Crosshair and Villainy

(Warning: The following contains spoilers. Read at your own risk.)

I’m overdue for a piece on Star Wars: The Bad Batch. Truthfully, while a great show, merging the best of Star Wars: The Clone Wars and Star Wars Rebels, it’s been hard to say more than “It’s great, you should watch it!”. So I’ve put it off until now. But I’ve finally found something to say about Crosshair. More-specifically, how Crosshair’s been characterized, as well as what that says about Fascism’s adherents.

Crosshair was introduced with Clone Force 99 in Star Wars: The Clone Wars. The sharpshooter of the group, he always had an edge that the rest of his unit didn’t. He was cold, calculated and off-putting, barely raising his voice beyond a whisper. But like the rest of his team, he got the job done. And that made him irreplaceable.

The real test of character came in the debut episode of Star Wars: The Bad Batch. While fighting on planet Kaller, Order 66 is initiated by Emperor Palpatine, activating every Clonetrooper’s inhibitor chip and forcing them to turn on their Jedi. While most Clones obey the order, Clone Force 99 doesn’t…save Crosshair. Being a cold soldier, Crosshair fires at Padawan Caleb Dume and begins his descent. He even questions the loyalty of his comrades on Kamino, leading to him being taken by Admiral Tarkin, having his inhibitor chip cranked to the max and turned into a weapon for The Galactic Empire.

Most of Season 1 has Crosshair’s appearances focusing on trying to take down his former teammates, with some exceptions. In Episode 3 Crosshair leads a crew of voluntary recruits to finish an unfinished assignment: execute some rebels led by Saw Gerrera. When one of his recruits refuses, Crosshair shoots him and orders the rest to “finish the mission”. All the while, he stands there and watches. Crosshair might be in Order 66 Mode, but he's enjoying it.

Crosshair’s handed a crossroads moment in Season 1’s finale. He captures Hunter, his former leader, and brings him to Kamino to bait his old crew. It doesn’t take long for them to arrive, and he’s tasked to take his team of recruits and kill them. But he doesn’t. Instead, he assassinates them and lectures Hunter about “abandoning” him. Hunter says, “We didn’t have a choice”, to which Crosshair replies, “And I did?” It’s a tense moment with plenty of great lines, including when Crosshair mentions that he’d had his inhibitor chip removed “a long time ago”. Which begs the question: was Crosshair always bloodthirsty, and his teammates had pacified him?

To make matters worse, Admiral Rampart of The Galactic Empire orders a strike on Kamino, causing it to sink. As Crosshair’s forced to work with Hunter, Echo, Wrecker, Tech and Omega to escape, we see glimpses of what could’ve been. Hunter and company really do care about Crosshair, and he knows that. But his duty to The Empire presses on his mind. We even get a hint that his inhibitor chip might still be active when he massages his temple at the end of Episode 16, and that he lied about removing it.

We don’t see Crosshair again until Episode 3 of Season 2, when he’s assigned to Commander Cody and dispatched to Desix to rescue an Imperial officer. There’s an interesting exchange that Cody and Crosshair have about Clone loyalty early on. Clones, states Cody, are increasingly defecting as they question The Empire’s motives. Crosshair makes note of this, pointing out that “they’re traitors, like the Jedi”. Does Crosshair mean that, or is that his sense of duty talking?

Either way, Crosshair and Cody free the captured officer. Said officer then orders them to kill the Separatist leader that’d captured him and hang her body in the public square. Cody refuses, opting for a peaceful path. But no sooner can he justify himself when Crosshair executes the Separatist personally. The next day, Crosshair’s informed by Rampart that Cody’s gone AWOL.

Why’s Crosshair blindly obedient to The Empire? He’s had many opportunities to renege his loyalty, and he’s even abandoned on Kamino. If he’s so disposable by them, why go back? Is it his inhibitor chip, or something else? Who’s to say?

This speaks volumes on how Fascists operate. In Star Wars particularly, The Empire holds no allegiances to its own. Krennic is the architect of The Death Star, but he’s killed by it when it fires on Scarif. Luke Skywalker destroys said Death Star, killing thousands of soldiers, but Emperor Palpatine orders a new one created. Even when Darth Vader dies, no Stormtrooper helps him. To The Empire, everyone’s disposable.

