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.

The Australian children's cartoon Bluey has been in the news a lot lately. Disney is planning to add Bluey attractions to its theme parks and cruise ships. The show will be getting a full-length feature film with an expected release date in 2027. The show's creator, Jeff Blum, will also be leaving the production of the show in order to focus on the creation of that feature film. Will the show be the same without him? Who knows?

More interestingly, people on social media freaked out when Bluey was nominated for the US Critics Choice awards for 2023's "best animated series". Its competitors were Harley Quinn, Bob's Burgers, Scott Pilgrim Takes Off, Star Trek: Lower Decks, and Young Love. Many people were upset and (in some cases) "offended" by a children's cartoon being nominated alongside those other, more serious, "adult" shows. They argued that Bluey could be a nominee for "best children's cartoon", but that it should not be a serious contender for "best animated show".

Bluey was nominated for "Best Animated Series" in 2023, alongside Harley Quinn, Lower Decks, and others.

Those people are wrong, because whether you're a child or not, Bluey is a fantastic TV show. It is full of heart and clever writing. It also excels at visual storytelling, making the most out of its short run-times (each episode is less than 8 minutes long) to tell densely-packed (but easily-digestible) stories. It has plenty of silly episodes about children doing child things, but it also has some genuinely moving episodes that should be enjoyable to people of all ages.

To put this into a context that more of my readers would probably understand, when Bluey is at its best, it features emotional moments that make me tear up like the most sentimental episodes of Futurama. Think of moments from Futurama such as the epilogue of "Jurassic Bark", with the dog waiting outside the pizza shop for Fry to return. Or the twist in "Luck of the Fry-ish" when Fry finds the memorial to his "brother" on Mars. Or the montage at the end of "Leela's Homeworld" when we get to see all those little "happy coincidences" that followed Leela around through her youth. Or the ending of "The Devil's Hands Are Idle Playthings", when Fry performs his opera for Leela. Bluey is full of those sorts of moments, and whenever they come around, the show absolutely nails them, every single time!

And I think Futurama is an especially apt comparison because so many of Futurama's best, most tear-jerking moments are about the relationships between family (or in some cases, pets).

season 4, episode 7. © Fox

season 4, episode 2. © Fox

The only cartoon that I can think of that has as much heart as Bluey is Futurama.

Yes, it's true that you probably won't relate to Bluey as much if you aren't a parent. But there's also plenty here for siblings to relate to. Or if you have ever been a care-giver or baby-sitter for a young niece or nephew.

Similar to Pixar movies, Bluey is loaded to the brim with jokes, sight gags, and content that adults (parents in particular) will relate to and be amused by. Whether it's the messiness of the backseat of the car, or being kicked by a child sleeping in bed with mom and dad, or noticing a few extra gray hairs or rolls of fat, adults will see themselves and their family reflected in many of Bluey's expertly-crafted scenes. The show also does not shy away from talking about (or at least hinting at) very adult and serious topics. Several episodes focus on growing old and dealing with declining health. Other episodes touch on infertility and failed pregnancy. Yet others are about the stress or anxiety of starting a new job. Everything may be filtered through the perspective of the children, but adult subjects are brought up, and they can sometimes hit very hard.

So yes, Bluey is really that good! It deserves to be nominated for every award that it is nominated for. I haven't watched all the shows that were nominated against Bluey, so I cannot speak as to whether Bluey deserves those awards more than the other shows, but it definitely deserves to be in the discussion.

© 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've always seen Fallout as a bleak and cynical video game series. Yes, it has humor, but that humor is, itself, very dark and cynical. As such, the goofy, slapstick humor of the early episodes of Amazon Prime's Fallout TV show were a bit off-putting for me.

Around episode 3 or 4, however, the tone begins to shift. From then on, this show is Fallout through and through. It is violent. It is graphic. It is cynical.

