NSO's GBA Extravaganza!

I’ve owned a Switch for 7 years, and I’ve had Nintendo Switch Online for 6 of them. While I’ve enjoyed using both, I’ve only completed a handful of classic titles. And most were games I’d already completed, with only a select few “new” ones. So perhaps it’s time to give my overall thoughts. Especially since the Switch’s successor’s debuting soon.

By the way, yes, these are all GBA games. And there’ll be spoilers:

Mario & Luigi: Superstar Saga:

I’m going to be honest: this game’s a little overrated. I don’t mean that in a “this game sucks” way, but there were several moments that were more stressful than fun. However, for an entry title in a sub-franchise that’s eluded me, I finally get the appeal. Do I love the game? No, but it’s a solid RPG.

The premise involves Mario and Luigi travelling to The Beanbean Kingdom to reclaim Princess Peach’s voice from Cackletta. Once there, they stumble upon a conspiracy to destroy The Beanbean Kingdom and The Mushroom Kingdom. Mario, being the altruistic soul he is, and his scaredy-cat brother Luigi decide to help The Beanbean Kingdom, hence the title. Of course, hijinks ensue. Lots of them.

If you’re playing a Mario RPG for the story, you’re going to be disappointed. Not because there isn’t one, but because it’s not an epic. You know how the previous paragraph was light on plot? That’s because this game’s light on story. Most of its memorability relies on character interactions and dialogue, of which there’s plenty. My favourite gag involves Luigi dressing as Peach to fool Cackletta. Despite Luigi refusing to uncover his face, Cackletta falls for it anyway.

There are other great moments, including a subplot involving a Beanbean thief named Popple, that are scattered throughout. Whether it’s how frequently Mario and Luigi are recognized as celebrities, or how Luigi’s billed as being braver than he is, I found myself grinning constantly throughout the 30+ hours I spent on it. The game even has sections where Mario and Luigi go at it solo, giving me time to appreciate their moves. As someone who considers Luigi more interesting than Mario, it’s nice to be reminded that he deserves more respect when he ventures alone to save his poisoned brother.

This game has plenty of unique secrets. Considering the limitations of GBA cartridges, it’s amazing how big The Beanbean Kingdom is. It’s nothing compared to home consoles, but there are hidden paths and objectives that I wouldn’t normally expect. The most-surprising involves the underwater map. Ignoring how Mario and Luigi can breathe underwater, traversing that part is always interesting and fun…even if some parts I can’t properly access.

I like this game’s music. The GBA wasn’t known for high-quality tracks, but this game’s one of the exceptions. I think my favourite is Popple’s battle theme, which doubles as the theme for Fawful near the end of the game. Something about it gets me in the right mood for a boss fight, even if I’m not the best at combat. And it works! It might even be a better track than the final fight with Bowletta! Fancy that.

I said this game was overrated, no? That’s because of some key issues. For one, I keep forgetting Mario and Luigi are mapped to different buttons on the gamepad. This is true of the overworld, but also combat. Far too often, I’d be in a major battle…only to forget and lose a lot of health. It might be good for my reflexes, but I struggle with information processing. There’s a reason I spent so long on this game...

Another problem I have involves the Bros. moves. These are special attacks during combat, but they’re not always intuitive. Factor in how the game doesn’t tell you how much HP your opponents have, and it makes using Bros. moves a chore. How should I gauge when to use a Bros. attack if I don’t know how effective it’ll be? Am I supposed to guess?

Speaking of combat, some of the bosses are a nightmare. This is true of Bowletta’s final form, as Mario and Luigi begin at a disadvantage. Unless you use healing items right away, you’re not going to last. I also didn’t enjoy the boss in Joke’s End because I kept attacking the wrong enemy. Does this game like punishing me?!

Finally, there are too many mandatory side-quests. Traversing the overworld for a side-quest is frequently a game of “Are We There Yet?”. I like how many of these side-quests provide an opportunity to try out Mario and Luigi’s power-ups, but there’s too much backtracking for my liking. It makes an otherwise-fun experience a chore. And a game should never feel that way.

I’m sounding harsh, but I don’t want to turn people away from Mario & Luigi: Superstar Saga. It’s fun! And much of the game’s fantastic! But for something that spawned a successful sub-series, you’d think I’d be sold more on its debut. I wasn’t. Perhaps I’m being unfair, but I think I’ll hold off on future entries. Sorry.

Pokémon Mystery Dungeon: Red Rescue Team:

Does this game feel repetitive? Yes. Is it deep? No. But I still like this game more than Mario & Luigi: Superstar Saga. (Shocking.)

