It's Fantastic, Right?

The Fantastic Four IP, despite being Marvel’s first, hasn’t had much success on film. Despite 4 movies, 5 if you include the Roger Corman venture, the franchise has long been considered a joke. It wasn’t until the most-recent entry that they starred in something critically-acclaimed. The best portrayals of Fantastic Four characters until now were two cameos that were killed for shock effect. Make of that what you will.

The question on my mind was, “What makes this newest Fantastic Four movie different?”. After all, the previous movies were in conversation with one another, yet they all suffered from similar problems. And while you’d think Marvel working directly on The Fantastic Four: First Steps would guarantee a success, if recent years are indication, well…that’s not assured. So what made this work? I think it boils down to something lacking in previous attempts: sincerity. Specifically, respectful sincerity.

I’ll make a disclaimer: I’ve only seen the 2005 movie prior to this one. However, based on how bored I was, as well as word of mouth and clips of the other movies, I can deduce that they suffered from the problem of, “These Fantastic Four characters are lame”. It’s a shame, as their comics suggested otherwise. Even prior MCU cameos, which were comic accurate, didn’t help with this notion, as both Reed Richards and Johnny Storm were murdered. It felt like the films were embarrassed by these characters, to the point of scrubbing anything fun or exciting.

Take the 2005 and 2007 movies. These are part of the same franchise, thus fair game to lump together. However, while the tone might be correct, mostly, the writing’s a mess. The 2005 movie is way too long, and when it doesn’t feature plot-related action, it spends its time with science lessons and pointless hijinks. I love Chris Evans as an actor, but I can only stomach his “immature frat-boy” personality for so long before wanting to punch a hole in his chest. Thank God the movie does that, except without the fatality.

This isn’t helped by the movie routinely stopping to share anecdotes about rocks, fire, rubber, invisibility and metal. Which leads to the second problem, that being its inability to shut up. I like chemistry, even if it was never a subject I excelled at, but I don’t care to hear what happens when rubber’s frozen. Or I’d prefer the movie not shout it out. It’s more satisfying watching Reed Richards freeze and become brittle without the movie spelling it out.

Arguably the movie’s biggest problem is its antagonist. Like Galactus being a storm cloud in the sequel, this movie doesn’t trust the audience buying Victor Von Doom as a mad scientist and dictator. He might be overly-theatrical, but he has potential to be scary. Yet this movie gives Victor a new origin, that being a casualty of the same solar eruption that gave the others their superpowers. It also rips off Spider-Man’s Green Goblin portrayal, with Victor’s transformation being gradual and chaotic. Yes, it’s cool watching his metallic casing slowly cover him, but at what cost?

I haven’t seen the 2015 reboot entirely, even though I’ve written about its production, but it has the same problems as the 2005 franchise and news ones entirely. On one hand, it doesn’t respect Doom’s character, creating an even more convoluted origin for his powers. On the other hand, it’s also overly bleak and dour. Based on what I’ve watched online, Fant4stic, as it’s been called, is gritty and grounded in the vein of Christopher Nolan, except without any life or levity. Nolan’s characters crack jokes and have genuine emotions, even amidst their exposition, and Josh Trank’s movie forgets that. In fact, I don’t think the characters even crack a smile.

Fant4stic seems to have every problem the 2005 and 2007 movies are guilty of, and more. In an attempt to distance itself, it’s learned all the wrong lessons. And this is while adding new ones. There’s a reason Fant4stic’s one of the worst-reviewed comic book movies, surpassing Batman & Robin. Considering some of the slop superheroes have given us, that’s no easy feat! But when you don’t respect the material, that’s what happens. Especially since, outside of X-Men and maybe Blade, 20th Century Fox had no clue what to do with Marvel’s IPs.

Perhaps it’s only fair that Marvel now owns the Fantastic Four characters. We can argue the ethics of their acquisition, which I’ve already done, but considering the abuse many of Marvel’s IPs experienced prior, The Fantastic Four: First Steps being the first well-received entry in the IP’s history was inevitable. And yes, it has issues, as all MCU films do. But when it embraces to looney sincerity of the IP, even down to its antagonists, it’s clear we’d have a winner right from its final trailer. That much was guaranteed.

It also shows that sincerity still works. I like The MCU, but its biggest drawback is not always taking its in-universe story beats seriously. It’s fine to have your characters crack jokes, especially when it helps the world feel lived-in, but at some point that’s too much. The Fantastic Four: First Steps avoiding that works in its favour, surprisingly. Then again, when your movie takes place separate from most of The MCU, I guess you can get away with that.