Amazon did a fantastic job with the cast. Ella Purnell is fantastic as the innocent and naïve vault-dweller (named Lucy) who serves as the audience surrogate for exploring this world, as well as an adaptation of the player avatar for all of us who tried to play the first game's Vault-Dweller in a "good karma" playthrough. Aaron Clifton Moten has a weird, detached quality to his performance as Maximus, as if Maximus is half sleep-walking through the events. As weird as the performance is, it does give a genuine sense that Maximus is just completely callous and desensitized to the violence and cruelty of the Wasteland, and he only ever seems to perk up when that cruelty gives way to some kind of comfort or happiness.

The side characters are also well cast and entertaining. From Kyle MacLachlan's vault-daddy, to Matt Berry as the voice of the Mr. Handy robots, and all the Wasteland inhabitants and vault-dwellers in between, everybody is great.

But the real show-stealer is Walton Goggins as the movie cowboy-turned-ghoul bounty hunter Cooper Howard. He steals every scene he's in, and gives off just the right combination of confidence, charm, and antagonism befitting such a gun-slinging cowboy anti-hero. We also see empathy and vulnerability in his character, especially in the flashbacks to the pre-war times.

© Amazon.

Walton Goggins steals the show, even if his make-up leaves a little to be desired.

The lower budget of a TV show does make itself apparent with some of the makeup effects and one character's digital de-aging effect looking pretty bad. Walton Goggin's ghoul makeup looks more like he's cosplaying the Red Skull than being one of the rotting zombies wandering the wastes. I'm wondering if this was the result of a contractual requirement that the actor's makeup not be too uncomfortable or hide too much of his face, because other ghoul characters and extras that we see in the later episodes look pretty ghoulish.

But other than that, the show looks good. The Wasteland has that eerie beauty that we come to expect from a post-apocalyptic landscape. Whatever money was saved on Walton Goggins' makeup must have been spent on the Power Armor costumes. The Power Armor costumes look fantastic and move surprisingly well for being such a large and bulky practical effect. Being an actual costume (or maybe a puppet?), the Power Armor has an appropriate dirty and weathered look to it, and doesn't clash with the scenery in the way I usually expect a CG character to look.

After posting 2 essays about how Deep Space Nine realizes the ideals of Star Trek and how it was ahead of its time, I would feel remiss if I concluded any discussion of the greatness of Star Trek Deep Space Nine without praising its outstanding cast of recurring guest actors and characters. Seriously, DS9's recurring guest characters are some of the true highlights of the entire show. Their natural charisma as performers is bolstered by the show's fundamental structure as a serialized story, and its setting on a stationary outpost. These two decisions in the design and production of the show allow guest characters to recur frequently, with their own storylines and arcs, and helps make them just as vital to the plot of the show as any of the main cast.

As mentioned previously, Deep Space Nine wasn't a starship like the Enterprise. It didn't have the luxury of sailing off into the sunset at the conclusion of every episode, leaving the people and problems of the episode behind. The crew of Deep Space Nine were stuck dealing with the long-term fallout of the events of any particular episode, and that included the circumstances of characters in the station's immediate neighborhood. Some of these characters come and go, leaving Deep Space Nine behind forever. But others become permanent fixtures on the show, almost as much a part of the main cast as Armin Shimerman or Andrew Robinson.

Being a stationary starbase, a diverse collection of guest characters repeatedly visit Deep Space 9.

The following post will discuss specific plot points regarding multiple guest characters, including some who don't appear until the later seasons of the series. As such, this post will have the most explicit story spoilers of any of these 3 Deep Space Nine retrospectives. Read on at your own risk.

Star Trek's best villain(s)

The highlight of Deep Space Nine's guest cast is its principle villain, the best villain in all of Star Trek: Gul Dukat.

Yes, you read that right. Dukat is Trek's best bad guy.

Dukat is better than Khan. Better than General Chang (but only barely). Better than the Borg (and their stupid queen). Certainly better than the Duras Sisters or any of Trek's rogues gallery of throwaway villains like Commander Kruge. He's better even than Q -- if you want to consider Q a "villain" to begin with.

- Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, copyright Paramount Pictures.

Sorry Khan, I do not think you are Star Trek's best villain. You're 2nd place, at best.

Yes, Dukat is my favorite Trek villain -- by a long shot. It's not even close.