Welcome to Megalopolis?

Megalopolis is a movie I was dreading since it hit my radar screen. It was a 40-year passion project from Francis Ford Coppola, and you don’t get a blank cheque to make whatever you want unless you’ve gained a reputation. But even amidst that, the production kept me uneasy. And now that it’s debuted to mixed reception, even with a standing ovation at Cannes, my concerns feel validated. I’m unsure how to react.

I shouldn’t overplay how much of a nightmare the production of this movie was. One of the cast members had sexual assault allegations well before shooting had started. Another cast member hadn’t been in a movie of note for over a decade, as well as gained the ire of many for his political views. And then there was Coppola. For a man of such high reputation, many people outside of the actors called him inappropriate and childish.

Now, many high-profile movies were made by gross individuals. Some of my favourite films are soiled by that. But in a post-Me Too age, where abuse and predation have surfaced everywhere, you’d think someone like Coppola would dial it down a bit. Especially since people consider him in high regard. But I guess we make exceptions for the “Film Brats”. And as someone with a Me Too story, this upsets me.

I could be over-projecting, as I haven’t seen Megalopolis. For all I know, I could end up liking it! Yet the stories I’ve read and heard don’t sit well. Especially since Coppola appears to have driven away anyone who wasn’t the main cast with his antics. That doesn’t exactly make me happy.

Some of you might be wondering how this is if Cannes gave it a standing ovation. For one, that isn’t so impressive when you look at what they gravitate to. And two, so what? Remember, Cannes gave a standing ovation to Roman Polanski for his movie on Alfred Dreyfuss. Yes, Dreyfuss’s story’s worthy of being told. But no, Polanski’s the wrong person for that given his own history of criminal behaviour. Cannes might have “prestige”, but they’re not gospel.

It's especially true considering the controversies Cannes has been entangled with. The festival has had indecent exposures, obscene gestures and fights break out, not to mention their sexist dress attire. Most-noteworthy is that some of their screenings lacked warnings for scenes of brutality and rape, leading to an infamous walkout in 2003. With this in mind, I’d take Cannes praising something with a grain of salt. It’s healthier that way.

Additionally, some passion projects…don’t pan out. It’s unfortunate, and I can’t claim to be an expert on why, but it’s a reality. Not every passion project is good, and doubly-so when in production for decades. We can’t expect The Tale of the Princess Kaguya-level work each time, even with a veteran. That shouldn’t stop people from pursuing their dreams, but it happens. Megalopolis is one of the passion projects that didn’t work, and I’m sorry it didn’t. At least, I’d be sorrier if the production and director’s behaviour hadn’t been a nightmare...

I don’t mean to kill the vibe. I want passion projects to succeed, namely because the people making them care. I’m also not averse to passion projects. I’ve liked plenty of movies from new and beloved directors who’ve poured their heart and soul into them. Megalopolis is also the kind of venture that, as a writer and fellow artist, I want to endorse. But when the experience doesn’t sound fun, the production’s riddled with issues, the director’s a creep, multiple cast members have scandals and the reviews are less-than-stellar, well…what does that leave me to be excited about? I genuinely want to know!

I also acknowledge that my attitude has evolved in the almost-9 years I’ve been writing on The Whitly-Verse. Initially, I’d have used “separate the art from the artist” to still enjoy movies without thinking of the ramifications. Not only was I not ready to acknowledge my childhood trauma, but I had some growing up to do. Because, truthfully, it’s impossible to completely distance the artist from their work. And when you can directly influence the trajectory of bad behaviour in Hollywood by not supporting it, I think you should try. Even when one of Hollywood’s greatest is involved.

It's equally possible that I might be saying this because the movie’s been harshly reviewed, or because I have no real attachments to Coppola. After all, I’ve enjoyed the Avatar films, which were directed by someone with a short temper and a massive ego. But while I understand this inconsistency, I never said I loved the movies themselves. Nor do I love James Cameron’s filmography, even the entries I’m “allowed to enjoy”. Remember that.

While it’s personal, I’m not eager to watch Megalopolis. That doesn’t mean I should stop you from watching it, I’m not your parent, but I’d like my decision to be respected. I’m human, and I have my emotional limitations. And in this case, there’s too much I’d be risking mentally by supporting the film. Even when Francis Ford Coppola’s the director.

Wish I May...

Let’s talk Wish.

The last time I discussed this movie, I mentioned the following:

“I’m worried because Wish’s reception validates a prediction I made when Elemental was in theatres: experimental animation’s the new frontier, but how long will it take before it’s a disappointment? The answer’s ‘not long’. It troubles me because the style’s relatively-new, and because it shows that something can’t be exciting based on its art-style alone. And while the latter should’ve been obvious, there’s a real fear Disney might learn the wrong lessons.”

