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.

Switch in Reflection

In 2017, Nintendo, then struggling with the Wii U, debuted the Switch. Marketed as a portable-docked console hybrid, it became a hit, proving Nintendo, like the Wii, still had a few tricks up their sleeves. Despite an initially-emaciated library, with few launch titles worth buying, it quickly gained momentum and turned into a juggernaut capable of competing with the competition. And now, 8 years later, the Switch 2’s set to debut, taking the Switch and adding to it in subtle ways. With that said, I thought I’d reflect on my experience with this glorious machine.

Now, I didn’t buy a Switch at launch. I didn’t have the financial means to do so, and I had more pressing concerns at the time. Nevertheless, it was the first console I bought new with my own money, having saved up from my job in a warehouse. It felt like an accomplishment, especially since every Penny of that purchase was my own. It helped that the first game I bought, Super Mario Odyssey, was superb, redefining what Mario games were capable of.

The next few years would see my library grow slowly, as I got used to the system’s capabilities in docked and portable mode. I’d come to prefer docked mode, especially given the physical strain portable mode created, but both options had advantages. For the former, playing games on my flatscreen TV was magical, giving me a full-on experience the Switch was designed for. The latter was a novelty should I need to unplug from my TV, even if I was reliant on the console’s battery. Either way, there was something for me.

Perhaps the biggest draw, outside of portability, was its retro catalogue. The Wii did this over a decade prior, and possibly better, but the downside there was buying each title separately. The NSO, however, included everything for a flat fee, meaning no extra hassle. So long as you had a subscription and a working internet connection, you could play everything. This is something I’m glad the Switch 2’s incorporating too.

Another draw was the control scheme. Say what you will about the Wii U, but playing titles on a tablet controller, even if its range was limited, was something I’m glad was ported to and improved on by the Switch. Outside of that, the joycon and pro controllers were amazing, demonstrating how intuitive the games were to play. That the joycons could detach and be used in different ways was a bonus. Even the motion controls, something the Wiimote struggled with, were great.

But the Switch’s real legacy is its library. I don’t have a massive catalogue of titles, especially compared to the Wii, but quality’s its greatest asset. Whether its drafting new levels to play, or traversing Kanto in glorious HD, the Switch’s library was never boring. And whenever I was finished with a game, I could always fall back on classic titles. There was so much to do that simply turning on the system and browsing updates felt like an accomplishment. It was like the system had never-ending secrets waiting to be explored. That I kept discovering them via menial tasks helped.

That was the secret to the Switch’s success: it had something for everyone. That’s not to ignore its problems, especially the dreaded joycon drift, but none of the system’s limitations were dealbreakers. It was such a big game-changer that, honestly, I’m having a hard time picturing the Switch 2 outdoing it. Because it showed that the Wii U, from which it incorporated design ideas, had real potential that wasn’t utilized. In contrast, the Switch capitalized on its potential fully, such that I’m positive it hasn’t been pushed to its limits yet.

Does this mean the Switch 2 won’t live up to expectations? I honestly don’t know. Hefty price tag aside, it’ll definitely have its work cut out for it. Keep in mind that the Switch revived long-dormant and obscure franchises Nintendo had given up on due to sales numbers, which is no easy feat. For the Switch 2 to really do that justice, it’d have to continue the legacy of good decisions and marketability. And it’s still too early to tell.

Personally speaking, I don’t think it should try. The Switch, like the Wii, really does feel like lightning in a bottle, and trying to recapture that magic would be a waste of time and resources. The best option, one I hope Nintendo goes for, is leaning into the Switch’s success, except with some upgrades. Think less DS to the Game Boy and more Game Boy Color or Game Boy Advance. Especially since the Game Boy series was discontinued prematurely.

In the end, I’m excited for the Switch 2…assuming I can actually afford it. Yet while I’m ready for this new experience to debut, it’ll also be difficult to close the book on the Switch. So much about it has been baked into the last 8 years, and saying goodbye will feel bittersweet. Nevertheless, I’m optimistic the Switch 2 will be a worthy follow-up. Nintendo owes that much to everyone, myself included.

The Orthorexia Question

In my time online, I’ve rarely interacted with Talia Lavin. There’s no personal reason, and no vendettas either, we simply don’t travel in the same circles. But I respect her, and consider her a valid voice in the Jewish community globally. She’s also a great writer, based on what little I’ve read. I mention all this in case I’m accused of belittling her.

Recently, Talia wrote a piece dissecting a book from Trump’s Surgeon General, Casey Means, explaining why “Make America Healthy Again” reeks of orthorexia. I’m no health expert, but I agree that obsessing excessively about what you eat is dangerous. My late-Zaidy was ahead of his time with food, limiting his consumption of red meat early on, but he also owned a bakery briefly because you can’t deprive yourself of every indulgence. When he was diagnosed with diabetes in his mid-80’s, he’d already stopped caring despite his appetite dwindling by that point. He lived to 92, by the way.

