I Got DMCA'd

I owe you an apology. My goal was to have my yearly compare-contrast piece up on Tuesday. I had it typed out, edited and ready for a second set of eyes to edit. Everything was going smoothly, and it’d cap off January. Unfortunately, life had different plans. And the timing sucked.

On Monday night, I discovered an email in my Junk folder with the following information:

“Hello,

Google has been notified that the URL(s) listed below allegedly infringes upon the copyright of others, and violates applicable copyright laws in the relevant country/jurisdiction.

Impacted content: Contribution

Action as a consequence: Restriction of Access

Therefore we are in the process of executing the specified action for the impacted content on Google Blogger for users globally.

Affected URL(s):

-----------------

Details of the original claim are included below to help you better understand and respond to the claim against you.

Name of claimant: Eric Green

Rightsholder represented: Remove Your Media LLC

Description of claim: Copyrighted Japanese manga published by Viz Media LLC. Site are backlinking illegal scanlation sites. This is contributory infringement. Pursuant to 17 USC 512(c)(3)(A)(ii) the official website for 'Viz Licensed Manga' includes a commulative episode list at the below url:

https://infiniterainyday.blogspot.com/2015/01/this-shonenshoujo-series-has-how-many.html

Please note that automation was involved in the decision(s) specified above. Google uses a combination of manual review and automation in handling complaints. For more information on our use of automation, see g.co/legal under the ‘Automation’ section.

-----------------

What you can do next

Ask Google to reconsider this decision

If you disagree with our decision and want us to reconsider our position, you may submit an appeal (also known as a counter notice) by selecting the ‘Counter Notice’ option on our webform at g.co/legal. List the URLs you wish to appeal in your appeal form.

You may have the option to pursue your claims in court. If you have legal questions or wish to examine legal options that may be available to you, you may want to consult with your own legal counsel.

Need more help?

Read about the Google legal removal process in Legal Removal Requests in our Help Center.

(Routing ID: IBTN)

Regards,

The Google Team

For more information about our content removal process, see g.co/legal”

I initially thought this was a joke. But when I looked at my Blogger page, there was a notice that my post had been converted to a Draft. My heart began to palpitate. I’d heard of YouTube videos being flagged and demonetized, but never a blog. I also stopped using Photobucket years ago, as they started charging for usage, but why was I being challenged now? For a 10 year-old piece for a site I no longer write for? Sure, it exists for archival purposes, but it’s inactive. Did Eric Green have nothing better to do?

Anyway, I edited the Draft for Republish. Unfortunately, my boss had formatted the piece with specific tags I was unfamiliar with, so replacing images was a nightmare. Our family internet was simultaneously playing a game of “Now I work, now I don’t” for several days at this point, with my mom constantly unplugging and rebooting our modem. It’s amazing that I could satiate the copyright claims at all, even if the end-result looks like a hack-job.

Whatever, I got that out of the way. Yet a question lingered: what if this reoccurs? I refuse to re-upload my photos to Imgur and start fresh, as it’d not only take forever, but I’d tried that once and hit a snag 2/3 of the way through. It wasn’t worth the headache. But could I be flagged on another Post now?

I couldn’t message my boss privately and ask him to fix the situation. We haven’t been on speaking terms for years, and he’s gone into an online black hole. I was on my own to remedy the situation, a situation that shouldn’t exist because my content was protected under Fair Use. This DMCA claim, therefore, was unjustified, especially since Canadian copyright laws are different than American ones! Was Eric trying to scare me in compliance?

When I clicked on Blogger’s counter-notice page to file my request, I realized I’d probably need a legal representative to help out. I’m not well-versed in US Copyright Law, so I didn’t want to incriminate myself. But I also didn’t want to end up in court, so I had to be careful with my language. I asked my dad, a lawyer by trade, for suggestions, and he referred me to The Law Society of Ontario. I took his advice, found a lawyer specializing in copyright and made the call.