Having watched the movie, my concerns are validated, yet also intertwined with some concerns. There are minor complaints I can make-it’s rushed, Asha has too many friends, the credits skip key movies when recapping Disney’s filmography-but none compare to two major ones and a concern I have with Disney overall. So let’s discuss them. Ready? Here goes.

The first problem is glaring: the writing sucks. Specifically, the songs suck. Wish desperately wants to coast on the success of Lin-Manuel Miranda, whose work with Disney has earned several Oscar nominations via Moana and Encanto. The movie wants to match his rapping and long-winded verses, but because he’s not the lyricist…it fails spectacularly. There’ve also been suggestions this movie was written by AI, something I try not ascribing to, but might be possible given what Marvel did with Secret Invasion. Considering the redundancy of many verses, as well as the timing of the release, it’s not unreasonable.

Still, while the songs themselves aren’t impressive, the compositions are. Even the villain song, “This is the Thanks I Get?!”, is fun, if not unconventional. But the most-impressive number, lyrically and musically, is “This Wish”. Redundancies aside, Ariana DeBose and the lyricists cared deeply, or they wouldn’t have used it for the marketing. It shows that even if AI was involved, a human hand guided it.

Another issue with this movie is the response to one detail. Magnifico, Wish’s antagonist, has been defended as “being right”. To that, I wonder if film literacy’s dead. Like Abuela Madrigal in Encanto, sympathetic isn’t the same as correct. In Magnifico’s case, he’s not even sympathetic, as he’s a victim of underwriting. The movie clearly wanted to allude to John Lasseter’s tenure at Disney while hearkening back to classic Disney villains, and it doesn’t work. You can’t have your cake and eat it too, especially when many of the plot beats feel rushed.

Also, how is Magnifico “right”? Because he felt that he had to safeguard corruptible dreams? Who decides that? And even if that’s true, which it’s not, that doesn’t excuse his controlling nature. He’s even coercive to his wife! Do people not understand manipulators?!

Yet my biggest issue isn’t even the fault of the movie, but rather how it’s impacted Disney: this was a new art-style meant to celebrate Disney’s 100 year anniversary. It was supposed to honour the studio’s legacy. And once it came out…it was met with a lukewarm response. So Disney panicked, “course correcting” with sequels. We’re seeing that with the lineup for the next few years.

Don’t get me wrong: I’m not saying they’ll be bad. Not only am I excited for the sequel to Moana to debut this year, I also think the worlds of Frozen and Zootopia have infinite potential. For all I know, these sequels might be amazing! But that they’re prioritized over original stories is worrisome. Doubly-so that they’re not innovative like Wish.

I’ve championed photorealistic CGI animation before, despite its limitations, but I want animation to not be creatively stagnant. I want it to push boundaries in new and exciting ways, which Wish was attempting. It didn’t succeed, but it was an attempt. Like with Chicken Little, Disney needed to try first. It needed room to fail, and that’s not happening here.

If Disney, a corporation with infinite resources, is afraid to learn from failure, what does that say about the animation industry? Are movies like Nimona and TMNT: Mutant Mayhem one-off responses to Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse, ones meant to underperform and fizzle out? Will we never break free from the standard set by Pixar in 1995? Is Disney making a feature film like “Paperman” never going to happen again?

It's not even like this movie was atrocious. Disney’s made far worse in the 70’s and 80’s, perhaps even in the early-2000’s. But they were allowed to. And they learned from them, as opposed to doubling-down on safer, more-established alternatives. That’s less a failure of Disney of yore than of Disney of now, which worries me. Because other animation studios are paying attention and taking notes.

Maybe I’m overreacting, and this is a small hiccup in the bigger picture. Maybe Disney has actual, original films in the pipeline that are as innovative as Wish, except well-written and with soul. It could even be that these sequels were inevitable, I don’t know. But that doesn’t make the reactions to Wish less of a problem. Because if this is how we respond to risk-taking, what does that say? After all, isn’t the ultimate deciding factor our feedback, both vocally and financially?

Think about it.

The Omega Factor

The Clones are more interesting than the Jedi.

This was my sentiment post-Star Wars: The Clone Wars. Even with their occasional moments to shine in the Tartakovsky miniseries and Prequels, there were millions of them, and they acted and thought like human beings. It made sense that they’d have unique personalities, something I’m glad was elaborated on. Little did I know, however, that Clone Force 99 wouldn’t only become my favourite unit, but also warrant a spin-off series. That’s exactly what Star Wars: The Bad Batch was.

There are many ways to discuss my thoughts on this show: it’s a worthy successor to Star Wars: The Clone Wars and a nice tie-in to Star Wars Rebels. It’s more focused than both shows. Crosshair’s my favourite member of Clone Force 99. The final scene’s bittersweet in an uplifting way, a full-180 from Star Wars: The Clone Wars’s ending. Instead, I’ll zone-in on something I’d have never expected until suggested by the show: is Omega Force sensitive?