You take the role of a human cursed to become a Pokémon. After waking up in a foreign world, you quickly learn that the Pokémon world’s in peril. Earthquakes are commonplace, and Pokémon can no longer evolve. Complicating matters is that Pokémon are turning savage and terrorizing the locals. As you take on odd-jobs, the question remains: who made you a Pokémon, and could your presence be the source of these calamities?

I remember reading the Manga serials for these games when I was subscribed to Nintendo Power. I never completed the story, but a human becoming a Pokémon was intriguing. So when this game was announced for NSO, I had to try it out. Right after finishing Mario & Luigi: Superstar Saga, I started it. I wasn’t disappointed.

Getting inside the head of a Pokémon is this game’s selling point. It not only draws attention to this perspective, it allows me to talk to other Pokémon without it feeling weird or unnatural. It makes this world lived-in and tactile, essentially. Because being a human and interacting with Pokémon isn’t the same as being a Pokémon. This franchise is proof of that.

As implied from the title, this is a dungeon crawling RPG. The stages play out on a grid, with enemies taking turns with your Pokémon in real-time. Unlike the main games, these fights are telegraphed. And unlike the main games, the fights can feel slow. If you’re not used to dungeon crawling mechanics, the key is patience.

Despite this, the game’s not overly-challenging. For one, you heal whenever you move. And two, even if you don’t know which attack to use, you can still mash buttons and strike opponents. This makes combat simple, made simpler by being able throw items at enemies that you find in dungeons. It works for what it is.

What’s more pressing is keeping track of your energy levels. Like any ordinary human, you’re bound to get hungry. Getting hungry also depletes your energy. Thankfully, there’s plenty of food lying around in each dungeon, some of which doubles as a status healer or stats booster. Why anyone would eat food lying on the floor’s beyond me, but I’m not a Pokémon, so…

It helps that dungeons don’t require you to dilly-dally. Not only do you have the option to teleport back to your base if you complete an objective, but finding the stairs to the next floor means you’re not obligated to explore further. This is great for weather hazards like heat or ice, both of which can deplete your health. I kept forgetting that until it was too late, as my Pokémon would black out from depleted health, forcing me to either call it a day, or return to a save point. Oops!

The save mechanic becomes more pressing in the latter part of the campaign, one you rely on once the game becomes story-heavy. It turns out that your transformation might have something to do with the everyone’s woes, making you and your allies fugitives. It’s here that the game becomes darker narratively, forcing you to clear your name. I also like how you can sometimes befriend Pokémon that you beat in dungeons. They prove helpful in these darker moments.

I love the boss battles in this game. These are the hardest enemies, and they’re where the game’s combat truly shines. I especially like the fight with Rayquaza. He’s not only the last in the campaign, but his fight feels the most consequential. He’s tough to beat, too, and it took me several tries. Come to think of it, most of the bosses took several tries to beat…

Once the main story was over, sadly, so was my engagement. Sure, I could now evolve Pokémon, but I made the mistake of not teaching the HM Surf that I’d received for an underwater dungeon. Considering you lose items if you black out, I had to go to a different dungeon to find Surf. And, lo and behold, I couldn’t access it anyway. There went any desire to continue further!

Pokémon Mystery Dungeon: Red Rescue Team’s a fun game. Is it the best Pokémon game? Not really. I wouldn’t even consider it the best Pokémon spin-off game, that title belongs to Pokémon Snap. Nevertheless, it’s a decent enough dungeon crawler. I’m glad I played it, and that’s what really matters.

Wario Land 4:

This might be my favourite Wario Land game. It’s not only a cohesive game, it’s also not a confusing game like Wario Land 3, which I got stuck in partway. It’s also one of the few games with a time gimmick that I don’t mind, which automatically makes it great. And no, I didn’t stutter. But I digress.

Beginning with a cutscene that’s skippable, Wario Land 4 has Wario driving to a mysterious pyramid to find a secret treasure. How does he find this out? From a newspaper. How does he get there? In his convertible. Does this make any sense? No, but who cares?

The game tells you everything in its first level, which doubles as the tutorial. You enter a level, collect treasure, find the four pieces of a special sapphire, acquire the keyzer, trigger the frog timer and escape the way you came before the timer runs out. It’s straightforward, and possibly formulaic, but each level has enough variety to keep from feeling stale. Considering this is a short game, that it leaves an impression is a testament to memorability. And that’s only scratching the surface!

Perhaps the real secret, like I said, is making the time gimmick tolerable. Up until now, the only game I’ve played that made a time gimmick tolerable was Pikmin 3. That game allowed you to extend the time limit with fruit, incentivizing exploration. Wario Land 4 has a time gimmick too, but it’s not a burden because: a. It’s generous. b. The consequences for failure are non-existent. c. You can try again as often as you’d like, with no penalties.