That was three night ago. I’m waiting for the lawyer to get back to me. It’s a risk, since there’s a chance I might be charged, but I don’t want a repeat of Monday night. I don’t make money writing my Blogs, and this feels like a unwarranted slap to the face. It also feels like I’m over-justifying myself here, spending energy better-exerted on something else.

Which brings me to my point, something I’m sure you were waiting for. The obvious lesson is to not use Photobucket if you don’t have to. They not only charge people, which they’re in the right to do, they have a way of punishing users retroactively with nonsense like this. It’s a hassle for people who can afford it. Why must I suffer?

Additionally, American copyright laws need to be overhauled. The DMCA exists for a reason, but it doesn’t factor in Fair Use online. Considering Fair Use doctrines include education, parody, or criticism for a greater audience, and my stuff falls into the third category, this should be a no-brainer. But it isn’t. Instead, small-time creators, who don’t have time, patience and money to battle these claims, are left at the mercy of bots and people who don’t have their best interests at heart. It’s disheartening.

Finally, more lawyers should familiarize themselves with copyright law. If not to specialize, then to be acquainted with key components. Copyright infringements, particularly DMCA claims, are scary, as they favour corporate interests. It’s easy to attack the little guy. It’s harder for the little guy to stand up to corporations.

I’m sorry for the delay. I’m hoping for a February release date, preferably mid-February, but in the meantime here’s my apology. It disappoints me more than you, as I don’t like breaking promises. In the interim, please be patient while I remedy this. I’m hoping to get legal advice soon, as I don’t want this repeated.

A Meritis Contender

One of the most annoying parts of Oscar buzz is its relevancy. Particularly, which films deserve their merits, and which are there for conversation. I remember when Avatar was one of those movies, but ignoring that, this happens yearly. 2025 is no different. However, I’d like to zone in on a micro-conversation surrounding animated films. Because why not?

The 2025 Academy Awards nominees list was recently announced. No doubt everyone has an opinion about it, but it’s the animated films that stick out most. Why do we still have a Best Animated Feature category? Can animated films not be included in Best Picture? Why must they be relegated to a specific category?

Ignoring the previous paragraph, however, I can’t help feeling like the end-result will get heated anyway. It’s not like Best Animated Feature hasn’t been contentious since its introduction in 2002, especially since Disney and Pixar receive most of the trophies. However, that Inside Out 2 has to compete with The Wild Robot, despite both being well-received, makes me wish the former didn’t have to be pitted against the latter. Because I don’t think it’s a fair competition.

I’ll get this out of the way: I didn’t watch The Wild Robot. I’ve heard it’s fantastic, but I’ve been trying to reduce my monthly cinema outings for financial reasons. I ended up seeing Transformers One instead, which I enjoyed. I did, however, see Inside Out 2, and I enjoyed that as well. I wouldn’t call it my favourite of the year, certainly not when Thelma exists, but it had a poignant lesson about anxiety shown in its third-act panic attack.

I happen to have anxiety. I’m Autistic, after all. But while I no longer have Autistic meltdowns, thanks to therapy and maturity, I still have moments where my anxiety creeps up. I’ve had several of these since October 7th of 2023, including when last year’s Academy Awards were flooded with red triangle pins from attendees who didn’t understand the history behind it. Anxiety attacks aren’t exclusive to me, though.

I’m appreciative that Inside Out 2 showed one, albeit played out in Pixar fashion. You can argue the effectiveness of it, or if it’s the best example of one, but I think that’s irrelevant. A mainstream Hollywood feature showed an honest depiction of one regardless, and in such a way that children can understand. Considering how difficult it is to explain to adults on a good day, that’s impressive. And it speaks to Pixar’s talent.

It not being the first movie to do this is also irrelevant. 12 Years a Slave wasn’t the first movie to depict slavery, but that doesn’t make it any less important. Angles of storytelling are as important, if not more important, as the concepts they address. Inside Out 2 might be to anxiety attacks what Finding Dory was to disabilities, since both movies pale to their predecessors, but does it matter? They tackled a sensitive and nuanced concept with respect and dignity, all while having jokes that never diminished it. That’s more important than originality.