It's strange at first glance that the child character would be a Force wielder; after all, not only is she a full-on clone variant of Jango Fett, but Clones had never been canonically-Force sensitive prior. Still, like Asajj Ventress mentions, there are millions of Clones, so it’s not impossible. Omega even has a high M-count, so the show hinted at it before the curtain was pulled back. But is Omega, the preteen who’s the heart and soul for her gruffer brothers, capable of Force sensitivity? And would that make her a Jedi? It’s left open-ended.

Personally, I’d be down with this. Novelty of a Clone wielding a lightsaber aside, Ahsoka confirmed that Sabine Wren is Force sensitive in its Season 1 finale. And Omega’s revelation isn’t as forced as Sabine’s, having time to breathe while not smacking you in the face. Plus, Omega’s around the right age to be a Padawan, even if the exact number isn’t stated. So why not?

Omega being a Jedi would be a really neat concept. It’d also raise questions that’d expand the franchise in clever ways. For example, how does a Clone become Force sensitive? If the Sith influence Midichlorians to create life, was Omega’s Force sensitivity the result of Darth Sidious manipulating Jango Fett’s DNA? Did he plan for Omega to be his Plan B should Anakin not fall to The Dark Side? And did all the Kaminoans know, or only Nala Se?

None of these questions are answered, but, unlike Snoke’s existence, they don’t need to be. Star Wars is science-fantasy, and it’s also an enhanced D&D campaign. So much retconning occurs as lore’s retroactively grafted onto pre-existing lore that a Clone being Force sensitive isn’t that strange. Nor is it out of place given what The Force is capable of. Either way, I welcome Omega being Force sensitive. Like Grogu and Din Djarin, it’d be new territory for a franchise that’s risk-averse.

It also opens up superficial possibilities: would Omega have a blue lightsaber, a green lightsaber, or a purple lightsaber? Would she wield two lightsabers, or one? Would her robes be the standard grey and brown, or a different colour? Would she even wear robes? And how would she wield a lightsaber?

Going further, would Omega gain a Padawan of her own? Would it be one of the Force sensitive children she was locked up with on Tantiss? How quickly would she progress? And would she join Luke Skywalker’s new Jedi Academy, or go solo? There’s so much to work with since she was created for this show, thereby lacking the plot armour of Rex or Ahsoka. Most-importantly, it’d be great to see a newcomer become a Jedi naturally, like how Luke did in the original films.

I’m excited by a female Clone being Force sensitive. Ever since The EU was retconned by Disney, Star Wars fans have clamoured for that gaping hole to be filled. Force sensitive Clones was one idea that appeared to not survive the purge. Having it brought back, assuming Disney goes through with it, would be a step in the right direction. It’d also be cool.

I’m not one to shy away from being a contrarian amongst Star Wars fans. I liked the Disney Star Wars movies, and I thought The Prequels were enjoyable. I also thought Luke defeating Darktroopers in The Mandalorian singlehandedly added nothing to his character. And Andor bored me because of its pacing. Omega being Force sensitive is something I can get behind without attracting too much negative attention. I could be wrong, Star Wars fans are notoriously toxic, but I’ll chance it. I have nothing to lose.

In the end, there’s potential with Omega should she prove Force sensitive. She’s already well-loved, being the Grogu of Star Wars: The Bad Batch, and she’s capable even without The Force. It’d also clear up why she was a valuable asset to The Empire, as Palpatine had been kidnapping Force sensitive children to train as assassins. If anything, making Omega non-Force sensitive, in contrast to Sabine, would be a complete cop-out. But I’ve been let down before…

Here Brucey Brucey!

Whenever Jaws is mentioned, what comes to mind? Is it John Williams’s score? The image of a giant shark about to eat someone? Maybe even the odd line or two, often misquoted? I’d say all of those combined, but there’s also the uncomfortable elephant in the room:

I don’t consider Jaws one of the best action movies ever made.

It’s not terrible. A recent rewatch made me enjoy it more than I initially did. As for directors, even Steven Spielberg’s trash is more entertaining than most. I think Jaws was a perfect fit for him, showing off his eye for visual storytelling despite the problems Bruce, the shark prop, posed. But in terms of pure spectacle, he’s done better since.

Some of you are rolling your eyes now, and I get it. Why am I scrutinizing this movie for not meeting modern sensibilities? After all, it was already 15 years old when I was born, and technology has progressed significantly! But while true, being a classic doesn’t excuse something from criticism. If you want proof, read some my pieces on other movies from the same director.

I could spend forever deconstructing little details I find silly. Like how the mayor of Amity is a dimwit with blood on his hands. Or how Alex and Chrissy’s deaths are big plot points in the first-half, yet that dog from the first beach scene is never properly mourned. Or how the ending’s hilariously-schlocky and over-the-top, a key feature of Spielberg productions. All of these are funny, some more than others, but they don’t hold back the experience.