That’s not to say the time limit isn’t stressful. It absolutely is. Not only is the music that plays increasingly chaotic, but Wario starts bleeding coins when the timer ends. From there, you need to escape before you run out of money and are booted from the level. Fortunately, like I said, the time limit’s pretty generous, so the odds of you not making it out are slim. Though it’s happened once or twice for me.

The bosses are also timed, but for a different reason. You have to beat them before the timer runs out, but that timer also determines how much treasure you can bring with you upon beating them. If you wait too long, the treasure chests start disappearing. If you wait even further, you lose all of them. And if you don’t beat the boss before the timer hits zero, you have to start from scratch. No pressure.

Despite this, the boss fights are a genuine highlight. They’re varied in combat style, and they force you to think outside the box. I found myself having to replay each one several times to understand their weak points, as each was different. The final boss in particular kept mixing attack styles as the fight progressed. This was also when I relied heavily on the NSO’s rewind feature, something I’d never used prior to this game, but am incredibly grateful for.

The game itself is lots of fun. I find games revolving around treasure collecting can feel stale, but it fits the moniker of Wario. After all, he’s greedy! If his introduction in Super Mario Land 2: 6 Golden Coins was any indication, he thrives on stealing treasure! So if this game didn’t focus on that, I’d have been disappointed. It helps that collecting treasure’s exciting.

That’s all there is. When it comes to the topic of best Wario Land games, Wario Land 4 frequently gets shafted. I disapprove. Not only is it a great game, it also deserves to be discussed. Though I guess talking about it here counts. Give it a go.

And that about does it! Feel free to play these games at your leisure, and I’ll see you next time!

No Fun Allowed!

Everyone, I’m tired.

That doesn’t mean I won’t be writing any new pieces. I have too many ideas, and too little self-control, for that to happen. But I’m tired. I’m tired of toxic negativity online, and I’m tired of toxic negativity offline. I’m tired all around.

I mention this in-light of the newest MCU entry’s lukewarm reviews, especially since I’ve watched it, and because the internet’s a cesspool of hate and bigotry. It’s like Bob Chipman said in one of his videos: if you don’t manufacture outrage constantly, you’re going to fade into obscurity. It’s why I’ve shortened the titles of my entries, and why my output’s increased over the nearly-10 years The Whitly-Verse has existed. It’s exhausting fighting with SEO, truly. But there’s little I can do about it.

I’m not getting paid to do this. Between writing, editing, formatting, publishing and promoting my stuff, I’m doing the work of five people. The odd person might look over my work prior to upload it, particularly my compare-contrast pieces, but I’m running on passion here. That, and feedback I receive from my readers, mostly from family and friends. I like doing it, but keep that in mind.

That farming outrage nets eyeballs is upsetting. It stifles my creativity, forces me to prioritize my fight-or-flight instincts and makes it hard to experiment with ideas that excite me. My most-viewed piece is a rant on a shoddy fan-ship. In contrast, my favourite piece, about an obscure period in the Jewish calendar, has done well, but not come close to the number of views of that rant. And while I don’t regret writing either, I wish my non-antagonistic content got 1/10th of the traffic as the antagonistic content.

Going back to The MCU, it nets attention these days for terrible reasons. Ignoring how it’s been struggling lately, though its batting average is still better than most, the franchise can’t catch a break from bigots and attention-seekers fuelling outrage. With the former, it’s mostly internet bros mad that the franchise has moved on to younger, more diverse audiences. With the latter, I sometimes want to throttle them and ask if they have anything better to do. Either way, it’s unhealthy.

And it’s not only The MCU! If you think this mindset hasn’t leeched into other properties, I have a giant, blue alien race with long tails to sell you. Alternatively, I have space wizards with magic swords to sell you. Basically, anything people deem “dying” or “dead”, even when reality claims otherwise. Use your imagination.

That’s what this is about. We can argue if over-saturation of franchise material has ruined it, but it’s irrelevant to the issue of how relentless negativity has ruined any and all conversations online. It’s all I see. I guess it was inevitable when the internet encourages anonymity, but talking to strangers doesn’t have to mean always being negative, right? Right?!

Writing this is increasing my exhaustion, amping up my anxiety. I’m already a worrywart, and the constant hate and rage-farming doesn’t help. Especially when it spills into real life, causing online hate to become real. I’ve seen upticks in Antisemitism and bigotry for years, compounded by October 7th, 2023’s massacre and its corresponding war. Not only have people become more hostile to Jews, but it’s made worse by the president of The US pouring gasoline on this out-of-control fire. If that’s not bad enough, he’s weaponizing the internet via the world’s richest man to encourage extremist rhetoric.

