make something creepy. And it starts with her design: she’s cute, she has freckles and she doesn’t wear shoes. This, apparently, is considered scandalous. I’ll ignore the freckles, because many people have them in real life, and focus on the first and third complaints. Because what gives?!

I’ll start with being cute. Okay, and? She’s a kid. Chihiro Ogino from Spirited Away looks cute, as does Kiki from Kiki’s Delivery Service. Vanellope von Schweetz in Wreck-It Ralph, whom Pauline probably takes inspiration, also looks cute. But they’re supposed to. I’d be worried if Pauline’s design wasn’t cute!

But I know what this is about: perverts might take advantage. To that, I have two responses. One, get your head out of the gutter. And two, even if Pauline were an adult, perverts would still take advantage. Considering what the internet did to Princess Peach after Princess Peach: Showtime!, it’s not unreasonable to assume that. I’m sure Nintendo knows this.

The overprotective backlash is gross. Yes, the internet has a new target. That can’t be helped, unfortunately. But shielding Pauline feels patronizing. Ignoring how Google has filters for inappropriate content, and we can argue its effectiveness, I can’t help wondering if this conversation would be taking place if she were a boy. I know she’s not real, but it’s worth pondering.

As for not having shoes? Give me a break. She’d recently been freed from a curse, and her not having shoes is the scandal here? No one’s asking how she became a rock, or how she’s able to bond with a gorilla? Her being barefoot is the big concern? Really?

I understand, again, that perverts will have a field day over this. But they were having a field day already with Adult Pauline, who wears stilettos. You can’t be naïve enough to assume that Young Pauline’s going to be treated any differently, right? Because if so, bless your heart. Also, touch grass.

Like with being cute, Pauline being barefoot has little to do with her character outside of aesthetics. Young Pauline’s a spirited, insecure and shy singer whose voice helps DK. She has all the characteristics of a gifted, teenaged girl who’s unsure of herself. We should be talking about how cool it is that teenaged girls have a role model their age to relate to, as opposed to complaining about her design. Not only is that creepy, but it sends the wrong message.

Perhaps I’m being too sensible here. Puritanical reactionaries once called the Harry Potter books “Satanic”, and said the Pokémon franchise was “heretical”. It doesn’t matter how “modestly” Pauline does or doesn’t dress, they’ll find something to complain about. They shouldn’t, it’s gross, but they will. And nobody can stop that.

Maybe that’s why this irks me. Ignoring how Young Pauline dresses more “modestly” than many celebrated adult heroines, the term “Male Gaze” comes to mind here. Because Pauline’s the antithesis of that, as her appearance, like her personality, actually contributes to the story. This is less Male Gaze than dressing like a teenager, and acting otherwise says a lot about you.

Look, Nintendo has many issues as company, some of which I’ve covered. Even storytelling-wise, they routinely overplay the damsel in distress card. Mario games in particular are guilty of this, with Princess Peach only being playable in a handful of mainline entries. So for a Mario-adjacent character like Pauline, who up until now wasn’t that well-known or interesting, to have a complete revamp of her character is something that should be celebrated, not criticized. Like with Donkey Kong’s recent redesign, I’ll take it…even if she’s cute and barefoot.

Super Snyder Bros.?

I sometimes wonder if Snyderbros live in reality. I know that’s harsh, but considering how they extorted Warner Bros. into releasing Zack Snyder’s version of Justice League, then tried (unsuccessfully) to do it again with David Ayer’s “true cut” of Suicide Squad, it doesn’t help their case. This isn’t accounting for attempts at “restoring The Snyderverse” following Warner Bros. cancelling The DCEU and starting fresh, implying that only Zack Snyder deserves to control the property. It as if Snyderbros don’t understand when to move on, and that’s bleeding into the new Superman movie from James Gunn. It’s pathetic.