No, the real issue is the inconsistent pacing. I have nothing wrong with length. I even wrote a piece defending that! But while it doesn’t bother me, economically-inefficient storytelling does. And Jaws is a 2+ hour experience that doesn’t warrant its length. This is despite its limitations.

For example, the movie didn’t need three beach deaths. I understand Chrissy’s death, as she’s the inciting incident, and Alex’s too, but once it became clear that a man-eating shark was loose in the water the beaches should’ve closed and the hunt begun. Yes, the third beach attack highlights the folly of politicians, prioritizing selfishness, but shark attack #3 is an elaborate extension of shark attack #2, complete with an unnecessary fake-out.

Then there’s the gutting of the tiger shark. I understand that it’s a red herring, indicating that people are susceptible to false alarms, but it drags on. The movie makes a huge fuss as well, leading to shark attack #3, but I think it could’ve been cut down. It didn’t need to be a major plot point, and it brings the first half of the movie to a minor halt. It’s also resolved too quickly, with it never being brought up again.

Perhaps the biggest issues come in the second half. That’s where the main trio hunt for the shark. Again, I know filming had to accommodate a non-functioning prop, but it feels like a lot of the scenes are delaying the inevitable action moments. Even then, they go on for too long, with last-minute decisions that only serve to set up the finale. Even Williams’s score, which works in harrowing moments, transitions to lighthearted in the more triumphant moments. It get why, but it doesn’t work for me.

The dinner scene in the third-act, where the trio flesh out their characters, is way too long. What’s the point of showing scars? Does it serve a purpose, other than highlighting Hooper and Quint’s egos? And the song Hooper, Quint and Brody sing is catchy, but I doubt it’s necessary. Though that’s nitpicking.

Really though, this movie could’ve been tightened. If Jaws had shaved 15-20 minutes off its runtime, most in the second half, I’d have been more on board. As it stands, it feels way too long, simply because of the pacing. And yes, to reiterate, I know the movie was working with a malfunctioning shark prop. But there’s working with limitations, and there’s unnecessary padding, and this movie has both.

I wouldn’t be as frustrated if Spielberg hadn’t perfected suspense 18 years later with Jurassic Park. Like Jaws, that movie’s a victim of hokeyness, padding and red herrings. Unlike Jaws, the movie has unresolved plot threads, some of which aren’t referenced again. Yet while both movies share similar issues, Jurassic Park captures suspense and terror more-efficiently. CGI in 1993 was in its relative infancy, so, like with Bruce the Shark, Spielberg had to work with limitations. And he pulled it off by keeping the suspense and tension consistent in the second half.

This isn’t to demean the impact of Jaws, both for action movies and Spielberg’s career. It was huge in 1975, and its ripple effects can be felt in the way Summer blockbusters, particularly monster movies, are made now. Yet despite being enjoyable in 2024, even more than I remembered, I can’t call it one of Spielberg’s best. It’s not one of his worst either, but you get the picture. Besides, the behind-the-scenes of Jaws makes for the better movie, and I’m anxiously waiting on that to happen!

Folly and Boo

Joker left me with many negative feelings. It’s not only the last movie I saw with my late-Zaidy, it’s also one of the last movies I saw in theatres before the pandemic hit. Additionally, it was a mega-phenomenon despite not being that good, even earning Joaquin Phoenix an Oscar win. So now that its sequel has a trailer, I have to wonder if people understand what they’re in for. Especially given how confusing said trailer is.

I don’t hate anyone for being excited. I’ve been excited about plenty of movies other people weren’t, and I was on-board with Joker before I discovered what it was about. If Joker: Folie à Deux’s up your alley, that’s your prerogative. My goal’s to give a take on a sequel to something that not only didn’t impress me, but actively infuriated me. Okay? Good.

To start, let’s talk about Joker. Despite being annoyed, I enjoyed Joaquin Phoenix’s portrayal of Arthur. I thought the material he had was garbage, but Phoenix is one of those actors who can make trash work. Every line, down to the mind-numbingly awful ones, was given believability because of him, and even scenes he improvised, like his slow dance following the murders on the subway, have enough poise to distract from everything else. If all else, Phoenix made this movie.

That said, Arthur’s an awfully-written character. I know the conceit is to show how society stigmatizes mental illnesses, but some of the decisions Arthur makes are embarrassing. At one point he states that he’s “stopped taking his meds”, saying he’s “never felt better”. As someone who briefly went off his meds in university, I guarantee you that the increase in appetite and brief bursts in energy weren’t worth the self-loathing and aggression that followed. Not since childhood had I been that vicious and nasty, and I fail to see how this movie romanticizing such a decision curries Arthur’s sympathies.