Calling this out hasn’t done anything, or has led to further hatred. People can debate whether or not Elon Musk made a Nazi salute, but that doesn’t matter. What matters is that the message was heard by awful people. And I don’t care if he “supports Israel”. No one who espouses that ever stops to ask why.

On the flip-side, I’m exhausted by people weaponizing the right’s support for Israel. It’s not only not news, it’s used to absolve people of accountability from their bigotry. Like attacking Gal Gadot and Shira Haas for starring in superhero properties, masking sexism with Antisemitism. Whenever I call that out, I’m accused of being a “Zionist shill”. What does that have to do with my concerns?!

You see what I’m getting at?

Reading this might be exhausting or triggering for some of you. It’s exhausting and triggering to write, that’s for sure! But while cathartic to jot this down, it also highlights the bigger issue: negativity sells more than positivity. That’s concerning. It’s concerning because it’s tiring, and it’s concerning because, as I’ve outlined above, it's unhealthy. There’s finite energy to devote to always being mad, but opting out of it hurts my traffic. I’m sure I’m not the only one experiencing this catch-22, either.

Besides, what’s wrong with a little joy and positivity? I’m not saying to stop being angry, as there are times where it’s appropriate, but there’s a reason why it’s a reactionary emotion: anger’s a response to something. Happiness is spontaneous, anger isn’t. But you wouldn’t know that with how anger’s marketed…

We have to decide if it’s worth always being mad at everything. I don’t think it is. Not only does it kill the mood, it sucks the fun out of everything. It especially sucks the fun out of our hobbies, making them chores. Is that what we really want? Do we want to be the “No Fun Allowed” meme? Because what does that say? Nothing good!

Beauty and the Beast (1991) VS BELLE-Which is Better?

“Beauty and the Beast”, the 1740 fairy tale written by Gabrielle-Suzanne Barbot de Villeneuve, has been adapted to film numerous times. Perhaps the most famous is the 1991 Disney film of the same name, which remains one of three animated movies to receive a Best Picture nomination at The Academy Awards. That movie’s impact has been felt since, inspiring other directors to invert the story while keeping its messaging intact. One such director’s Mamoru Hosoda, whose 2021 anime film, BELLE, was well-received by the public. Yet even with sharing a similar source of inspiration, the question remains: which is better?

As per usual, this’ll be subjective and contain spoilers. You’ve been warned.

Let’s kick this off with…

Story:

VS

The basic premise involves a beastly figure developing feelings for a maiden under unusual circumstances. In Beauty and the Beast, the backstory involving the beast’s transformation is because of greed. Told through narration and stained glass windows, the beast was once a young and spoiled prince who was transformed after denying shelter to a disguised-as-homely enchantress in exchange for a magic rose. If the prince learned to love someone unreservedly before his 21st birthday, the spell would be broken. If not, he’d remain a beast.

From here, we’re introduced to Belle, a young woman living in the countryside. Belle’s a bookworm dreaming of a better life, to the chagrin of everyone else. She routinely avoids advances from Gaston, the local hero with a fancy for Belle’s hand in marriage. When Belle’s father goes missing while venturing to the local fair, she ends up at the beast’s castle and sacrifices her freedom in exchange for her father. From here, Belle and the beast learn to love one another, all while Gaston becomes more desperate to marry Belle.

In BELLE, Suzu Naito hides the scars of her mother’s passing as a child by being socially-awkward. When her best friend, Hiro, invites her to the online social media app U, Suzu takes on the persona of pop diva Bell. Her concert performance is one day interrupted by a beastly figure being chased by U’s unofficial police. Confused and curious, Suzu and Hiro track down the identity of this beast, all while Suzu begins opening up socially.

BELLE has more going for it narratively than Beauty and the Beast. Not only does it run past 2 hours, it also has several subplots. There’s a running “will-they-won’t-they” story about Suzu’s friendship with classmate Shinobu, who feels a protectoral responsibility for her stemming back to childhood. There’s also a story point about the beast’s identity that takes up much of the runtime, and it has various red herrings. And there’s a story thread about Ruka and Kamishin, two of Suzu’s schoolmates, that’s slowly revealed as the movie progresses. All of these are interesting, but they’re not the primary focus; in fact, there might be too much going on here.

Beauty and the Beast has none of that excess because of its length. This might be one of Disney’s tightest scripts ever, having absolutely no fat. Sure, there are gaps in logic and “rushed” plot points, and I think its opening’s a little cruel given the prince’s age, but all of that can be excused with this being a fairy tale. It operates on fairy tale logic, with all of its writing executed brilliantly.