So why stay? The obvious answer is “a sense of duty”, but I don’t buy that. As Crosshair shows, The Empire doesn’t value its soldiers. Why, then, does he come back, even after being treated like garbage? What makes the cause appealing?

I think the answer lies in who The Empire attracts. Like real-world Fascists, The Empire’s all about control and subjugation. It’s quick to turn on its own for political gain, but it compels those who are like-minded to join it. Crosshair, in that sense, isn’t anomalous. He’s simply a really efficient cog in a machine that doesn’t value him.

That’s the real tragedy. While it’s true that the Clones were all victims, being forced to turn on their leaders and absorbed into an entity that didn’t value them, Crosshair’s a special example of that. Remember, Crosshair isn’t a standard Clonetrooper. He, like the rest of Clone Force 99, is unique, efficient. So him falling victim to the same trap as other Clones is even more-upsetting.

Nevertheless, Crosshair’s enjoying his descent way too much. Like Zuko from Avatar: The Last Airbender, he feels purpose in his mission. And like Catra from She-Ra and the Princesses of Power, he revels in the hunt. But unlike Zuko and Catra, I doubt there’s a way out that doesn’t involve death. I could be wrong, but Crosshair has too much blood on his hands.

I’ll conclude by mentioning this: in a recent piece, I stated that the key to a good antagonist is having sympathy written for someone you despise. Crosshair’s exactly that. He’s a villain who enjoys being evil, but he’s also exploited by a system that doesn’t value him. It’s not unlike how Fascists are drawn in by power, then discarded when no longer useful. It’s a sad, vicious cycle, something Star Wars: The Bad Batch isn’t afraid to call out.

Rolling a D20

Dungeons & Dragons is something I only recently got into. And by that, I mean this year. I’d heard a lot about it for years, and even wanted to try it out, but I couldn’t find a time that worked. It was only in January that I found something on Thursday evenings. But now that I’ve enrolled in a campaign, I understand the hype. Because when it’s not in the planning stage, it can be lots of fun.

There’s a new movie premiering centred around the game: Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves. While it was announced months ago, I waited to seek out the trailer. But having seen it, I’m hooked. It looks fun, and it made me laugh at one point. That’s all I needed.

There are some hopes and aspirations I have, so I’ll share them.

Firstly, I hope the movie has jokes. And not only jokes, bad ones. Bad jokes that distract from the story, but are funny nonetheless. Jokes that feel pop-culture-heavy and dated, some of which break the 4th wall. When you get down to it, that’s half of the fun. To demonstrate, here are the highlights from my campaign:

When designing characters, which took an entire session, one of the participants created a Frankenstein’s monster from different body parts and armour. When asked to name the character, she chose the equivalent of “Generic Name”.

In our first story session, one of us, an orc, barged in a tavern and demanded food. When given a bowl of slop, he wolfed it down and belched loudly, creating a mess. My response? “Great, something else to clean up.”

Shortly afterward, said orc wandered off to go find The Sunless Citadel, which was our map. Along the way, he encountered three enemies made of wood. After defeating them, he proceeded to eat them.

Upon entering the cave to The Sunless Citadel, the whole party, myself included, bragged about lessons our in-game fathers had taught us.

When we got to a nearby cavern, I made a comment about dwarves and their height. This offended a fellow campaigner who was a dwarf mage, and he went on a rant the entire way down.

When it was my turn, I tossed a giant rock down to see what the distance was. It attracted three, large rats. But not to worry, once we defeated them the orc ate them too.

There was a narrow staircase leading to The Sunless Citadel. Since my character was acrophobic, or afraid of heights, I was strapped to the chest of another character, a giant, all the way to the bottom. “Generic Name” mentioned that if everything went poorly, they could throw me into the abyss. I then protested and explained that my character’s acrophobia stemmed from childhood trauma.