Additionally, Arthur’s…scary. And not in a sympathetic or clever way. I know he has an uncontrollable laugh, and that life hates him, but the difference between being miserable and controlling what you can is what creates sympathy. I know people, some personally, who’ve had plenty of awful thrown their way, giving them every excuse to be curmudgeons, and have taken this as an opportunity for growth. Perhaps they were blessed with excellent supports, but-wait, no. Even people I know who’ve taken their lives had tried being positive until the end, and this is despite their support circles. Having mental illness is an unfortunate problem, but being a monster is a choice.

Arthur fails to take control of his life, using each misgiving as an opportunity for revenge. When the businessmen mock him on the subway, he shoots them. When his colleague demeans him at work, he later kills him by stabbing him and ramming his head against a wall. Even Murray, the late-night host who mocks Arthur on TV, gets shot on air. The one person Arthur shows compassion to, a dwarf colleague, is infantilized. Arthur might be mentally-ill, but he’s not sympathetic.

When I initially ripped Joker apart, a lot of people misunderstood my intentions. It remains one of my more-popular pieces on The Whitly-Verse, right up there with my rant about Korrasami. I want to set the record straight: I dislike Joker vehemently. It’s a sloppily-written mess with a crappy lead, even if Phoenix elevates the material. It’s also insulting to people with mental health issues, and it’s an exercise in making me feel angry and guilty for feeling angry simultaneously. It’s not the worst movie I’ve seen, as it’s also uninteresting, but that doesn’t make me less annoyed.

I’m, therefore, not looking forward to Joker: Folie à Deux, as it looks to be doubling down on what I disliked about the original: a mentally-ill protagonist using their lot in life as a violence vehicle? Check. A love interest who exploits that? Check. A movie masking its lack of worthwhile commentary with ill-timed musical numbers? Double check.

Seriously, why’s this a musical? It’s possible there was mis-marketing with the trailer, but I’m not convinced Joker: Folie à Deux would benefit from being a musical any more than the first movie benefitted from being set in the 1980’s. Especially when the song choices shown so far are low-grade cover numbers from better movies. I’m sure Todd Phillips has something in mind with this, but I’m not sold. But there’s always the possibility of me being proven wrong…

Even the one aspect sure to get people talking, Lady Gaga, has me raising eyebrows. And look, no disrespect to Lady Gaga. She’s a talented singer and, going by A Star Is Born, a decent actress. I also think this material suits her. But the one aspect that’d work in this movie’s favour, having her manipulate Arthur in a subversion of the relationship between Joker and Harley, doesn’t seem like it’ll be fully-realized since it’s too sophisticated and clever for this franchise. Again, I could be proven wrong.

I’m not sure Joker: Folie à Deux even understands what made the original a phenomenon: the origins of one of DC’s greatest supervillains. I’m not against this in theory either, similarly to how I wasn’t against Joker in theory. But if you’re going to double down on the ideas of the original, awful as they were, you need to go full-on. You also need to have teeth with bite, something I doubt this movie will. That’s what I’m concerned about.

Again, I don’t want to diminish the anticipation of those looking forward to Joker: Folie à Deux. The world’s dark and scary at times, and movies, even awful ones, provide escapism. Considering The US is also in the middle of preparing for a major election, one with real stakes, a brief distraction from that isn’t unwarranted. But that doesn’t mean that I have to be excited. Because I’m not, and it’s important that people not misconstrue that…even if there’s a chance it’ll happen anyway.

Princess Peach Transforms!

Princess Peach: Showtime! has been out for a bit, and the reactions have been…mostly positive, but also mixed. But I’ve already shared my thoughts. Instead, I’d like to rank the different costumes in the game. They’re all neat and have different strengths, so nothing I say is a personal attack on these concepts. I’m also only mentioning the 10 main costumes, discounting the one for the final boss. Finally, there’ll be minor spoilers, as it’s been long enough.

Anyway, let’s begin!

10. Patisserie Peach:

One of two modes in the demo, Patisserie Peach is my least-favourite costume. It’s not “bad”, but since baking’s the entire gimmick, you’d think there’d be more here than making cookies and decorating cakes within a time limit. But that’s exactly it. And even as an dabbler in baking myself, I don’t find this too inspired. Especially when it feels like this game’s answer to the Mario Party franchise.

I should double down on how this isn’t bad, though. For one, it takes a laid-back approach to Peach’s heroism. For another, it’s fun. Despite the cookie-making being rote, you have to mash X the right amount of times, seeing the final product is satisfying. The same goes for the cake decorating, even if I’ve yet to master laying down the icing.

The boss for Patisserie Peach is equally unique, constantly sabotaging your cookie making efforts while filling its own trays with them. You not only have to time your cookies, you also have to make sure the boss doesn’t land on and destroy them. It’s a game of multitasking, in other words. It’s also one of the few instances where the game could be considered “difficult”, with Peach losing hearts when she fails. Make of that what you will.