It’s for that reason that I prefer the story of Beauty and the Beast. It might not be as thematically or narratively rich, but it’s more cohesive.

Winner:

But a movie’s premise is only as good as the characters in its world, which leads me to…

Cast:

VS

If there’s one area both movies excel in, it’s their characters. Beauty and the Beast’s Gaston’s so memorable that not only can I imagine him existing in real life, but his counterpart in BELLE’s two characters, and ones not nearly as interesting. Justin’s his charisma and arrogance, while Tomo and Kei’s dad’s his violent turn. The parallels the two share with Gaston are so obvious that it’s a missed opportunity for them to not be the same person. This is especially true given that Justin becomes a non-entity after Suzu uses him to unveil herself in U and earn Tomo and Kei’s trust.

I’ve heard critiques that Beauty and the Beast is about Stockholm Syndrome, and that Belle’s relationship to the beast is why. Ignoring my issues with Stockholm Syndrome, distilling the relationship to that does it a disservice. Remember, Belle leaves the castle twice, the second time with the beast’s blessing, and both times she willingly returns. That alone disproves the Stockholm Syndrome theory.

Fortunately, BELLE has the upper-hand with something I don’t think could be helped given where Disney movies were narratively in the early-90’s: Suzu, the “Belle” archetype, has a character arc. Not to demean Belle, but she’s not interesting and doesn’t really grow. She’s a conduit for the beast, who goes from a loud animal with a fowl temper to a soft and caring prince. It’s a radical shift, but it’s at the expense of Belle’s development.

Suzu lacks this problem. Being the focus of BELLE, she goes from excessively introverted to more confident. She has the backstory, she’s the one who changes. She even helps Kamishin connect with Ruka! (It helps that Ruka, the popular girl, is receptive to Suzu and doesn’t begrudge her childhood trauma.)

The beast in BELLE doesn’t change, however. He’s revealed later on to be Kei, and he takes on the role of a human shield for his dad’s abuse, but outside of being less cranky and distrustful he’s the same as he was during his first appearance. Not that he needs to change, though, as he’s interesting in his own right. And that he puts on a façade to hide his scars and bruises makes him instantly sympathetic; after all, why wouldn’t he be distrusting? Why wouldn’t he lash out at those trying to help him?

As for the rest of the characters in both movies, they’re all fun. I like how the servants in Beauty and the Beast are objects that match their names, essentially being visual puns. Lumière and Cogsworth come off as a bickering couple with their arguing, while Mrs. Potts is the doting mother and Chip is the cute teacup. Contrast this with the characters in BELLE being more human, feeling more like friends at a gathering than a family you get to know well. Which you prefer is a matter of personal choice.

Personally, I’m going with BELLE, and for one reason: Gaston feels like a dated stereotype. It’s a common critique for early Disney movies that they coded gay stereotypes into their antagonists, and it shows with the stereotypically-metrosexual boorishness he displays around Belle and LeFou. He’s so over-the-top and arrogant that while his incel behaviour feels real, it’s also a little homophobic in 2025. Justin and the abusive father, while not the same character, are more tangible adversaries nowadays.

Winner:

But a movie needs to look pretty too, which leads me to…

Aesthetic:

VS

Animation’s an under-appreciated medium for storytelling, and these films are proof of why. While both are a product of different decades, they take advantage of the technology available at the time. In the case of Beauty and the Beast, it was one of the earliest films to use CAPS for its animation, with high-quality digitization rendered traditionally. Some scenes, like Belle’s dance with the beast, feel dated given the advances in technology, but in 1991 it was impressive to see an overhead shot of a chandelier slowly swerve and zoom in to the characters. It’s also a really great moment.

As for BELLE, it too looks impressive, made better by the 30-year leap in digital technology. The world of U’s a busy and lived-in place, taking on an intricacy that only exists online. It’s reminiscent of OZ from Summer Wars, another Hosoda movie, but it improves on that by not cheating with its depiction of the online world. It contrasts with the real world setting of Japan, one we only see a fraction of, but get enough visual information to be tangible. I like how the climax, where Suzu searches for Kei and Tomo, and flashback scenes involving Suzu’s mother’s death take place in the rain. It’s a nice parallel.

While both movies have technical limitations, BELLE hides them better. That said, it’s also restricted visually by homages to the 1991 Disney movie, most-notably the beast’s castle and when Bell dances with the beast. It was inevitable that’d happen, since BELLE wouldn’t exist without Beauty and the Beast, but it’s no less-noticeable.