Inside Out 2, even if it doesn’t win the Oscar, will get the ball rolling on anxiety. Disney has a massive, built-in audience who watch their movies regardless of quality. Inside Out 2 happens to be good, but even if it wasn’t, that wouldn’t matter. It still honestly portrayed anxiety attacks in an accessible way, and that’s what counts. It’s what’ll be talked about most.

Isn’t that what matters? We accuse Hollywood of being risk-averse, but whenever they take risks we’re unfairly critical of them. It’s unhelpful to chastise a sequel for failing to live up to its predecessor, especially given how hard that is. Inside Out 2’s no Inside Out, but it doesn’t need to be. They’re wildly-different-yet-relevant stories about growing up, and Inside Out 2’s anxiety attacks are up there with Ego’s review in Ratatouille and the furnace in Toy Story 3 as one of Pixar’s greats. That it comes from a sequel’s irrelevant.

That’s why denigrating the movie in relation to its competition isn’t fair. Is it one of Pixar’s better movies? No. Is it the best animated movie of last year? Probably not. But does it have one of last year’s best movie scenes? Yes, and that deserves recognition…even if it’s only included in the Best Animated Feature category because of its namesake.

We can argue the merits of The Academy Awards. We can also argue if the awards should exist. And we can argue which movies should or shouldn’t have won awards. But it’s futile when you ignore its subjectivity and lasting impact. For as tacky as this sounds, sometimes movies win Oscars based on their legacies, not simply because of their quality.

I’ll end with a story: in 1980, Robert Redford directed Ordinary People. Despite stellar reviews, it’s not remembered as the best of that year. Yet it received Best Picture at the 1981 ceremony. It’s easy to be mad about that, but its portrayal of mental health and suicide was integral in the conversation surrounding those topics. Because mental illness was still largely stigmatized, and this movie broke barriers for its time.

It's something to think about.

Goodbye, Neil Gaiman

(Note: this piece deals with some uncomfortable subject matter. Please read at your own discretion.)

Remind me to never become rich and famous. Not only would I be unable to handle that, but additional scrutiny for my slip-ups would be bad psychologically. Besides, stories surrounding the rich and famous have turned me off altogether. Case in point? The recent controversy surrounding Neil Gaiman.

I don’t know Gaiman personally. He’s an influential writer and artist, even though he comes from a shady upbringing. That said, I’ve taken plenty of inspiration, directly and indirectly, from his stories. In fact, one of my manuscripts owes its format to a book he wrote. Since Gaiman’s writing style helped with my own, it’s safe to say I hold him in high esteem.

At least, I did until recently. It wasn’t news to me when it broke that Gaiman was accused of inappropriate behaviour, but I wasn’t prepared for how deep the rabbit hole went. But it went deep. Considering my admiration for Gaiman’s work, it was heartbreaking. Though let’s back up and add context.

A recent article, which is paywalled, in New York Magazine detailed Gaiman’s inappropriate sexual behaviour from several women over the last few decades, including one with a nanny. Gaiman, predictably, denies this. However, that it’s not one woman, but rather many, frustrates me. Gaiman had a wife, and they had a child. He could’ve been content raising their son happily. Why throw that away?

It also frustrates me because, like I said, I respected Gaiman. Perhaps I’m guilty of letting my attachment to famous authors blind me to their failings; after all, I used to love JK Rowling’s Harry Potter books! But while Rowling’s repeated transphobia makes it increasingly difficult to accept her work’s impact on me, she’s at least transparent about it. Gaiman was more secretive about his demons, preferring to keep them hidden. Rowling was a heartbreak, but Gaiman was a heart-shatter. It’s the difference between having someone openly betray you, and having someone quietly betray you.

I don’t know what to do now. Gaiman, like Rowling, is a famous individual in a profession I’m interested in. Like how Rowling taught me skepticism of authority, Gaiman taught me to dream for a better future. But while Rowling stoked my writing passions, Gaiman taught me form and content. That’s not literary license, either: Gaiman has videos on MasterClass, ones I’ve watched.