That’s the secret here. Yes, The Fantastic Four’s a silly IP. But so are most superheroes. That a person with weird powers would fight crime is, in itself, ridiculous, and a good adaptation would acknowledge that. At the same time, it’d treat it with dignity, which this newest movie does. Perhaps some of its writing feels a little sterile, but I’ll take that if the movie’s good.

Now, about that end-credits scene…

Who Am I?

If you’d have asked me in November of 2015 if I thought The Whitly-Verse would survive this long, I’d have probably shrugged my shoulders. After all, the whole reason this Blog started in the first place is because I wanted an avenue to write about pop culture stuff that wasn’t exclusively anime-related. That might sound silly now, but keep in mind that I was still writing for Infinite Rainy Day, a site that shut down roughly 7 years ago. It was all anime-related, so that puts everything into perspective.

Anyway, I probably should’ve waited until November to write this, as that’s this site’s actual anniversary. However, given that I wanted to celebrate my 35th birthday with a bit of reflecting, I figured that now was as good as ever to do so. So let’s reflect. And I mean some genuine introspection. Be prepared for some tough revelations!

I should start by following up on a point that I made 5 years ago: how 20 year-old me would be really disappointed in the path that I’ve chosen since then. I say this because I was hoping to be independent and married with children by now, and neither of those realities have come to fruition. I also say this because 20 year-old me was, and forgive me for being so blunt, a bit of a douchebag. He was constantly picking fights with people as a way of compensating for undiagnosed mental health issues, and he wasn’t happy. 35 year-old me still isn’t 100% satisfied, but at least he has some sort of internal purpose.

To that end, 26 year-old me wouldn’t be happy either. He was hoping to be a celebrated author by the time he hit 30, and that’s yet to happen. That’s not to say that I haven’t been published since then, I have, but it’s not the kind of publishing that he would’ve liked. No, he’d have liked for a book or three to have circulated, and that hasn’t happened yet. I guess, in hindsight, that’s still a bit of a regret.

But that’s okay, truthfully. Because while I’m not on any New York Times Best-Seller lists right now, I’ve come to accept that being overambitious isn’t good for me mentally. I’ve had to take life slowly, and that includes writing. It also includes not biting off more than I can chew, something that I’ve had to learn the hard way on several occasions. Go figure!

Another bitter reality that I’ve had to learn to accept is that people are often not nice, despite putting on the veneer of being nice. It’s a reality that’s only become more apparent in the decade since I started The Whitly-Verse, especially with political nonsense making it okay to say what you want without much ramification. I won’t act like there wasn’t always an undercurrent of douche-y behaviour before that, especially outside of my bubble, but people at least largely tried bottling it. If Trumpism and October 7th, 2023 have taught me anything, it’s that that’s not true anymore. And it’s been genuinely upsetting on a personal level.

That said, I’ve also had to recognize the kindness that’s been on display to counter that. Whether it’s macrocosmic or microcosmic, people have genuinely shown compassion in unexpected ways. They’ve also helped me to show compassion to myself, learning to forgive myself for the undue harshness that 20 year-old and 26 year-old me wouldn’t have been able to forgive. They say that self-love is the most important kind to have, so I guess you can consider that a step in the right direction for me. Thank you to everyone for that valuable lesson.

It's all the more that they’ve taught it, as I’ve discovered that some of my heroes aren’t such great people. I’ve written extensively about it as well, and I’m sure I’ve only begun to scrape the tip of the iceberg on that. In some ways, I guess The Whitly-Verse has served as a personal diary to vent about these frustrating revelations, showing how I’m constantly evolving. Perhaps, in a weird way, this is my novel unfolding in real time? I don’t know.

I realize that I’m getting too esoteric here. Um…my personal relationship to God has changed a lot since my 20’s? I’m not as fervently zealous about my Judaism as I was 10 years ago, even though I understand what I believe more intrinsically. I’ve occasionally wondered why I still believe at all, given what I know about the world at large, but then I’ve caught myself by remembering that humans were given free will. If they wish to screw up their own lives and the lives of those around them, that’s their problem, not God’s. It’s no different than a parent relationship with their adult child, especially when the latter has agency.

Besides, knowing that it’s not inherently God’s fault that people suck has made it easier for me to accept when people misbehave. War? That’s an invention of man. Poverty? That’s a byproduct of man’s neglect for one another. Destruction of the planet’s natural resources? What about it can’t be ascribed to humanity’s negligence?

That’s really what’s at stake here. It’s high-time that we learn to get along, as opposed to divide and conquer, and that’s something I’ve come to appreciate as I’ve gotten older. It’s also tiring to see people make the same mistakes over and over again, but accountability’s important. You can only blame others so many times before it gets tiresome, after all. Especially when accountability’s an important facet of maturity.