As for the designs, both movies have drawbacks. Beauty and the Beast looks amazing, but some of the crowd work is pre-rendered instead of being natural. It’s as if Disney was strained by traditional animation, preferring to transition to CGI. BELLE lacks this, but while the characters are fluid and moving, they lack detailed shading and shadows. Plus, they fall victim to Manga Iconography, which is used for comedic effect, but is distracting to look at. Especially since faces are expressive without that.

It's tough to pick a victor. While BELLE lifts from Beauty and the Beast, it does enough to stand out. Conversely, I think aspects of Beauty and the Beast’s animation are dated. So it’s a tie.

Tie:

However, visuals are only as good as the audio attached to them, which leads to…

Sound:

VS

Despite being over 30 years old, the music and sound mixing of Beauty and the Beast hold up. This is especially true of the songs, which the movie’s 2017 remake couldn’t escape. Perhaps my favourites are “Gaston” and “The Mob Song”, with “Beauty and the Beast” a close third. For “Gaston”, you get a sense of Gaston’s pompousness and reverence in ways only a musical number could bring, while “The Mob Song” cements Gaston’s villainy through a crowd riot. “Beauty and the Beast”, aside from being one of Disney’s best songs, is also a really lovely and well-written ballad. Even the limited edition “Human Again”, while redundant and initially cut from release, has its charms. The movie doesn’t have a bad song in it.

BELLE’s songs, while excellent, lack the instant memorability of Beauty and the Beast. Perhaps that’s unfair, as the movie’s only a few years old, but they need more time to marinate in the public consciousness. It also doesn’t help that they lack conventional rhyme because they were translated from Japanese, which doesn’t use that. It’s probably unfair, since English is my first language, but it’s noticeable. Yet if I had to pick favourites, “Millennium Parade” and “Gales of Song” would be them.

A more pressing nitpick involves the background music in Beauty and the Beast. While the orchestrations are amazing, they never let the background noise immerse you. I know Disney could never get away with dramatic silence, lest it “bore” people, but some artistic silence could’ve benefitted the experience. That’s something BELLE never struggles with. In fact, while reusing many compositions, it has plenty of dramatic silence.

One more note I should point out is the voice acting. We expect top-tier acting from Disney movies, and Paige O’Hara as Belle steals the show. However, I appreciate Kylie McNeill’s singing voice for Suzu in BELLE. For all my complaints about Japanese songs, McNeill captures the beauty of the translated lyrics in a way I don’t think her Japanese counterpart does. Even with the dub’s roster of veteran VAs and up-and-coming newbies, she still stands out. She even stands out in her non-singing moments, fitting Suzu’s socially-introverted vocal inflections.

It'd be easy to give BELLE the victory here; after all, it has dramatic silence and takes bigger risks with its music! But I think people underestimate how good and ambitious the music is in Beauty and the Beast despite that. This was the late-Howard Ashman’s dream-child, even supervising the songs before dying from AIDS before the movie debuted. The music’s so good, in fact, that future Disney musicals couldn’t live up to it, and that says something! So while BELLE might be more artistically daring, Beauty and the Beast is more artistically memorable.

Winner:

To bring it home, this is…

Entertainment factor:

VS

I really like these movies. Not only do they raise the bars for their respective studios/directors, they show the power of animation and timelessness of “Beauty and the Beast”. That said, I have to pick a winner. And it comes down to, “Which do I enjoy more?”. So, which do I enjoy more?

It’s close. Both movies have a cheer-out-loud moment, for one. Rumour has it the beast’s transformation sequence at the end of Beauty and the Beast elicited a thunderous applause from test audiences, and it’s easy see why when you watch it. Conversely, I feel like applauding when Suzu reappears as her Bell avatar while singing “A Million Miles Away”. Considering she asked Justin to unveil herself in order to gain Tomo and Kei’s trust, U’s Five Voices rewarding her vulnerability, all while singing a song her late-mother taught her, works as a satisfying moment. Both movies have great climaxes with great payoffs.

Both movies also feel like they’re in conversation. With the Disney movie, Belle’s the main character, but the beast has the character arc. For the Hosoda film, the beast, or Kei, never changes, but Suzu does. Yet despite the imbalances, these decisions feel natural and earned. They don’t feel cheap.

Both movies also deal with abandonment and estrangement, with BELLE touching on the psychology of abuse. These elements are why this is such a timeless tale worth retelling constantly. After all, beauty’s skin deep. And appearances can be deceiving. It’s a lesson we keep forgetting.

I’m going to give this one to Beauty and the Beast. While BELLE has more going for it narratively, its script’s also messier. The most-notable moment is when Hiro and Suzu stop a rumour about Suzu and Shinobu. It’s a fun moment, but it’s a derailment involving lies, misunderstandings and Tactical MMORPGs. The movie always loses me at that point, making me wonder if I’m unintentionally watching the wrong movie. Beauty and the Beast, however, is a lean 90+ minutes, with no derailments or loose ends.