Once at the bottom, I accidentally activated a trap door. After arguing over who’d save me, the giant volunteered. Relieved, I said, “I guess I should consider you my ‘get out of trap free’ card!”

When we saw a button hanging on a wall, I pushed it. A spike came out that dealt me damage, followed by three skeleton warriors. We beat them, but not before almost killing our necromancer. Also, our orc wanted to eat the corpses.

A little while in, we spotted a glowing orb making sounds. Every time someone approached it, we darted in the opposite direction out of fear. When the orc was confronted about it, he said, “It was like watching a Tim Burton movie.”

Not long after, we discovered and befriended a dragon keeper who’d lost his dragon to goblins. Initially, “Generic Fighter” braced him for the worst, causing him to run away. We caught up to the dragon keeper and convinced him we weren’t a threat. Said dragon keeper started shouting “tickle-fresh”, which the orc mistook as a sign to tickle him. He also put a frozen dragon scale in his mouth, and we had to roll a D20 to remove it.

Upon meeting the dragon keeper’s community, the orc tickled a baby and was bitten by it.

When confronting the king of the goblins, the orc suggested doing The Chicken Dance. When that didn’t work, he yelled at him, initiating a fight we nearly lost. It was here that I asked, “Why is our strongest member also our lamest?”, to which the orc replied, “That tends to happen with my characters.”

We were saved at the last-second by “Generic Name” rolling a D20, getting a 20 and cleaving the king in half.

I also almost died and was sent to a dungeon, and I woke up with a death hangover. The remedy? A Devil’s Eggnog. (Basically a Prairie Oyster from Cowboy Bebop.)

When we finally found the dragon, the orc tried speaking garbled Draconian. The dragon got offended and stormed off. “Generic Name” then asked what’d happen if someone failed at speaking Orcish, to which he responded, “I’d laugh”.

(We’re not even done our campaign, FYI.)

Anyway, this goofy improvisation’s integral to the experience. And I’ll be mad if the movie doesn’t have it.

Secondly, I want good chemistry between the leads. This might be based on a game with contrivances, but it’s a movie. And it needs characters who work well together. You can have as many fantastical and nonsensical elements as you want, but if the leads don’t mesh, you’re setting yourself up for failure. Fortunately, that appears to be a non-issue.

Thirdly, I want meta-references. I want call-backs to this being a campaign with nonsense. I want hints at the different dice, including the D20. I want moments that distract from the story, as well as characters bobbing in and out depending on availability. And I want the episodic nature of the campaigns here, including cliff-hangers and expository recaps. I don’t know if all of this will work here, but it’d be nice to have some of it.

Finally, I want this movie to go all-out. This is D&D, where the story’s only limited by the people playing it. If there isn’t even a fraction of the chaos this game’s notorious for, I’ll be disappointed. In fact, I’ll be angry. Because D&D deserves better.

Ultimately, I want to have fun. It’s an action-fantasy epic in the vein of a self-aware comedy, complete with quips and meta-humour. That’s all I’m asking for, and I hope it delivers. Fortunately, it appears to be doing that, judging by reviews. But we’ll see soon enough.

That’s about it. If you’ll excuse me, I have some more goblins to slay…

Selective MCU Nostalgia

I need to get something off my chest.

Hmm… (Courtesy of The Cosmonaut Variety Hour.)

The above video was published on YouTube a few days ago. It’s from an interesting content creator. I’ve seen videos from him before, so I know what to expect. But I don’t agree with it, for several reasons. Here’s why:

Forewarning, this isn’t to slight the poster. I like Marcus’s content, even if I don’t watch all of his stuff. He’s (mostly) fair, even while hard on something, and I appreciate him recognizing that not everything is for him. However, I think Marcus is being overzealous and selective about Phase 4 of The MCU. Specifically because many of his complaints aren’t clear-cut when juxtaposed with the franchise’s history.

Let’s start with the obvious: the movies feel rushed. This might be true, but The MCU has churned out several projects each year (with a few exceptions) since its inception. The only part I agree with is that The MCU’s been going overboard lately with its output. We had 4 movies and 5 shows in 2021, 3 movies, 2 short-films and 4 shows (if we’re counting I Am Groot) in 2022, and we’re getting 3 movies and 2 shows this year. By MCU standards, that’s a lot. But considering ex-CEO Bob Chapek’s strategy, I’m not surprised.