The Snyderverse Subreddit had a post recently from someone requesting that the new Superman movie be review-bombed. Among the demands were writing bad reviews before release, as well as reserving tickets, but not paying. If this sounds petty, the post was immediately removed upon being brought to Gunn’s attention. Because of course. And while I applaud the admins for taking action, I’m in disbelief this got as far as it did.

I’ll state this upfront: I don’t know if Superman will be good. I want it to be good, and released footage shows promise, but it’s not out yet. It won’t be for a few weeks, and anything can happen. That said, even if it’s not good, I still want Gunn to have the opportunity that was afforded to Snyder. He did excellent work on the Guardians of the Galaxy movies, and he deserves to show us his take on Superman.

Perhaps the best indicator the movie might be good is its trailers. Instead of being angsty and violent, Superman’s upbeat and restrained. He tries to minimize casualties, often at his own expense. He has a dog named Krypto, and he uses the dual persona shtick Christopher Reeve perfected in the late-70’s. Everything about what’s been shown has me optimistic, including a remix of John Williams’s score. So while I can’t say for certain it’ll be good, I’ll be surprised (and disappointed) if it isn’t.

Nevertheless, I fail to see why this is so antithetical for Snyderbros and their vision of Superman. You want a brooding loner? That’s what Batman’s for. You want someone violent? That’s what Daredevil’s for. You want someone who kills criminals? That’s what The Punisher’s for. Superman isn’t any of that. So why must it be grafted onto him?

I know the Snyderbros will use Frank Miller’s The Dark Knight Returns in defence. Two objections. First, the Superman in that story, while subservient to The Reagan Administration, is a kind-hearted boy scout. And second, the Batman in that story, while violent, isn’t a cold-hearted murderer, even calling attention to that frequently. Not only do Snyderbros not understand Miller’s work, it’s also a red herring.

You want to know the biggest irony here? Ignoring how Gunn was unfazed, or that Reddit deleted the original post, Snyder himself hasn’t weighed in. Yeah, Zack Snyder, The Messiah to his cultist fans, has said absolutely nothing so far. There’s good reason for that: he wants to move on. And considering he’s had success on Netflix recently, I honestly don’t blame him. Especially since his daughter took her life during production of Justice League, and the wounds are still fresh.

If the Snyderbros were convinced of their righteousness, assuming you’d even call it that, wouldn’t they want Snyder’s blessing? They’re not getting Ayer’s blessing, he’s made that known, but Snyder’s the big kahuna. And he regularly interacts with fans. This is a perfect opportunity for Snyderbros to get his approval before trashing another creative, assuming Snyder has beef with Gunn at all. But that’s thinking too in-depth, so…

Look, I get being disappointed that something you love was discontinued. I’m unhappy that GoldenEye: Rogue Agent isn’t getting a sequel, if only to conclude its story. On the DCEU front, I’m unhappy that Batgirl was written off before it was released, as it genuinely had promise. But I’m not sending death threats, extorting creatives or threatening to review-bomb future projects. Snyderbros, however, are guilty of all three. And it doesn’t look good.

The biggest insult here is that this made headlines. When I initially found out about this, it was through an IGN video and article. But Variety picked it up too, and I’m sure other outlets have covered it. Do Snyderbros have no shame? Are they that desperate to stay relevant that they’ll sabotage other creatives? Because I have news for them, and it’s not good…

Ultimately, Snyderbros have to make a decision. On one hand, they can move on and cherish the few years they had with Snyder, irrespective of overall quality or perception by the public. On the other hand, they can continue whining about how their beloved franchise was discontinued, attack people who disagree with them and be immature to others. Either way, the ball’s in their court. I only hope they know what to do with it.

Now, if you’ll excuse me, I’d like to focus on more positive developments, like how enjoyable Mario Kart World really is…

Switch 2 Go

The Switch 2 had it rough initially. First shown off without any fanfare, it had to overcome its price and justify that it wasn’t an extension of the Switch. To make matters worse, none of its new titles could be owned, instead using licenses. And then there was the Donkey Kong redesign controversy. Yeah. The odds were basically stacked against the Switch 2. But the original Switch’s reveal didn’t set expectations high either, and that’s Nintendo’s best-selling console right now. How bad could the Switch 2 be? Ignoring how hard it was to find, I managed to get my hands on one this week. And I have thoughts. Mostly positive ones, but thoughts.