No offence to BELLE, a movie I adore, but Beauty and the Beast is better overall.

Overall winner:

Thank you for reading, and I’ll see you next time!

Friendly "Woke" Spider-Man?

I’m torn on watching Your Friendly Neighborhood Spider-Man. On one hand, I’ve heard it’s fantastic. On the other hand, I’m burnt out on Spider-Man retellings. It’s possible I’ll binge it when the first season’s finished, like I’ve done with most Disney+ shows, but I’m not in a hurry. Especially considering how it’s now the subject of controversy, thanks to its star VA.

In an interview with Collider, Hudson Thames, who voices Spider-Man, had this to say:

"I thought it was awesome. I mean, my biggest fear was that it was gonna be annoying and woke, and it wasn't, and I was like, 'Yes, this is great, it's so well written,' like it feels real. I'm the oldest of five boys, so I feel like I kind of know what's happening in their lives and in high school, and it felt like it was doing that justice."

I’m sorry, what?

I’m not sure what to make of this. If it’s an act, like what Jerry Seinfeld’s been doing, then I’m disappointed in Thames. Not only is he almost 31, meaning he’s old enough to know better, but Spider-Man has always been “woke”. The character was created to give teenagers representation at a time when they were relegated to sidekicks. His struggles, outside of supervillains, have always centred around paying bills, marriage troubles and caring for his elderly, widowed aunt. You know, stuff real people struggle with? How’s this not “woke”?

If this is Thames being serious, perhaps it’s time for him to be educated. “Woke”, like “politically-correct” and “SJW”, has become another racially-charged buzzword used by people who are angry they can’t be openly-racist. We can debate this forever, but these terms have been floating around more as minorities have gotten attention and accurate representation in media. It doesn’t help that the people using the phrase can’t define it when confronted. You don’t need to look hard for that.

Additionally, “woke” has been used by the people in power to justify enacting laws that harm the vulnerable. Whether it’s stripping DEI initiatives, or scrubbing trans and non-binary identities from government websites, this has all been done to “combat woke-ness”. It’s also expected to get worse, given who’s currently President of The United States. Woe to all!

This has also trickled down to entertainment. With Disney specifically, references to Riley’s lesbianism in Inside Out 2 were removed post-production, while a Pixar series on Disney+ had a trans character’s storyline changed. You may think this is incidental, but queer youth exist. Don’t they deserve to have their stories told? Or is it a problem because “woke”?

I haven’t even gotten to the nasty repercussions, which I’ll skip for two reasons. Firstly, they’re traumatizing to segments of the population, and I want to respect their dignity. And secondly, I’m not living in The US, so I’m not an expert. That said, you can research everything online. It’s all in the name of combatting “woke ideology”.

By Hudson Thames making that remark, he’s contributing to the greater problem. I’m not even sure he’s aware, or he might not care. I don’t know for sure. Yet in the context of the show, there are definitely aspects that, from what I’ve heard, could be considered “woke”. The most-prominent is having Coleman Domingo, a black actor, voicing Norman Osborne, as well as having him mentor Peter Parker instead of Tony Stark. Wouldn’t that be considered a “woke” change, going by this logic?

You’ll notice I’ve been putting “woke” in quotation marks. That’s intentional. Not only is the term loosely-defined, I don’t want to give credibility to racist buzzwords. Let’s not kid ourselves: calling something “woke”, unless done in jest, is racially-charged. Like “politically-correct” and “SJW”, as well as the casual misuse of “DEI” nowadays, “woke” is a thinly-veiled alternative to less-than-savoury language that fell by the wayside when minorities started getting respect. It’s not the be-all-end-all people claim, especially when most can’t even define what it means.

Outside of that, it doesn’t even make sense. What was Thames implying here? That the show he headlines was going to suck? Because I don’t think he’s doing a good job at promoting the series. Giving something negative PR as its debuting isn’t a great idea. I’d argue time and distance help, and even then you need tact.

Let’s flip this around for a minute. Thames is, for lack of a better term, white. Say someone called his Spider-Man “woke” because he’s in it? And what if Thames were black? Don’t you think he’d be offended? I would!

Yes, I’m “taking the bait”. I’m “overreacting” to nonsense. I’m aware this is trivial, and that I’m giving oxygen to a nonstarter. That might be true, but that doesn’t mean I can’t be miffed. I’m allowed to comment on something that has negative ramifications. That warrants a response, silly as it is.