Another complaint I can get behind, though not entirely, is the rushed effects and colour-grading. This has become a sticking point for many people, and it’s definitely true. But it’s not exclusive to Marvel movies, as many films and shows with VFX artists have struggled. Besides, The MCU having “unfinished” effects isn’t new. People were pointing it out with Black Panther in 2018.

There are two problems with this complaint. The first is that bad visual effects aren’t a new issue. They’re not even new to superhero movies, as evidenced by Raimi’s Spider-Man films. Remember how rough the first movie’s CGI was? Remember how The Green Goblin flying on his glider looked fake and goofy? Remember how bad some of the fights looked, and how dated others are now? Remember how no one cared, because we were invested anyway?

The second is that many of the complaints here centre around nonsense. Axel’s first projection looking crappy? He has no experience yet, of course it looks bad. Kamala’s powers looking crystallized? That was the point. M.O.D.O.K. looking ugly? He’s an enlarged head!

Of everything people could complain about, people pick the most-insignificant details. Besides, did everyone forget the monstrosity that was skinny Steve Rogers? I didn’t! It looked terrible, but I didn’t care because I was invested. That’s what matters, not if the effects are bad!

Another complaint that gets mentioned a lot, and this isn’t only Marcus’s doing, is that of aimlessness in Phase 4. I disagree. I not only don’t mind the lack of immediate cohesion, I also think there’ve been bits and pieces of connective tissue. Marcus’s complaint about the conflict of Eternals not getting mentioned again, for example, isn’t true, because She-Hulk: Attorney at Law joked about it, and it’ll be the focus in Thunderbolts. Additionally, Marcus saying that the stories don’t connect is strange given that The MCU hasn’t tied up everything together 100%.

Perhaps this is most-apparent in The Incredible Hulk. That movie teased a villain reveal that hasn’t come to fruition. You know, that moment where Bruce Banner hits a scientist with radiation while trying to get his Hulk persona under control, and the scientist briefly changes? Did you catch that? Or were you not paying attention? Regardless, it’s been 15 years...

Even outside of that, The MCU’s notorious for constantly improvising its continuity. And it hasn’t always been subtle about that, teasing possibilities in well-loved entries. Iron Man, a movie famous for having a half-finished script, teased War Machine, and it used SHIELD’s full, unabbreviated name several times before shortening it. Given how so many people consider it one of The MCU’s best, you’d think that’d be discussed more…

Much of Phase 4’s content being “bad” is subjective and rooted in bigotry. This isn’t to slight Marcus’s concerns, but She-Hulk and Ms. Marvel have received flak for merely existing. Remember when She-Hulk twerked for 5 seconds, and that somehow warranted outrage? Remember when Ms. Marvel was criticized for being “woke”? Remember the “M-She-U” nonsense? I do.

This “M-She-U” term is used as a justification for how The MCU’s “declining in popularity”. While most recent entries haven’t done pre-pandemic numbers, some, like Spider-Man: No Way Home, have. (And yes, that’s including rewatches.) A few of the newer movies, at least superficially, have also embraced queer text. This has alienated several foreign markets, where that’s still taboo. And outside of that, I doubt movie theatres will fully go back to pre-COVID numbers.

Even with the newer content, people have zoned-in on non-white males in prominent roles as “wokeness gone too far”, despite that dating back to Black Panther. It also was in a scene from The Avengers: Endgame that The Boys cast shade on. The MCU has always been “woke”, and that people are only catching onto that now is quite telling.

By the way, The MCU has better antagonists now too! Remember the villain from Thor: The Dark World? Did you know his name was Malekith? Do you remember anything about him? I only remember that his design was interesting, which sucks given that he’s Marvel’s answer to The Joker in the comics.

