Ever since Captain America: Winter Soldier and And Man (and also Logan), I've been eagerly awaiting Marvel Studios to be able to make a Fantastic Four movie. Winter Soldier and Ant Man were both genre pieces (a spy thriller and heist film, respectively). And, of course, Logan (not made by Marvel) is a western. The success of those movies as both comic book films and also genre films had me excited for the potential of a Fantastic Four movie that would be a science fiction genre film.

After all, the Fantastic Four differ from most other comic book heroes in that they don't just save the city or the world from bad guys, but they are also scientists and exploders. Many of their comic book adventures involve them flying their rocket ship into space to explore new planets and phenomena, and interacting with cosmic and celestial beings.

It took a long time for Marvel to re-acquire the rights to Fantastic Four (by its parent company, Disney, outright buying the previous rights-holder, Fox). In the meantime, Black Panther kind of beat Fantastic Four to the punch as Marvel's "sci-fi" genre piece. But that didn't lessen my anticipation.

This is the first Marvel movie in a long while that doesn't feel like it requires homework. It stands alone, and is a welcome breath of fresh air. It also feels much more in line with the good movies from phases 1 and 2, in terms of both its quality, and also in its lack of baggage. It's easily the best Fantastic Four movie (and I'm someone who thought the first 2 from the early 2000's were just fine), and it's probably the best Marvel movie since Infinity War.

Silver Age Sci-Fi

But is First Steps a "science fiction" movie?

It certainly has a lot of the trappings of a science fiction film. First and foremost is its wonderful 1960 retro-future aesthetic that feels like it's pulled straight from a 60's-era silver age comic or science fiction pulp. Much in-line with science fiction, the central problem of the movie (and, in fact, many smaller problems as well) is treated more like a scientific or engineering problem that the four have to solve. This is in contrast to most other super hero movie that simply requires the hero to play "detective" to figure out where the bad guy is going to be, and what their weakness is. And of course, there's a healthy dose of outer space adventure in the middle of the movie.

Unfortunately, the space-faring adventure is just that: adventure. There's little in the way of exploration or discovery.

Image ©: Walt Disney, Marvel

There is a stand-out space-faring chase scene.

The outer space scenes do make for a pretty spectacular set piece though. I particularly loved the way that the heroes use the gravitational time-dilation of a neutron star to help them resolve a problem, and then have to calculate a sling-shot maneuver to seal their own escape. It's the sort of thing that you would see in a sci-fi pulp story, or even in an episode of Star Trek (though this movie involves a lot more visual spectacle).

There's a new Spider-Man cartoon on Disney Plus, and sadly, it is not a reboot or continuation of Spectacular Spider-Man, which, as far as I know, is still stuck in a frustrating legal limbo in which neither Disney nor Sony completely own its rights. Instead, what we have is a cartoon that couldn't decide whether it wanted to be a prequel to Spider-Man: Homecoming, or a completely new adaptation of the comics. It would be very easy for such a project to lack a strong sense of identity, and to have an incoherent plot that feels like parts of 2 different plots haphazardly stitched together. Thankfully, that isn't the case, and Your Friendly Neighborhood Spider-Man actually comes out to be a pretty good Spider-Man cartoon.

It definitely still retains many aesthetic and narrative elements from its original conception as an MCU prequel. Aunt May is clearly based on Marissa Tomai's version of the character from the MCU. The Sokovia Accords and Superhero Registration Act are important parts of the show's backstory. And cameos by Doctor Strange, Iron Man, and others definitely feel like the MCU versions of those characters.

But this definitely isn't a prequel to the MCU's Spider-Man. First and foremost, the Sokovia Accords have already been put into place without Spider-Man being involved in the events of this story's version of Civil War, which is referenced several times. It also features a completely different cast of characters. There are no traces of characters like Ned Leeds, MJ, or Liz Allen. And it does feature characters like Norman and Harry Osborn, neither of whom have appeared (properly) in the MCU movies.

So this is a show that will definitely be familiar to people who have watched the MCU, but its lack of continuity with the MCU might turn die-hard MCU fans away.

Thankfully, I don't care if the show follows strict MCU continuity. All I care about is whether it's a good adaptation of Spider-Man. And it mostly is.

©: Walt Disney Co.

The connections to the live-action MCU are nebulous.

© Walt Disney Corporation, Marvel Animation.

This wave of nostalgic reboots is becoming so overwhelmingly exhausting. I almost avoided watching X-Men '97 out of principle. I can barely remember the last TV show or movie that I watched, or last video game that I played, that wasn't based on a '90's or '80's IP. At least Shogun and Three-Body Problem are based on novels, instead of movies and TV shows that I watched in elementary school.