It's also frustrating because, unlike Rowling, Gaiman was actively respected and admired in the public eye until now. Adaptations of his books are still being made. He penned the English translation for Princess Mononoke, a movie many, myself included, hold dear. Even now, Gaiman’s in the midst of a cultural renaissance, brought on largely by The Sandman on Netflix. Rowling hit it big with one series, but Gaiman hit it big with his entire backlog.

Perhaps it was inevitable that this was bound to happen. Like “politicians aren’t our friends”, the mantra “never meet your heroes” seems to be evergreen. Even within Gaiman’s backlog, I think back to The Sandman story about Richard Madoc and the muse he abuses. Madoc touts himself in public as a feminist icon, all while trafficking Calliope secretly. Was this simply Gaiman warning us about himself? If so, what does that say?

I don’t know. While I’m horrified that my fellow artists continue to “not be normal”, I also can’t control others. Simultaneously, I recognize the impact Gaiman has had on me, one I can’t shake. Like I said, he inspired one of my manuscripts! He also penned the translation to one of my favourite films! Do I pretend his influence hasn’t been felt? And if I do, am I being honest?

I’ve hammered this to death, but it’s worth reminding people that I’m a victim of childhood sexual assault. I’m also a victim of adulthood sexual assault. Whenever I hear stories of those in power abusing others, it re-traumatizes me. It makes me feel insecure about my own potential to abuse others should I become powerful, which is why I don’t want to. Especially if it makes me another Rowling or Gaiman.

At the same time, I don’t want to throw my passions into the trash. I love writing! It’s one of the few skills I excel at, and it brings me pleasure to write pieces people read and enjoy. I can’t begin telling you how many people, some strangers, have told me, openly and privately, that they enjoy my stuff. It makes me feel good. I won’t give that up because someone I respect has let me down.

I’m left at a crossroads. It’s not like Rowling, where she directly benefits from all of her IP, even as she destroys people’s lives. I don’t know how much control Gaiman has over his adaptations. He must have some, but to what extent remains uncertain. At least, it remains uncertain to me.

That said, my adoration of Gaiman’s now gone. This much I know for sure. Gaiman can feign his innocence, but that doesn’t exonerate him. He made his bed, and now he must lie in it. If saying that makes me a “bad person”, so be it. I’ve heard worse.

Skeleton Crew Assemble!

Star Wars was meant for kids. We can argue semantics about what that meant in 1977 forever, but George Lucas himself has stated that. It makes sense, as many of the early fans were children, and the goofy tone of the franchise, even during serious moments, lends perfectly to them. So it’s weird that so few Star Wars stories have starred children. Then again, that’s probably a byproduct of the franchise being spearheaded by adults...

Enter Skeleton Crew. The latest entry in the expanded Star Wars universe, this 8-episode series follows four pre-teens-Wim, Neel, Fern and KB-on their adventure after accidentally leaving their home of At Attan. Along the way, they encounter pirates desperate to steal their planet’s treasure, as well as a mysterious Force user with unclear motivations. Desperate to return to At Attan, and completely out of their element, our protagonists must make tough decisions and learn harsh truths about their planet. After all, what’s so special about At Attan, and why’s everyone after its treasure?

I loved this show. Even from Episode 1, I already knew it was something special. I know Star Wars as a franchise is risk-averse, preferring to stick with pre-established lore, but every now and then it experiments. Skeleton Crew’s one of those experiments, reclaiming Star Wars for the youth and having its world played out from their perspective. It sounds strange saying this, but that’s refreshing. It’s basically an 80’s Amblin Entertainment story in Star Wars clothes.

I’m not kidding about that last part. Aside from show-runner Jon Watts being a fan of youth storytelling, something that made him perfect for tackling Spider-Man, this show was inspired by classic kid’s movies from the 80’s, The Goonies specifically. This inspiration rears its head constantly, but I’d argue there’s a healthy amount of Treasure Island here also. It’s a story about pirates, after all! That’s not something I thought would fit well with Star Wars, but it does.

