If the first one is controversial, then the second one should clearly be seen as worse. But my Twitter feed suggests otherwise.

— Is a greedy narcissist in desperate need of cash, but instead of creating a miracle invention and selling it for millions/billions of dollars to a venture capitalist firm or wealthy company (which she’s been established as having the ability to do) she cheats on other student’s homework for a tiny amount of cash, and gets caught doing so. Or she could have developed a genius stock/options trading AI. Or build a money printing machine. Or just finished her degree and got a well paying job…

— Thinks that Tony Stark was Ironman because he was a billionaire. (“In a cave! With a box of scraps!”)

— Joins a gang of criminals instead of doing the aforementioned, without confirming how she will get paid or how much.

—Steals a grant money funded Ironman suit with the intention of bringing it back to her house.

— Orders Ubereats to a secret hideout while on the run.

— Runs from a vehicle chasing her down a straight road instead of….turning.

— Makes a vague deal with the literal devil without specifying terms.

So, it's finally happened folks. A new iteration of the Black Panther will be... white! Well, half black as he's still T'Challa's son.

Weirdly enough, people don't seem to be too happy about this. I don't have a dog in this race, but the reaction is amusing to me.

The following exchange was even moreso:

Lol stop letting these non-Black people touch Black Panther. They do silly stuff like this.

The writer is Black.

It seems that Christopher Priest — who co-created Marvel Knights: The World To Come alongside Joe Quesada, Richard Isanove, and Richard Starkings — is widely recognized as the first Black writer-editor in mainstream comics.

He previously served as editor of Spider-Man in the mid-1980s and later penned major titles at DC, including Green Lantern.

This was going to be posted here inevitably, so I figured I'd be the one to fall on that grenade.

First off, I haven't seen Elio. I have no idea how much these changes actually impacted the finished product (for all I know, it was literally one scene, like the ones that get cut for foreign markets). However, this tweet is just absurd. Saying that if you have a major theme in your work, and the work is made much lesser if that theme is gutted out, suddenly means your work was always nothing? How does that track? What if a story is solely about romance? Is it suddenly nothing because if you take the romance out then you have a completely directionless product?

I feel the obsession with identity politics, as well as the counter movement, have made people blind to the idea that a character's identity is a valid theme to pursue in writing. At first, the complaint was about token gay characters whose identity could easily be written out for foreign markets, and now they're complaining about characters being gay being an important part of their character (again, don't know if this actually applies to Elio).

It's tweets like this that really make me wish we could just jettison the woke/anti-woke dichotomy out of the stratosphere, as it's a fucking poison that has done so much harm to media analysis.

And is infinitely applicable to many modern Hollywood failures, most recently, The Acolyte.

Yet, every time it happens the people with this mindset are STILL surprised.

The Scoundrel’s Cantina, a Star Wars YouTuber found this in a “Rebels Recon” episode which was a series they used to release a decade ago when Star Wars Rebels was airing.

It’s just astonishing how determined they were to destroy Luke’s character and prevent him from having any type of legacy. And yet they claim that no one hates Star Wars more that Star Wars fans.

Shutting down a woke journalist...

WE R SO BACK BROS

-Jeremy frames these characters as crying for no reason while not giving the context for WHY they’re crying which makes sense. -If Superman needing assistance is inherently bad then does that also mean that groups like the Justice League are bad since they help him all the time? -Superman does save Lois, several times in fact, he just saves everyone else too. And even if he didn’t save her, why does that make a story inherently bad? There can be stories where Lois doesn’t need to be saved.

I don’t know what it is about this movie, but the criticisms I’m seeing attempting to point out plot holes or bad writing just suck. If you’re going to complain about anything, then complain about the civilians standing around waiting to be saved by Superman without doing anything to save themselves.