The MCU’s villains are more-interesting now than a decade ago. Even Yellowjacket was fleshed-out more in Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania as M.O.D.O.K., hence why the character change didn’t bother me. I say this knowing that Ant-Man was better overall. If you want to criticize modern MCU antagonists, at least criticize older MCU antagonists. It’s only fair!

One final note is The MCU’s overall quality. I agree that MCU fatigue hasn’t kicked in yet, and that The MCU movies and shows have an obligation to be better. But that doesn’t mean that they’ll all be equal, or even hits. That’s not only impossible, it’s not fair to the entries overall. The Ant-Man movies will always suffer when they’re not lighthearted palate cleansers, as Ant-Man’s a goofy character. Conversely, making Black Panther a complete joke ruins the character. Even within The MCU, not everything works the same way.

I could go on forever, but I want Marcus to understand, again, that nothing I’m saying is personal. I respect him and agree with him much of the time. Even with this video, which I don’t agree with, I can at least see his arguments. And I know he wants what’s best for The MCU. That’s more than I can say for most complainers.

That said, Marcus’s words can and will be used as ammo by detractors of The MCU. It’s making discussing these movies exhausting. Especially when many of these complaints can be retroactively lobbed at The Infinity Saga, which was a perfect series of films that had no low points whatsoever. (And yes, I’m being sarcastic. How could you tell?)

Regardless, I’m definitely interested in what Kang can bring to the table. I only hope he delivers…

Unpacking The Oscars

It’s Oscars season, and the usual buzz is everywhere. Whether it’s the different categories, the bigotry, or talking about how The Oscars have outlived their usefulness, nothing gets people more riled up at this time of year than some incredibly-subjective statues. It begs the question: why do so many people get upset? Really?

My thoughts on The Oscars have mellowed over the last 14 years. If you’d have asked in 2009 what bugged me about them, I’d point to the endless complaining and free press it gave a ceremony the people didn’t like. Nowadays, it tires me out. I watch the ceremony out of habit, but it’s not worth the bile. That’s why I avoid Twitter while it’s on. It’s simply not worth the headache.

Let’s back up a bit. The Academy Awards began as a distraction from the Fatty Arbuckle scandal. Originally short, they’ve since swelled into a big press release. The Oscars are no longer a private, secluded event where Hollywood celebrities gather to hand out trophies. No, they’re a private, secluded event where Hollywood celebrities gather to hand out trophies…but they’re televised now. The Oscars are an event, where people make impromptu speeches.

I’m being cynical, but there’s a good reason. Aside from burnout, as well as endless debates, I don’t see the point in getting mad. The Academy doesn’t care what we think about them. Ignoring the big controversies, many of which are shameless, The Oscars don’t deserve the attention they receive. I say this knowing that their disdain for animation is flagrant, as I’ve no doubt covered on Infinite Rainy Day.

What bothers me more is the holier-than-thou attitude so many of their critics have. I get that there’ll be disappointment and disagreement, but is it worth getting mad? Is it worth mocking the choices as “lame”, or starting your own, equally-painful ceremony in response? Is it worth arguing over merit, given how subjective it is? No.

I’ve always been partial to the choices myself. As a “film omnivore”, I’ll watch anything that appeals to me, including the “snobbish, artsy picks”. Because many of those movies are ignored in the era of tentpole blockbusters and streaming. That they’re highlighted at all gives a certain exposure that wouldn’t happen otherwise, which is good. No one would’ve realized that movies like 12 Years a Slave were more than cheap “Oscar-bait” if they, ironically, weren’t introduced to larger audiences via The Oscars. Even films like Dallas Buyers Club, which I absolutely loved, were on many people’s radar screens because of the ceremony.

Does this mean I agree with every pick? No. I thought Birdman was a slog to sit through, while I’ve made no secret about my disinterest with Mad Max: Fury Road. Both movies received Oscars, demonstrating their appeal. But that’s okay. To paraphrase James Rolfe, The Oscars are a recommendations list.

Think about it: The Oscars a group of people in the industry choosing what they consider the best of the year. And they’re rank-choice. This means that not only are they democratic, they’re picked by individuals. That’s a recommendations list, especially since the stakes are low. You don’t have to agree, but that’s the beauty of recommendations.