Depriving yourself of pleasures in an attempt to be disciplined isn’t great. Not that you should fill your body with complete trash, but discipline and pleasure shouldn’t be mutually-exclusive. Interestingly enough, Judaism, the religion Talia and I share, understands this. There’s a reason we bless food before and after consuming it, as well as why we’re obligated to not be boorish when we eat. If we’re to live as decent, moral individuals, we need to respect our bodies too. After all, they were given to us on loan from God.

Anyway, let’s discuss keeping Kosher, which is what prompted me to write this in the first place.

In her critique of Means, Talia draws parallels between orthorexia and keeping Kosher. She admits it’s not a 1:1 comparison, even explaining the differences, but in doing so I feel she sells Kashrut short. Yes, Kashrut has many weird laws and regulations that are confusing to outsiders. There’s a classic joke involving Moses and God on Mt. Sinai where God becomes frustrated with Moses’s questions about not boiling a calf in its mothers milk and yells “You figure it out!”, underscoring how Jews tend to overcomplicate everything with minutiae. It’s a great joke, but ending it there does Kashrut a disservice. Talia may not have meant it, but there’s a less-than-zero-percent chance her correlation between orthorexia and keeping Kosher does that for the uninformed.

I’ll admit I’m biased. Unlike Talia, who left this practice largely behind when she got older, I became stricter about keeping Kosher as an adult. I blame part of that on my brother becoming a rabbi and going to Yeshiva University, but also part on me growing up with the Jewish educational system. Regardless, there was always a mystique around Kashrut’s strictness that intrigued me as a teenager, enough that it started as my way of “rebelling against the system”. I definitely see the correlation Talia made, and agree that violating Kosher laws is merely a personal affront, but I feel she sells Kashrut short here.

Remember that joke I referenced? While it’s definitely great, it intentionally ignores how Kashrut, like everything in Judaism, is meant as a living conversation that evolves. Having separate dishwashers for “meat” and “dairy” came about as dishwashers became standard in households, coupled with the rise in a middle-class that could afford such distinctions. Before then, people ate what was available to them and washed utensils by hand, so separate dishwashers was a nonstarter conversation. Even now, if you don’t use certain meat or dairy utensils for a certain period of time, you can theoretically get away with flipping their status. I haven’t even gotten into “Parve”, or “neutral”, utensils, because that’s a separate issue…

The rules of Kashrut are as conversational as they are rigid. The Talmud, every Antisemite’s favourite punching bag, makes a ruling designating poultry as meat. The rabbis agree with this unanimously, with one exception: Rabbi Yossi Ha’Galili, whose community ate chicken parmesan. However, he’s the minority opinion, included to facilitate discussion, and his stance didn’t last. Kashrut, like every other law in The Talmud, is a general consensus, even when it doesn’t make sense or, as with the case of a clay oven, is objectively wrong in God’s eyes.

Essentially, it’s as much communal as personal, and the more you understand, the more you know its ambiguities. I don’t think Talia’s review of Means’s book addresses that nuance, which is unfortunate because she had the potential to teach her readers about it. Not that she should revise her thoughts, especially when her goal was to critique orthorexia, but I consider it a missed opportunity. It’s why I felt I needed to respond to her at all. Which leads to my big point:

The rules of Kashrut go out the window if it means saving your life. If you’re forced to eat pork at the hands of death, you’d better eat it. Of course, there are scenarios where eating it would be murky, especially if you doing it is meant to make a mockery of Judaism, but God would forgive you anyway. This is because Jewish law’s meant to be practical, and common sense still applies. In this I think Talia also missed an opportunity.

One more point that throws a wrench into the orthorexia-Kashrut comparison is that Kosher food being “healthier” than non-Kosher food’s a debate. Maimonides believes there are legit health benefits, but even he was challenged by his contemporaries. Outside of that, Kosher food can be equally as unhealthy, if not more unhealthy, as non-Kosher food, as evidenced by “gribenes”, or deep-fried chicken skins. Even still, goose liver and veal can be Kosher, despite the ethical ramifications surrounding them, which is why I avoid them personally. Kashrut doesn’t guarantee healthy living.

I’ll end with a personal anecdote: even when I wasn’t strictly-Kosher, eating what my family calls “milky-treyf” (or dairy food that hasn’t explicitly come in contact with meat), I couldn’t stand certain non-Kosher smells. Bacon being fried gave me a headache, enough that I once had to excuse myself, while shellfish still makes me want to gag whenever I see it on someone’s plate. This aversion’s probably psychosomatic, but it helped me not develop cravings for treyf food. I’m not exactly hankering for a cheeseburger, as the thought of eating one makes me nauseous.

Maybe this is why I felt a need to respond to Talia. Again, my goal isn’t to judge her, as that’s between her and God. We all have our vices, and I’d be hypocritical to chastise her for that. Rather, my points are to stimulate conversation about Kashrut’s nuances, especially in relation to Means’s orthorexia. I only hope Talia’s receptive, as opposed to offended.