I guess it took a global pandemic to put life into perspective for me, didn’t it? But I’m starting to ramble here on my 35th birthday, so I’ll try wrapping everything up. Basically, I’ve learned a lot, and not always by choice, and that’s okay! Because I’m human! And I’ll continue to learn hard life lessons for as long as I keep living, which is also okay! If that’s a problem, then I’d rather not be part of the solution.

Anyway, that’s about it for me. Keep on trucking along for now, and I’ll see you next time!

Sands of Time

(Note: this piece contains spoilers. Read at your own risk.)

Having a cold is a death-knell creatively. Not only can’t you get up and move half the time, but when you do you’re afraid anything you’d write about would get ruined by coughing or sneezing. Fortunately, media helps. And one of the outlets I turned to was The Sandman, which recently finished its run. So let’s discuss it.

I should reiterate that I wish I could appreciate its beauty without being reminded about its original author. I learned a lot in a relatively-short period of time about storytelling from him, even modelling one of my stories on one of his. So that Neil Gaiman has disappointed me? That’s rather tough to swallow. Still, like I said last time, it’s a sin to waste a good dream, of which this show feels like in droves.

Perhaps that’s why the conclusion being about legacy and succession hits home. Though it’s probably unintentional, Dream being forced to find a successor because of his son’s death feels like the show recognizing its creator and trying to move on. It’s like the people in charge knew his baggage and were commenting on that. I think the resolution dragged on too long, with several fake-outs, but at least it had one. Whether or not it’s satisfactory will vary with each viewer.

Nevertheless, Dream reconciling with his mortality asks an interesting question: are aspirations eternal, or are they mortal? Do dreams live forever, or do they not? The answer is twofold and contradictory, like life itself. Because dreams are as frequently cuts short as not, something life has demonstrated frequently. I applaud the honesty.

That The Sandman has an answer at all feels bold. Dream’s end being inevitable is scary, and most stories would consider this a challenge they wouldn’t be able to resolve. But this one isn’t afraid to look mortality in the face with a solution: start fresh. Use a new Dream, a more human one this time. Enter Daniel Hall, and the tribulations foisted on him from birth.

This is most reflected in how Daniel presents his role. He has the coldness of the first Dream in his voice, but the human warmth of someone who was mortal. He initially is unsure of how to do his job, retreading the path of his predecessor, until one of his creations chides him for it. It’s fitting that the wise nightmare known as Fiddler’s Green does that, as he was always the kindly mentor figure. For someone like Daniel, this sagely advice sets him on his way.

In the previous piece I wrote on this show, covering the first-half of Season 2, I said that a scene at the end had me in tears. This centred around Orpheus’s death, the troubled son of Dream who wished for his life to end. Dream granted that wish, much at his own expense. In Season 2’s second-half, I was in tears all throughout the final episode, the funeral scenes particularly. Perhaps it struck close to home, having lost my Zaidy three Summers ago, but the other Endless reminiscing on their relationships with Dream reminded me of the frailties of people, even those we love. That each Endless expresses regrets at not being close with Dream, despite being family, made me cry. Contending with the remnants of a cold didn’t help.

What struck me as the most personal was Desire’s eulogy. The eccentric sibling, Desire and Dream rarely got along. On several occasions, the two were at each other’s throats, threatening to end one another. So to hear that Desire longed for the continuation of that relationship was heartbreaking. It made me think of real-life relationships that were faulty, and how one party often missed the other when they were gone.

Then there’s Delirium. Poor, innocent Delirium. The youngest of The Endless, Delirium’s sincerity meant that Dream’s death would be especially hard. But she was a trooper, and, as her name suggested, she’d be both comforted and upset by his passing in her own way. Considering she was already my favourite Endless, this made like her more.

Above all else, the passing of the torch seals the deal for this show. It’s been a rocky, sometimes messy two seasons, and some of its decisions weren’t my favourites (why give Abel a cross at his grave?). Yet even at its lowest points, creator included, I admired and respected its ambitions. For an adaptation that took forever to get going, only getting a Netflix release through Warner Bros. Television, I don’t know if The Sandman could’ve had a better sendoff. Comic purists will have a field day nitpicking what doesn’t work, or calling out missed storylines, but despite the updates and changes there’s a lot to admire and love here…warts and all. That, I think, is worth the bumps and lumps.

Though it’s a shame about Neil Gaiman. If only he hadn’t done what he done, maybe I’d be more accepting of the show as a whole than I am now?

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.