9. Figure Skater Peach:

The gimmick with niche appeal, Figure Skater Peach is also wonky control-wise. It works fine (mostly), but the figure skating to defeat enemies leaves plenty to be desired. Perhaps it’s that the conceit is about jumping and twirling. Or because the ice mechanics are too sensitive. Either way, I guess that’s accurate to in real life?

Once you get past the initial learning curve, it’s not that bad. It’s actually kind of fun! The best part is attempting the cool tricks you can pull off, like real figure skating, and seeing how they land. It not only allows for trial-and-error, it also taps into the skill needed to master the jumps and twirls. Even the secret areas require precision, adding some challenge. I like that.

The boss fights, where you must outperform your opponent and knock them off-guard, feed into the inexperience VS mastery component too. If you don’t time your twirls properly, even for a second, you’re not going to get far. And once you’ve recovered the Sparkle allies, you must skate a perfect circle around the boss and stun them. It’s glamorous, it’s unique, and it’s exciting! It’s exactly what I’d expect here, even if there are hiccups.

8. Cowgirl Peach:

It isn’t a romp without Cowgirl Peach! Set amidst a cliché Western, you have Peach’s trusty lasso and horse trotting through town. Like Figure Skater Peach, it leaves a lot to be desired. Unlike Figure Skater Peach, the controls aren’t difficult to master. All you need to know are how to jump and use your lasso. That’s it.

Cowgirl Peach throws a lot at you, and all at once. Not only is there lots of auto-scrolling, there are also many timed actions. In one instance, Peach has to get out of the way or she’ll be hit by a falling wall. In another instance, she has to yank a lever to prevent the captured Sparkle from being run over. Get it wrong, and you lose a heart.

It sounds like I’m complaining too much, but Cowgirl Peach is pretty fun! Despite the auto-scrolling and timed commands being frustrating, you still feel like you’re an old-timey cowgirl restoring justice! Plus, that horse is a masterwork of game design. It looks fake, yet steals the show anyway. I want to pet it!

7. Detective Peach:

Princess Peach: Showtime! uses one of its plays to ask, “What if Peach were a detective?”. And for the most part, it works! Granted, like the previous entries, the concept outweighs the execution, but that’s not to detract from the “Sherlock Holmes meets Ace Attorney” premise. It’s also slower-paced than other plays and has no action, forcing you to rely on your intuition. Or, rather, what this game considers intuition.

I appreciate the attempt at being different. Detective Peach is something I didn’t think I wanted, but not only is it utilized well, it’s even, at times, pretty funny. The stakes aren’t terribly high, they mostly rely on cliché premises, but the execution matters more. Who doesn’t want to see Peach snoop around and make funny pointing accusations? I do!

The one complaint I have is that Peach’s “Strike of Intuition”, where she points at something and shouts “Aha!”, isn’t terribly inspired. That, and you lose hearts for deducing incorrectly. Considering that Peach doesn’t follow her pointing with a statement, it also feels…wanting. It makes me wish there was more here than the bare-bones. But I guess little girls don’t care, and they’re the target audience.

6. Mermaid Peach:

Arguably the most “girly” concept in the game, Mermaid Peach actually lives up to its potential. The premise here is that Peach, being a mermaid, doesn’t fight. Instead, she uses her singing voice to control fish and get them to do her dirty work. It helps that this is perfect for Peach, given her lovely, flowery voice. And make no mistake, she can sing!

Of all the gimmicks in this game, Mermaid Peach is the most bare-bones conceptually. That’s not an insult, as “singing mermaid” needn’t be complicated. It’s also fun to see what hidden secrets can be unlocked with singing to fish, a sentence I never thought I’d write before playing this game. It even bucks the convention of water levels controlling poorly! What are the odds?

The part that holds it back is the concert at the end of each act. You have to sing in-sync with the direction the fish swim to line them up and make music. It’s not the most intuitive, especially since you have to pay attention and predict where the fish will go next. But hey! At least you get to hear Peach sing the acts off, right?

5. Dashing Thief Peach:

Now we get to one of the more interesting transformations. Dashing Thief Peach, contrary to the name suggesting, is less a Lupin III-type thief than a Robin Hood or Carmen Sandiego, as she steals back already stolen items. That doesn’t make her any less cool, though. Not only can she hack computers, she can hang from chandeliers and sneak around. And she can paraglide! Let’s not forget that.

This is one of the slickest outfits in Princess Peach: Showtime!. It’s also attached to one of the slickest plays. Even the Sparkle rescue is flipped on its head, with Peach working together with him to escape. It’s a nice bit of teamwork that’s absent from most of the plays, and it’s executed wonderfully. Plus, who doesn’t like paragliding? I’m acrophobic, and even I can’t resist!