I'm glad I did watch X-Men '97 though. It's pretty damn good. It's also depressing though. It's a reminder of how little has changed in 30 years, and how, in some ways, things have gotten worse. There was a hopeful optimism in the '90's. But now, properties like X-Men and Star Trek are reminding us of how fragile our progress is. How quickly and easily it can all be undone.

The X-Men are just as powerful and poignant as they were in the '80's and '90's, and the metaphors still work depressingly well. I had hoped we'd be past this by now. Maybe we never will be.

Despite being a little more bleak in tone, X-Men '97 is both a pitch-perfect continuation of the X-Men: Animated Series for children, and also a new experience for a more mature audience. This show is move violent, more graphic, and people die! But it's not excessive or obscene. It's not Game Of Thrones, and I would have no problem letting any comic book-reading child watch it.

It's also bonkers! The stories here go to crazy places, and do crazy things -- crazy even for comic books. But just as with the original show, these stories (as crazy as they are) are faithfully adapted from the comic book source material -- some of the craziest comic book source material.

I admit, I only kind of half pay attention to the new Star Wars and Marvel shows on Disney Plus. Both have so thoroughly over-saturated the market that there's just no excitement about either franchise anymore. A lot of the stories in Star Wars in particular feel like they're scraping the bottom of the barrel for any idea that some bean-counter feels is worth filming. Marvel at least has the advantage of progressing a continuous narrative forward, even if it's currently moving at a glacial pace. Star Wars is widely regarded as having shat the bed with the sequel trilogy (I still haven't bothered to watch Rise of Skywalker), so now it's completely fixated on just back-filling the details adjacent to the parts of the franchise that were actually good, while insisting that the same handful of characters have their hands in everything important that has ever happened in this universe. Anyway, sorry for the Star Wars tangent; I'm supposed to be talking about a Marvel show right now. I wonder how long it will be before Disney gets so desperate that they start crossing-over Marvel and Star Wars?

Anyway, the point is that I've been kind of "meh" about almost everything that Marvel has put out since Infinity War. So "meh" that I couldn't even be bothered to write reviews or impressions of most of it. So much of the content just feels like it's running in place from a narrative standpoint, or that it's just an elaborate setup and tease for bigger, more important future content. Just get to the Fantastic 4 and X-Men and Kang the Conqueror or Dr. Doom or whoever the next big bad Thanos-wannabe is going to be already!

Loki Episode 6, © Disney, Marvel.

WandaVision Episode 9, © Disney, Marvel.

Marvel's shows feel largely like teases for the good stuff that's still just over the horizon.

I went into She-Hulk expecting more of the same: a show that serves only to bridge the gap between Endgame and whatever is next, instead of really being a story in its own right. But after a couple episodes of only half watching, I found myself putting my laptop away and actually paying attention as we got further and further into the season. The reason is that She-Hulk doesn't feel like filler content; it feels like an actual TV show that exists for its own sake and is content to tell its own story.

Yeah, sure, it's still tied into what's going on in the broader Marvel universe. OG Hulk gets kid-napped by aliens and disappears for most of the series, which is definitely a tease for some bigger things happening out in the periphery. But while shows like Loki seemed to exist only to build some interest and intrigue about what's going to happen next, She-Hulk is just a show about Jennifer Walters coming to terms with her new, public identity as She-Hulk.

This leads to a more personal, intimate super hero story than I'm used to seeing from the never-ending parade of comic book movies that always have to have apocalyptic stakes. Yeah, sure, Spider-Man deals heavily with Peter Parker balancing his personal and social life with his hero duties, but the focus on teenage and high school drama isn't something that I relate to as much anymore. And yeah, both WandaVision and Loki get very personal, but neither of those allow us to see the heroes living their lives in real life. They both take place in highly exaggerated or outright fictional realities. So She-Hulk feels different. It's largely about Jennifer Walters' life now that she is a super hero. Not her life as a super hero; her normal, everyday life since becoming a super hero.

Where can the Marvel Cinematic Universe go after Thanos? My vote is for Doctor Doom to be the next overarching big baddie now that Disney owns Fox (and the Fantastic Four license). Thanos already successfully wiped out half of all life in the universe, and despite the Avengers gaining access to a time machine, they did not undo any of that! How do you up the stakes going into the next phase of Marvel movies?

Well, introducing a multi-verse seems like the logical next step.

It's so logical, in fact that Marvel didn't even seem to hide the idea in Far From Home's marketing. The second trailer, which I think premiered within a week of Endgame's release, pushed the multi-verse idea hard -- as well as spoiling Tony Stark's death for anyone who hadn't made it out to see Endgame within that first week.

It's all spoilers from the next paragraph on. If you haven't seen the movie yet, then I recommend it. It's good! Not Into the Spider-Verse good, but Far From Home is one of the better Marvel movies, and Mysterio is totally awesome.

...