Arguably the emotional centre’s the four leads. Each one’s so well-actualized that you can split them into pairings, which the show does constantly, and know how they’ll interact before they do. My favourite character’s KB, the part-droid brainiac who hides behind her intellect to mask her disabilities and limitations. She reminds me of myself at that age, always retreating into entertainment and literature to distract from being unable to fit in with peers. Not only does everyone else not demean her, but she quickly becomes a valuable member of the group due to her ability to think on her feet. I admire that.

I like how the leads’ parents play a critical role too. It’s easy for children empowerment fantasies to remove the adult figures, but this one avoids doing that. After all, the protagonists are kids! They need the emotional support of parental figures, even if said figures don’t always understand or respect them. Besides, adults can be useful, despite what children sometimes believe.

Speaking of which, the antagonists being adult pirates, while somewhat cliché, is fitting. Star Wars is a franchise filled with shady rogues, so why not include pirates? It’s not like they don’t already exist in this universe, and exploring their hierarchy’s an interesting take on this trope. I also like how one of the pirates is a Force user, leading to questions about his past that get slowly answered. He’s the most morally-ambiguous character for most of the runtime, gradually becoming more evil.

I could go on forever about what works. I could mention that the score from Mick Giacchino evokes a pirate-y feel. I could talk about how great the character designs and costumes are. I could even say how great it is for a Star Wars series focused around kids not to condescend them. But while all of that’s true, I think Skeleton Crew’s existence is a welcome breath of fresh air, and it deserves to be watched more.

Skeleton Crew…hasn’t been doing well ratings-wise. The reviews have been stellar, but it doesn’t seem like many people are interested. Given Star Wars diehards unfairly killed The Acolyte, leaving it on a cliffhanger, because it was different, I’m worried that this show not gaining traction will signal that fans don’t want risks. That’d be upsetting, since they’ve caved to a vocal minority before.

It's also upsetting because this show’s fantastic. It’s every bit as good as Andor, arguably more so because its pacing isn’t needlessly-slow and drawn out. But I’ve made my thoughts on Andor known, so I won’t repeat myself. Though I stand by what I said. (If you disagree, power to you.)

I want this show to do well. And I want more unique and ambitious stories like it in the Star Wars universe. It’s not like there isn’t room for experimentation! This franchise is so rich in lore that, to paraphrase a friend, even the smaller stories have the tendency to rival The Avengers in scope and ambition. Because they really do. Skeleton Crew’s proof of that.

Please see this show. It has everything that makes Star Wars great: a good story? Check. Likeable leads? Check. Authentic stakes? Check, check, check! What more do you want?

My Mega Memories

Growing up, my parents didn’t buy me and my brothers new video games often. We got them occasionally, but considering the cost of Jewish day school and living, they were an expensive hobby. Whenever my brothers and I received one, it was something we couldn’t complain about. It didn’t matter if it was complete garbage, we had to make the best of it. Many of my earliest memories with video games, therefore, were of learning to appreciate trash and quality-alike.

Every once in a while, however, we’d encounter a game that was excellent. Such was the case of Mega Man II on the Game Boy. I spotted it on sale in a discount bin at a pawn shop after going out for lunch, and I pointed it out to my younger brother. We then took it home and tried it out on our Game Boy Color, and the rest was history. There was something special about booting up the game and listening to the opening theme. Even now it reminds me of a funeral dirge, but a charming one. And the game was great.

It was also really difficult. I’ve written about this before, but one of the issues I have with older video games is how challenging and unfair they are. Perhaps it was due to limitations, but for however short older games were, they were equally as difficult. Mega Man II was no exception, especially since the Game Boy had a reduced screen and draw distance. The fact that this game was ported to a handheld at all was a miracle, even if it had to find clever workarounds to meet its capabilities. Among these included showing four levels at once, as well as everything being zoomed in.