To top everything off, Dashing Thief Peach oozes coolness: her design? Cool. Her level designs? Cool. Her escapes in her glider? You’d better believe they’re cool! It’s cool all around, and I wouldn’t have it any other way!

4. Swordfighter Peach:

The other mode available in the demo, Swordfighter Peach is the most anime-inspired. Think Utena Tenjou, and you have a rough understanding of Swordfighter Peach. She slashes up, down, left and right with her sword, making quick work of enemies and vines. It’s not the most sophisticated, she swishes like she’s fencing, but it’s cool to see anyway. It’s also lots of fun watching enemies fly off the screen when stabbed.

There’s a lot to like. The most interesting part, however, is her actual design. You have her cowl, her boots, her captain’s hat, complete with a rose, and her sword. All of this would be fun enough, but Peach also has a dodging maneuver that allows her to evade attacks and jump on top of enemies. It takes a little bit of skill to pull off, but man is it ever satisfying! I keep getting a dopamine rush when I hear Peach shout “Leave it to me!” before flipping in the air and landing a perfect blow.

Swordfighter Peach is pure fun. Who doesn’t enjoy fighting bats, suits of armour and giant plant monsters with a sword? I do! It might be “monotonous” or “repetitive” to some, as other games “have done this better”, but remember that this is meant for young girls. In that sense, I think it does the trick. En garde!

3. Mighty Peach:

Mighty Peach is this game’s answer to the Mega Man franchise. It’s the most Super Sentai-esque costume design too, right down to the visor and super strength. I know we complain these days of “superhero fatigue”, but being a superhero is still one of the ultimate fantasies. Who doesn’t love picking up trucks with their hands and tossing them like confetti? Or flying in the air and punching enemies? I do!

This may be a dumb-downed version of a Mega Man game, in that it involves saving Sparkles, but it never wears out its welcome. There’s always something new to keep everything fresh, whether it be putting out fires or creating bridges. And when that gets boring? Time to fly. Like a traditional, side-scrolling shooter, Mighty Peach takes on enemies with her fists.

You know something? That’s the best part of Mighty Peach. Forget saving Sparkles, picking up trucks and throwing enemies saucers, Peach taking down enemies in the sky is the highlight. It doesn’t matter how big they are either, she can still punch her way through them with ease. I love it.

2. Kung Fu Peach:

Have you ever watched a Jackie Chan movie and thought, “This is awesome, but what if Princess Peach could do that?”? Well, think it no more! Here’s Kung Fu Peach! It was tough between this and my #1 spot, but Kung Fu Peach coming in 2nd place isn’t bad. If anything, it’s a testament to how unique the different costumes and plays are! Nowhere’s this more noticeable than in the punching, kicking, prop-breaking, pole-swinging, action-heavy experience of “Princess Peach in Ancient China”.

I’m not kidding. For all the weirdness this game offers, nothing’s more inspired than Princess Peach as a Kung Fu fighter. The controls are also really intuitive, with Peach only needing to know how to kick and jump. But that’s not a detriment to the experience, as the combo-less combos are nothing short of amazing. Seriously, watch Peach swing around a pole and kick enemies and not tell me that’s awesome. I dare you!

Even the boss fights are cool, using timed buttons presses to great effect. The fights pull these off without you realizing they’re quick-time events, a feature I normally despise. If the frequent pole twirling and props being destroyed weren’t enough, these boss fights easily sell you on the experience. Which begs the question: why haven’t we gotten a Princess Peach fighting game yet? She’s perfect for one!

1. Ninja Peach:

You knew this’d be my #1 choice. Not only is Princess Peach as a ninja assassin, right alongside dabbling in Kung Fu, a perfect fit for its own game, but it matches the general aesthetic of this one. Ignoring everything else, Princess Peach was born to be a ninja. She not only looks graceful in her movements, she has the stealth aspect down perfectly. Which is great because this play relies on sneaking up behind guards and taking them out. Forget Ninja Gaiden, Ninja Peach is where it’s at!

There’s so much about this setup that makes the game worth it. Whether it’s Peach’s wardrobe being awesome, or how she takes advantage of her surroundings with “camouflage”, Ninja Peach is the kind of idea that only Nintendo could approve of merging with a play. It helps that she can run on walls. Did I mention that she can run on walls? Because that’s a key part of the experience.

If that doesn’t pique your interest, Ninja Peach can also manipulate environments to confuse enemies. Like Kung Fu Peach, the scenery’s a big part of everything. Unlike Kung Fu Peach, utilizing the scenery requires stealth, which means spinning walls and dropping down on enemies. Even the boss requires a timed swipe during a confrontation with it and the rescued Sparkle. Couple that with a disco-themed stealth riff on the main motif, and you’ve got yourself a winner.

And there you go: my ranking of the different costumes in Princess Peach: Showtime!. Be sure to pick up and play the game, and I’ll see you next time!