My thoughts have changed precisely because I view this as a recommendations list. Sure, many of the picks are trash. But aren’t many of your favourite movies trashy too? Some of mine are, and I admit that! That’s the beauty of recommendations, right?

Besides, every now and then a genuine surprise happens. No one expected Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King to win Best Picture. No one thought the late-Heath Ledger would win as Oscar for The Joker in The Dark Knight. Even Spirited Away winning Best Animated Feature was a genuine shock! These might be “exceptions to the rule”, but that doesn’t mean they aren’t great choices, right?

Personally, complaining about The Oscars feels like the equivalent of getting mad at horse racing. Even if you liked the losing horse, you still got invested. You have yourself to blame, and it’s weird how much over-investment people have despite that. I could also be speaking out of privilege. But I digress...

You can still be mad at the behind-the-scenes politics. Ignoring how The Academy sees anime films as “those Chinese fucking things”, there are weird decisions that go into the picks. The Academy even has an equity problem, something it’s been trying to remedy. These are definitely legitimate concerns. But they’re not talked about nearly as much as the award show, which is subjective anyway.

I’ve been dancing around in circles, switching from topic-to-topic with little connective tissue, but that’s how I view this conversation. And it’s tiring. And tedious. And annoying. And absolutely worth not hiding anymore, hence me writing this at all.

If anything can be taken from here, it’s that The Oscars aren’t worth the bile. They’re too subjective, too shameless and too full of themselves. And people making their own award shows in response aren’t much better. Sure, there’s validity to the closed-door complaining, but that’s closed-door. The overt stuff, like what actually wins, is what get most of the attention, and it’s not worth it. Devote your energy to something else…

…Or not. It’s your choice!

April O'Now What?

Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles is a property that’s had many highs and lows. On one hand, it’s had success in TV, movies, gaming and comic books, spurring multiple classics. On the other hand, the franchise has sold out more frequently than a hot dog stand at half-off. Essentially, the IP’s a lottery of quality. Which leads me to the trailer for Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Mutant Mayhem.

Teenagers in a half-shell, bro! (Courtesy of Paramount Pictures.)

There’s a lot here that I like. The animation style evokes a comic book come to life, complete with jumpy frame-rates and action speed-lines. The energy of the trailer’s consistent, so it’s never boring. The turtles behave like teenagers, and their VAs are teens themselves. And there are plenty of quips and jokes one would expect from teenagers. Add in that Seth Rogen is responsible for its existence, and it’ll be a good time.

I could end this here, but that’s not happening. I can’t leave on the positives, I have to delve into the “controversy”. And it involves April O’Neil. That’s right, the character classically depicted as a white redhead is now a black, slightly-heavyset teenager with glasses. Cue the fauxrage, as well as my patience diminishing.

Yes, April being black is cause for alarm now. And yeah, it’s a departure from what people normally expect, I won’t lie. But is that worth the anger and bile? No, it’s not. To further explain why, let me deconstruct how nonsensical this is:

Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles is a transient IP, constantly reimagining itself. It’s not based in reality, as evidenced by the leads being talking turtles trained in martial arts from a rat. In that sense, April being black doesn’t matter. Because she’s not real. We good?

Assuming people need more convincing, minority representation isn’t on par with modern sensibilities yet. Sure, there are many black characters in media, far more than 20 years ago. But it’s pittance compared to white characters, who’ve been dominant for longer. It’s the snowball effect in motion: the black snowball’s getting bigger, but it has lots of catching up to do to overtake the white snowball. Even if you remove some snow from the white snowball and give it to the black snowball, the white snowball’s still bigger. This transfer of snow’s called “equity”, something we need more of in entertainment.

But wait! What about April being canonically a redhead? While it’d seem like a redheaded character being made black would be a “problem”, redheads aren’t only white. Because they comprise approximately 1.3% of the global population, or 104 million people. Even though most are white-skinned, there are exceptions. Erin Kellyman, for example, is a biracial redhead. Red hair’s a naturally-occurring, if rare, hair pigment, and it doesn’t discriminate.