I didn’t know this at the time, though. I was too busy learning the ropes and making mistakes, constantly jotting down different passwords on scraps of discarded paper. Eventually I learned which levels to play first, as well as which upgrades worked with each boss. It took plenty of trial and error, but I completed the first four levels and discovered a new area. My hopes were dashed, however, when I realized said area wasn’t for Dr. Wiley, but a new hub for four levels and bosses. I was pissed.

That anger quickly subsided. It’s easy to laugh at how naïve I was, but I didn’t know! It was the late-90’s, and the internet was a fee-for-use service with limitations. We also used landlines to connect, and waiting to go online was frequently delayed or interrupted by outages, weather hazards, or someone making a phone call. Since the internet was as much a novelty as a new game, I had to persist through my frustrations.

Anyway, I learned an important lesson about not trusting that Game Boy titles were automatically complete because I’d cleared a screen of immediate enemies. It acclimated me to how Mega Man II operated on the Game Boy, splitting the game’s eight bosses into two groups of four to not overwhelm the system. Other than that, I had no complaints. I’d beaten the 1st four bosses, so how hard could the 2nd four be? Not too hard, though not exactly a cakewalk.

Fast-forward several more months, and I’d finally completed both hubs and gained all of the necessary power-ups. I was ready for Dr. Wiley! Nothing would get in my way now, right? Right?! Well…

To date, I’ve yet to beat Dr. Wiley in Mega Man II. I tried, I even came close several times, but I always ended up either dying, or running out of power-ups. Dr. Wiley, in my childhood mind, was also really cheap and unfair, throwing wrenches in my strategies right as I was gaining the upper hand. It didn’t help that my brothers managed to beat him, leading to personal insecurity. What was I doing wrong?

As it turns out, nothing. My brain works differently, processing tasks slower than most. But I was devastated that I was falling behind as the middle sibling with a limited social circle. I couldn’t share my successes and frustrations with my peers because they were uncomfortable around me, so I relied on hearsay and my own failures. Not beating Dr. Wiley was another example of that, and it stung.

As my failures kept piling, I finally gave up and moved on. It didn’t help that our Game Boy Color had broken from being dropped on the ground, and that our Game Boy Advance couldn’t do the game justice because of its lack of a backlight. I’m also pretty sure I lost the game, not bothering to search for it because the Game Boy Advance had “better games” that I was more interested in. So long, Mega Man II! For a while, at least.

It wasn’t until university, when I became a writer on ScrewAttack, that my interest in Mega Man II for the Game Boy returned. This time, it wasn’t to play it, but rather write about it. I remember reminiscing about my experiences as part of a weekly writing theme, even having my piece highlighted in a video from a fellow g1. It gave closure to my childhood memories and its importance growing up. Sadly, ScrewAttack no longer exists...

But that doesn’t mean I can’t write about the game, especially now as an adult. After all, Mega Man II’s currently on Nintendo Switch Online for the Game Boy. And replaying it briefly has reminded me that while I’m no longer 9 years old, I still remember the game fondly. It may not excite me the way it once did, especially since I don’t have the time or patience to “get good”, but that doesn’t mean I don’t cherish my memories of fighting Dr. Wiley and failing…constantly.

At least the opening theme’s great.

Lions and Hedgehogs

Let’s be clear: I haven’t seen Mufasa: The Lion King. It doesn’t look appealing to me, and no one involved seemed fully-invested (even the director). It also reeked of retconning a backstory into something that didn’t exactly need one, and being a photorealistic prequel to a remake of a beloved movie comes off as sloppier thirds to sloppy seconds. I know the music’s memorable, but The Lion King’s best left alone. We good? Good.

I did, however, see Sonic the Hedgehog 3 in theatres. It wasn’t fantastic, but it was enjoyable. The acting was solid, Jim Carrey’s Dr. Robotnik’s growing on me, and the emotional moments definitely resonated. It’s the best so far in the trilogy, even if it doesn’t have much to offer for those who aren’t Sonic fans. Again, we good? Good.

Despite both movies doing well at the box-office, a faux-rivalry’s been conjured up. Now, far be it for me to rip the success of the movies. I may not care for most of Disney’s live-action remakes, but movies need not be great to be meaningful. (I like The Star Wars Prequels, after all!) If Mufasa: The Lion King made you happy, power to you! But a rivalry? Why?!