Reviewers Being Peachy

I want to acknowledge upfront the irony of me complaining about a game for young girls. And I don’t mean that in the way you’d think. As indicated by previous pieces, I was looking forward to Princess Peach: Showtime!. And having played it, I was satisfied. My issue stems from something macrocosmic: the target audience here is little girls, but the people discussing this game are mostly adult males.

I’m all for reviewers having opinions. I’ve defended them on numerous occasions when it comes to movies, and my thoughts extend to video games. Additionally, I’ve learned to accept when a widely-praised game isn’t for me, as well as when something people were lukewarm on was. Given my last discussion of a video game talked about a flaw not normally discussed, I’m aware of what it means to be divided. Essentially, nothing I’m about to say is a personal attack.

Anyway, I watched The Completionist’s review of Princess Peach: Showtime!. In it, he laid down his frustrations, stating that while not bad, he was nevertheless disappointed. To be fair, I see where he’s coming from. But while I respect Jirard, I think he’s the wrong person to be reviewing the game fairly. And it’s not only him, I think most professional reviewers who’ve discussed it are the wrong demographic.

Despite the premise, Princess Peach: Showtime! is meant for girls. In particular, it’s meant for girls who are old enough to read and play video games, but young enough where this is still perfect for them. It isn’t overly-difficult, even if I struggled in a few places, but a 6 or 7 year-old would definitely find it challenging. In a sense, it’s the Switch’s modern-day answer to Yoshi’s Story, except better made. I think that needs acknowledging.

Additionally, a jaded male is the wrong perspective here. I respect Jirard, but his life experiences make him a bad candidate to be honest about Princess Peach: Showtime!. Really and truly, this game needs to be reviewed by a woman. Even if the overall sentiment’s still negative, at least that life experience clicks better. It’s as simple as that.

I think Girlfriend Reviews should take a crack at this game. I know the channel well, having watched many of their reviews, and Shelby seems like the perfect candidate. She’s a woman, for one, but she also struggles with most video games, usually describing her experiences via her partner. She even has the unique experience of being a casual gamer talking about video games through a cutesy and comedic lens, which works perfectly here. Shelby’s the kind of voice we need more of.

So why aren’t we seeing that? The obvious answer, unfortunately, is that sexism still prevails. It’s no secret that various companies, Nintendo included, have an issue with sexism, which extends to reviewing. It explains why so many people discussing this game are men. It also explains the uncomfortable feelings I’m experiencing with seeing and reading most of the reviews, however honest or upfront they are.

Besides, what’s wrong with a feminine perspective? My male privilege makes saying that sound forced, but having unique voices helps art criticism move forward. It’s especially true when the subject in question could benefit from it, in this case a play-themed video game starring Princess Peach. What better opportunity for a female theatre nerd to talk about this game? Who better than to shed light on it?

I guess that’s why I’ve stayed clear of certain subjects that lean female-centric before. I thought The Marvels was okay, but I’m not its target demographic. I respected the 2016 Ghostbusters, flaws and all, but I’m not its target demographic. And while I have appreciation for the impact Sailor Moon has made on anime-you get the picture. There are some topics where I don’t feel my voice is needed.

Princess Peach: Showtime! is being discussed by the wrong people right now. And yes, males are allowed to have thoughts. Personally, I was impressed! And yes, it’s true that not all women will be head-over-heels in-love with it either, because women aren’t monolithic. But until we get to hear them, we’ll never be able to have with an honest conversation.

Also, the game’s still new. And it needs time to resonate with everyone. I loved it myself, but that’s because it felt fresh and unique. I was happy playing a straightforward game without any external help in three nights, a rarity for me. But perhaps I’ll enjoy it more on replay, where I can appreciate the finer details? Who knows?!

This is what’s being missed in the initial reactions too: time. True, the game isn’t flawless, as evidenced by occasional frame-rate dips and some slight wonkiness of controls. But that’s offset by it being a relatively new experience. If this game clicks with its target demographic, and I hope it does, we could end up with a cult classic. That’s exciting, especially since the title character, Princess Peach, is so frequently overlooked!

However, before Peach can walk on her own, she needs to stumble and fall several times. And her accomplishments need to be acknowledged and respected by the right audience. Which is why people like Jirard, for all their insights, are the wrong demographic to discuss Princess Peach: Showtime!, as their honesty’s tainted by their experiences. Is it unfortunate? Yes, but it’s true.

I don’t mean to intentionally trash Jirard. He seems like a genuine and sincere individual, and he gets enough crap over his charity debacle. I also respect and admire his honesty, particularly in acknowledging that he’s the wrong audience for Princess Peach: Showtime!. But I think he’s the wrong person to be reviewing it, for the aforementioned reasons. He’s entitled to his opinions, but, as with all male reviewers, they should be taken with a grain of salt. Especially when a female perspective’s desperately needed!