I also never see this complaint when white people replace redheads. Matt Murdock and Elsa Bloodstone from Marvel Comics are redheads, yet The MCU portrayals of them have brown hair. To take this complaint seriously, Charlie Cox and Laura Donnelly should’ve dyed their hair red. But they didn’t. What gives?!

Even focusing specifically on April O’Neil, she’s been black in the comics. She was based on the biracial wife of one of the original creators. Ergo, April being a white-skinned redhead is whitewashing. By making her black again, she’s being reclaimed. That’s fair, right?

I’m avoiding the biggest, most-pervasive issue: racism. The reason why redheads being played by minorities gets flak is because of racism. Never mind that white people with brown hair are never criticized for taking roles from redheads, or that white people often stand in for minorities, this is about racism. You know why? Because whenever a minority role is created from scratch, people still complain. We saw that with Reva in Obi-Wan Kenobi, after all. April O’Neil being black as a controversy is about racism.

This nonsense not only creates free marketing, it also distracts from legitimate criticism. Like how Ariel from the live-action remake of The Little Mermaid being black distracts from the movie being yet another soulless attempt by Disney to capitalize on nostalgia. Or, in this case, it distracts from Seth Rogen’s baggage. (Google how the animators of Sausage Party were treated for proof of that.) There are real issues getting ignored for fake ones, which this is.

Honestly, I want to have fun with this movie. And I’m hoping it delivers. Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles hasn’t had a great track-record films-wise, with only a select few being good. This looks to be one of the exceptions, but trailers can also be misleading. I only wish that isn’t the case here, or I’ll have defended it for nothing.

Ultimately, I don’t get what the deal is. So April O’Neil’s black? So what? Is it the end of the world? Will one character being black counteract all of the white characters that exist in entertainment already? The answer to all these questions is “no”. And the sooner this is understood by everyone, the better.

The Xplay Factor

On June 26th, 2015, The United States Supreme Court ruled on Obergefell V. Hodges, a controversial case about a baker refusing to bake a cake for a gay couple. In a 5-4 ruling, they ruled in favour of the couple, striking down marriage bans throughout The US and making gay marriage official nationwide. Celebrations commenced, with celebrities like George Takei and Ian McKellen, both gay themselves, posting their thoughts on Twitter. It was also a pivotal moment in the fight against homophobia, demonstrating that if the world’s biggest superpower saw gay marriage as an inalienable right, then anything was possible.

And then there was 25 year-old me typing out the worst Tweet I could’ve written...

In hindsight, I understand the reasoning for my Tweet. The celebrations were pouring in, and in my mind it was draining. I was also still shedding my edge-lord libertarianism, a process I began in university and wouldn’t complete until after Donald Trump was elected president. In my mind, the celebrating was tedious. Nevertheless, while I nearly bombed my credibility by saying I was “tired of all these pro-LGBT Tweets”, I realize now that it was a bad move on my part.

I mention this for two reasons: firstly, I’m fallible and not above reproach. I’ve made many mistakes in the past, said Tweet being one of them. And secondly, I want to pay forward the lessons I’ve learned. Because that Tweet, which I can’t find anymore, was a teaching moment, one I remember even now. All of this is leading to what I want to actually discuss: Xplay.

Xplay was a show on the now-defunct TechTV/G4TV network. Hosted by Adam Sessler and Morgan Webb, the show reviewed newly-released video games in a tongue-and-cheek manner. I was late to the scene, having discovered Xplay in 2008, but I remember meshing with their sense of humour; after all, anything remotely video game-related was an instant sell. Even once I moved on from video games, I had fond memories of the show and, subsequently, the channel.

Unfortunately, time hasn’t been kind to the show’s humour. When a recent clip from an episode on Baiten Kaitos Origins resurfaced, Sessler wrote some…less-than-pleasant Tweets. He not only refused to apologize for the review’s racism, he openly-criticized those calling it out. When pressed further, he doubled-down. Essentially, he didn’t take it well.