Truthfully, this is unnecessary. Specifically, this forced rivalry’s unnecessary. Because it’s not a true rivalry. This isn’t “Barbenheimer”, where both movies were released simultaneously, happened to be good and made tons of money. This is a fabricated rivalry from edge-lords who think whining about Disney (again) is good for views.

These sorts of rivalries are as exhausting as they are watching them fade into irrelevancy. Remember, it’s Disney. They’re a conglomerate conceived to make children’s entertainment. You have to be empty inside to be mad about that. Are you empty inside? Please say you aren’t…

Even if you are, deconstructing this nonsense is tiresome. It’s not like Disney lacks real issues worth chastising. They routinely scrub their artists of ambition and passion, and they rarely challenge the status quo. They’re conservative politically, dragging their feet on hot topics in the name of not offending anyone. And their good stuff usually feels corporate.

Nevertheless, creating narratives about how “Disney’s dying”, this time through a rivalry with an equally-corporate brand, completely misses the forest for the trees. Because Disney’s not dying. Their corporate interests are doing solid numbers, and they’ve experienced worse. Have you seen their output from the 70’s and 80’s? It’s not something I’d wish on my worst enemy.

I get the inclination with Sonic to be competitive. Sonic was created to compete with Mario, a Bugs Bunny to Nintendo’s Mickey Mouse. Whereas Mario was conventional and even-tempered, Sonic was edgy and hot-headed. Mario was quieter, Sonic louder. Even the styles of platforming differed, with Mario being calculated side-scrolling and Sonic being about living in the moment. Sonic, by his nature, shows off.

But while that might’ve been the case in the 90’s, it’s not true now. Sonic hasn’t been a mainstay for Sega since the Dreamcast was in circulation. He’s been cross-platform for longer than he was culturally-relevant, with most of his games being mixed-qualitatively. Even his rivalry against Mario has dissipated, replaced with friendly competition on numerous occasions. If anything, Mario’s bigger rival currently is Master Chief, and not by much.

By turning Sonic the Hedgehog 3 and Mufasa: The Lion King into another Sonic VS Mario, you’re boarding a ship that’s long since sunk. It’s not only a dead rivalry, it’s an embarrassing one. Especially since these are properties for children. I’d understand if little kids were competing over these movies, not adults. And I doubt kids care.

I think those touting this rivalry have too much free time. There are real issues going on in the world. Ukraine’s at a stalemate with Russia. Israel’s been fighting a war against Hamas for well over a year now. The soon-to-be POTUS wants to annex my home country and impose tariffs. The world’s a complete mess without imposing a nonsensical film rivalry on movies that are doing fine at the box-office. I know it’s fun taking shots at The House of Mouse, but there are bigger fish to fry.

Basically, I implore people to get a life. And I implore them to get it soon. It’s not like there won’t be reasons to criticize Disney in the future. There will be, and I’ll be right there in line myself. But as it stands currently, fabricating a rivalry between two movies for children isn’t the best use of your time. It actually makes you look desperate.

Finally, I want to reiterate that while I may have saddled my horse in this race, that doesn’t mean I bear ill-will to Disney. Specifically, I don’t bear ill-will to those who take comfort in Disney’s live-action remakes. I’ve liked a few of their early entries, and the world’s too chaotic and scary to be that judgemental. If you like these movies, power to you! Besides, me calling you out would, like I said, be hypocritical and unfair. So long as you’re not a dick to me, I won’t be a dick to you. Fair?

Movies and Colours

One of the realizations I’ve had as an adult is that artistic concepts that excited me when I was younger don’t anymore: photorealism? It might look neat, but The Uncanny Valley exists too. Manga Iconography? The human face and body are already expressive. Tasteless violence? My stomach can only handle so much. However, nothing’s more disappointing than realizing that overly-bright and flashy colours hurt my eyes.