Even still, it’s not like using this terminology for Spider-Man, a superhero whose existence is “woke”, is appropriate or fitting. What’s wrong with proper representation? What’s wrong with advocating for better? Like Nicepool says in Deadpool & Wolverine: “It costs nothing to be kind.” I think Thames could stand to learn from that, regardless of his intent.

A Fantastic Bore

The Fantastic Four have had little success on the big screen. Not only have they not been taken seriously, the few times they’ve had comic-appropriate interpretations…they haven’t lasted. (The MCU’s takes on Mr. Fantastic and The Human Torch, the latter a holdover from another franchise, were both horribly killed on-screen.) So it’s interesting that the teaser for the newest attempt, which has a retro-futurist vibe, has me intrigued. Everything looks good, with one exception: the posters.

See, I’m no fan of Artificial Intelligence. I recognize that it has its place, and it can be used well if guided by human hands, but the thought of machines replacing people disturbs me. As we’ve seen over and over, it’s not true. Especially when people are shafted altogether. That’s not touching on the ethical ramifications, of which Hollywood’s addressed in recent years.

The posters for this movie appear to use A.I., and not in a creative way. I know people were unkind to Secret Invasion’s opening for that, but at least that was thematically-sound. That show was about Skrulls passing off as humans, so it was fitting, even if it didn’t work. These posters lack that excuse. Because when The Thing’s actor has a real suit to work with, plastering fake people on the advertisements is a slap in the face.

You know how to tell that these posters were created with A.I.? It’s a simple litmus test: pay attention to the characters’ hands. They look unusual, with several missing fingers. I could understand if that was an illusion of light, but it’s not. These finger errors are all over the posters. It’s blatantly-obvious.

I’m unsure why the movie’s advertising felt a need to do that. The MCU isn’t financially-strapped. They have the backing of Disney, a company that’s doing fine. An MCU movie can afford real extras. That they’re not is a choice, and a bad one.

This is especially-egregious because Hollywood had two strikes over this exact issue recently. In case you’ve forgotten, SAG-AFTRA and The WGA walked off the job to protest, among other concerns, the issue of A.I. replacing their jobs. With The WGA, their concerns were met. SAG-AFTRA didn’t get that same outcome, but it was enough to be satisfied. Regardless, this was huge, halting productions for months.

So…why continue using A.I.? It might be “cheaper”, but this is what SAG-AFTRA specifically was fighting against. And it’s not like Disney can’t find extras. There are plenty of actors in Hollywood who’d salivate over being part of a big production, especially if it means qualifying for benefits! Why shaft them over this? Is Disney secretly hurting?

Either way, this doesn’t exactly sit well. Doubly-so because of the issue surrounding A.I. not getting fingers right. It could’ve been easy to commission actual artists for promotional materials. Even if Disney didn’t want to hire extras, a human artist would’ve been more inspired. After all, retro-futurism isn’t new! The Jetsons were tackling this in the 1960’s! And they did so on a shoestring budget, with limited animation and reused backgrounds!

Marvel, Disney specifically, has no excuse. This isn’t the 70’s and 80’s, when they were pinching their pockets and struggling to stay afloat. That Disney’s no longer, having experienced two revivals, several CEOs and various IP acquisitions since. It’s insulting, therefore, that they’d fall back on cost-cutting with their advertising. Doubly-so for a blockbuster based on a well-known IP.

I know there’s little I can do here. I’m one person, and I don’t get paid by Disney. But while I’m sure the movie will be fine, and that I’ll watch it anyway, I wish more tact had gone into these posters. Because this is lame. And it’s tacky and shameless.

I’m unsure if much can be fixed here. Not only has the damage been done, but I doubt using A.I. for poster work will stop Marvel’s already-dedicated fans from seeing this movie. Like I said, it looks like plenty of thought went into every other aspect, including, but not limited to, hiring a Jewish actor to play The Thing, a character who’s canonically-Jewish. That last part’s huge, given Marvel’s past aversion to hiring Jews for Jewish roles.

I also doubt I’ll be able to stop the uses of A.I. in entertainment. Whether I like it or not, this is the future. A.I.’s here to stay, especially since it’s cost-efficient. I simply wish it could be regulated, so as to prevent real people from being put out of work. That might be a pipe-dream right now, given who’s in charge of The US, but it’s what I want. Especially if it means avoiding the finger issue with A.I. in the future.

Ultimately, a line has to be drawn. And it has to be drawn soon. Because what Disney’s done here is disgraceful, and it should be called out. So yes, shame on whoever decided this was a good idea. It’s tacky, and it’s disrespectful to what Hollywood entertainers have fought for. Do better, for everyone’s sakes.