I should mention that I have immense respect for Sessler. I appreciated his now-defunct response to the late-Roger Ebert’s claim that video games weren’t art, and I liked how he was an advocate for journalistic integrity during GamerGate. Sessler’s an intelligent man. And this makes his recent statements much more troubling. Because he should know better.

Let’s get the obvious out of the way first. For one, this is old material. Sessler isn’t the man he was in 2006, no one is. I know that I was drastically different 17 years ago, as evidenced by my Facebook Feed. Considering how embarrassing it is to reread my posts, I get not wanting to be reminded of your past thoughts.

Moving on, Sessler, judging by his Twitter Feed, is a busy man. He’s recently been on a reading binge, and he still does some gaming coverage. Being reminded of a show he did nearly two decades ago, one he might not have parted on good terms with, could be a sore spot. It doesn’t help that the internet can be ruthless with past failings and mistakes. Ergo, I get wanting to “move forward”.

And finally, it’s weird mentioning this review now. It was offensive? So was a lot of stuff in 2006. Gay marriage was still taboo in The US, and marijuana consumption was frowned upon. People’s attitudes toward Muslim countries like Iraq and Afghanistan were largely shaped by 9/11, which was only five years out at that point. Even popular media was making jokes that were “insensitive”, as evidenced by South Park. Given that Sessler’s review was thrown back in his face, I can see him getting defensive.

That said, my sympathies only extend so far. So it’s an old review that’s “bad”? Plenty of old content is “bad”. So Sessler’s busy? He can still admit that he made a mistake, it takes all of a minute. So this wasn’t an anomaly? So what?

We don’t fully-appreciate how little people’s sensibilities change. Sure, they do change, but not as drastically as you’d think. Remember, Warner Bros. and Disney made plenty of shorts and films that were in bad taste even then. Rereleases of Fantasia and several Looney Tunes shorts wouldn’t have been edited to remove bigoted material otherwise. Even now, said shorts and movies have disclaimers on Disney+ and HBO Max. Human nature doesn’t evolve that quickly.

While Sessler might have reasons to act like this doesn’t warrant an apology, they’re not good reasons. Ignoring the timing, he had the perfect opportunity to acknowledge that he messed up. That’d not only help reverse the harm, it’d earn him respect from many people. Sessler fancies himself a role model, and role models should lead by example. He’s not doing that.

This isn’t made better by Sessler’s defenders saying “it’s supposed to be offensive” to excuse his behaviour. Being offensive on purpose isn’t a good excuse. Especially when that offence is done out of mean-spiritedness, instead of making light of something in order to improve it. Like with South Park, it’s bullying. Basically, punch up, not down. Xplay’s review, which leaned into “Japanese developers are lazy hacks”, is the latter.

Let’s zone-in on that: Japan’s not one, singular voice. Japanese society isn’t monolithic, and it contains a wide variety of individuals with varying outlooks. Some of these are toxic, but many aren’t. And shaming Japan collectively because of a petty grudge does no one favours. If anything, it’s racist.

Yes, I said the “r” word. Am I wrong?

You know what doesn’t help? That Sessler dragged his critics. Is it true that some were unfairly critical? It’s the internet, so probably? But that doesn’t mean all of them were. Like with Japan, the internet isn’t monolithic. Some of his critics might’ve been picking a fight, but many were genuinely hurt by his review and lack of an apology. By him lumping everyone together as “insipid” (his words), Sessler comes across as the villain here.

Compounding everything is him comparing genuine critics of his behaviour to “MAGA idiots”. I get that MAGA’s a buzzword that’s done a lot of damage, I really do. But that doesn’t excuse petty behaviour. It’s why many Bernie-bros are so openly-reviled by the public, and it’s why Sessler’s response is troubling. Especially since he’s better than this.

I’d now like to appeal to Adam Sessler directly: I get it. You don’t like being reminded of your blunders, especially post-facto. I routinely cringe at my past behaviour and rhetoric! But I acknowledge and take accountability for it, and I think that makes me a better person. So while you might not want to, an honest, sincere apology is warranted.

Alternatively, you can ignore accountability and face the consequences. It’s your choice!