Unfortunately, that last point’s an anomaly among film enthusiasts. I’ve heard complaints and seen many videos about how Hollywood’s lost its colour, becoming darker and desaturated. It’s not like there isn’t merit here, especially when it’s impossible to see anything, but I think these complaints are overblown. I think complaining specifically about colour’s absence in modern filmmaking ignores how that isn’t the only component to movie storytelling. Let me explain.

It's important to look at where this started. Back in the mid/late-90’s, as it was becoming commonplace, filmmakers were overusing CGI left-right-and-centre. Not only did most of it look ugly, but much of it doesn’t hold up. And with that overuse of CGI, there was an additional problem of the visuals clashing with the actors and sets. How do you strike a balance?

The answer came from studying the colour wheel. Brighter colours need to be balanced with darker ones, or they’re distracting. The easy solution for bright, flashy CGI was to implement tints that cushioned everything. It’s why modern films look different than older ones, having a “film-like” feel. It doesn’t matter the genre or style, that tint’s used with almost every movie released nowadays. The exceptions seem to be in animation, but we’ll get there.

This filmic hue, especially as filmmaking went digital, became the norm, “fixing” the colour clashing of CGI. But then a different problem arose: if you’re using a tint to make the colours less distracting, can this tint be a distraction too? One of the chief complaints of modern filmmaking is how desaturated it is, such that it’s impossible to see any tactile personality. This is one of the many aspects people have criticized The MCU for.

I’ll point out that I’m no expert in colour theory. Nor am I an expert on what clashes. The walls of my room are blue and yellow, and dark at that. Additionally, I mishmash clothes without a thought to how they look. I don’t care that much about colour consistency. It might sound childish, but colours don’t have as much meaning. In fact, blue’s my favourite colour because it looks cool, not because of any deep attachment.

So yeah, I’m not the best judge of colours, something compounded by brighter ones hurting my eyes. But it’s that lack of attachment that I think makes me a better judge of colour in modern movies. Because I’m not picky. As long as I can make out what I’m watching, I don’t care how desaturated the film is. I might be in the minority, but I don’t think it matters.

Perhaps that’s for the best. I majored in English in university, and my personal attachment to movies lies in their scripting. I care more about dialogue and blocking than whether or not something looks vibrant, and that extends to CGI. I’m less interested in whether or not wardrobes clash than if the character’s speech patterns are consistent, and I’m open to exceptions for thematic coherency. Colour’s at #12 on my list of priorities, if that. And the modern trend of colour desaturation, for the most part, doesn’t bother me as much.

Besides, there are aspects of a film you can overlook and still enjoy it. Colour grading’s one of them. It still matters, don’t get me wrong, as the right hues can help advance the story, but I think people are also overreacting when it’s not the end of the world. Yes, improper colour grading can lead to racism in storytelling, particularly with how certain hues are short-hands for stereotypes. Yes, being too dark visually is also a problem, especially when you can’t see anything. Yet this fixation on “desaturation = bad storytelling” isn’t only a misnomer, it’s dishonest.

Even still, excessively-bright isn’t any better. Perhaps it’s a personal issue, but whenever colours are too strong, I get headaches. I can’t handle the over-saturation of colours because I’m not 12 years old anymore. Whenever desaturation comes up in conversation, I roll my eyes and bite my tongue, lest I cause a scene. But I don’t care.

The only exception is animation. Perhaps it’s that animated movies are designed from scratch, as opposed to being blended with real lighting and actors, but I don’t mind the brighter colours in them. In fact, I welcome as much colour as possible without it being distracting. And my eyes have adjusted too. Animation’s the only medium where the essence of colour doesn’t bother me, which is yet another argument in favour of it. But I digress.

Ultimately, people need to ask themselves if this is as serious as they let on. Like with 3D glasses and special screens, I don’t need bright colours to enjoy what I’m watching. Because movies are about escapism. And that includes suspending your disbelief to enjoy them. It’s part of the package, and it’s time we acknowledged that. But if that doesn’t help, I recommend going to an art gallery. I promise it’s more productive than complaining.