Let’s start with the console. Saying, “It’s a Switch…but bigger!” both does it justice, and doesn’t do it justice. Yes, it’s a bigger console than the Switch. Whether it’s the wider screen, or the bulkier controller, Nintendo’s takeaway design-wise was to go the WiiU route and make a bigger console. It feels that way too, as I’m more concerned about dropping and breaking it than I was with the Switch.

Nevertheless, that’s my only issue with the design of the console. While larger than the Switch, it’s also much more interesting. The Switch 2’s kickstand is far superior, and the joycon controllers attach and detach far more easily. They also have mouse controls, which take getting used to, but are actually pretty intuitive. Speaking as someone who recently purchased a wireless keyboard and mouse, as I was experiencing back problems prior, for when I’m at my desk, this feels like second-nature. Let’s not forget the HD resolution of the Switch 2’s screen in portable mode, something the Switch couldn’t do.

The interface of the Switch 2 isn’t much different from the Switch. It’s basic, but it has noises that play when you access the apps. The Switch 2 is also backwards-compatible with most of the Switch’s library, even letting you transfer save data. I didn’t overwhelm my Switch library anyway, but it’s nice knowing I could port over everything without it getting corrupted or lost. That I can play Switch games on my Switch 2 is a bonus.

New to the Switch 2 interface is voice chat. Simply set it up in the menu, make sure you have friends with a Switch 2, and you’re good to go. It reminds me a lot of Discord, in that it’s accessible for anyone with little-to-no knowledge of voice chat features. I’m a little worried about Nintendo’s strict guidelines, however. I don’t mind racial slurs being a no-no, but even dropping an f-bomb accidentally is a red flag. Considering how conversations can get heated during gameplay, that’ll be a difficult sell for me. Not even Twitch is that restrictive!

Another advantage the Switch 2 has is having classic GameCube titles in its NSO library. Perhaps it was a hardware limitation, but the original Switch couldn’t go beyond N64 titles, and even then they had lag issues. The Switch 2, however, can play GameCube games, even displaying them in HD. I love the GameCube, but its best games are impossible to find for a reasonable price nowadays. Them being on NSO removes that barrier.

Speaking of games, the Switch 2’s launch catalogue isn’t too impressive, but it has a gem in Mario Kart World, which is included as an optional bundle. I had to enter a code to download it, which took several tries, but I was blown away. Mario Kart Wii, while not a bad game, turned me off of the franchise because it reminded me that I can’t drive, so saying that about an open-world kart racer, something I never thought I’d be interested in, is impressive. And it’s great. I love how intuitive the overworld is, with challenges and collectibles that keep it lively and not boring. That’s something I wish more 3D Zelda games understood.

Also, the racing in the game is fun. The tracks have a lived-in feeling that previous entries couldn’t achieve due to technical limitations, and they’re quite expansive. They even have areas with branching paths, as well as rails and boosts for practicing parkour. I still don’t understand what purpose the coins serve, or why you can only hold up to 20 at once, but they’re a neat little novelty. They’re fun to collect, at least.

Other than that, this is a Mario Kart game, except with achievements and challenges that unlock characters and karts. Whether it’s the chaos of Battle Mode with 24 players, or hopping online and challenging friends, Mario Kart World has the potential to be another classic. And with the inevitable DLC, I can’t wait to see what the game has in store. I can’t get enough as is.

But that’s the Switch 2 in nutshell. Like the Switch, the Switch 2 has many cool features that make turning it on for even a few minutes, if only to check for updates, worthwhile. I’m only hoping the next few months make it more worth my time, as my one complaint is that it’s basically another Switch. A bigger, shinier and technically-superior Switch, but another Switch. And that’s not necessarily bad.