‘Ironheart' Ended Strong, It Deserved Better Than This From Disney
While I wasn't sold on the first three episodes of Ironheart when they aired last week, as reviews said, it really did pick up in the second half, and by the end, it delivered on its potential. But the show and character deserved better than how Disney delivered this series.
The promotion for Ironheart has been all over the place. Despite the fact that it was allegedly ready to air some time ago, Ironheart was released a full three years after Riri Williams had her high-profile debut in Black Panther: Wakanda Forever, when it should have been developed and aired much closer to that release. In addition to that, its late airing and focus on magic feels well outside anything that Marvel is currently doing, either on TV with its street-level punchy-shooty heroes like Daredevil or Punisher, or its larger Fantastic Four/Avengers projects. I would be floored if Riri ended up in either.
I was extremely impressed with Dominique Thorne as the lead here, who didn't especially catch my eye with her appearance in Wakanda Forever but here, I thought she gave a charismatic, compelling performance in a way I feel like I haven't seen in one of these series since Iman Velani's Ms. Marvel.
Ironheart
Ironheart was a grounded tale in the sense that it was focused on both grief and the subsequent anxiety it brings. I can't say I've ever seen a hero actively have believable panic attacks in the Marvel universe before, and none of it felt forced.
Action-wise, it's clear that this show has a larger budget than its viewership will justify, but its use of non-nanotech, mechanical suits is something that got lost in the MCU over time, and it was great to see it back. It would have been nice to see more than a single real suit fight, but alas, that's where the budget kicks in, no doubt.
The show struggled the most with its villain, The Hood, though his character got better by the end (his outfit, however, did not). Easily the most MCU-significant moment of the series is finally the introduction of Mephisto after endless theorizing about his appearance in past series like WandaVision or Agatha All Along. Marvel decided to finally show him off here, and in more than just a post-credit tease or something along those lines. Sascha Baron Cohen may have seemed like an odd choice for the part, but he was excellent.
Mephisto
But the way this show has been handled, despite being set up for a second season dealing with the aftermath of Riri's deal with the devil, it seems almost certain nothing will come of this. There are no places where it feels like Riri or Mephisto would be slotted into the larger MCU from here, given its current focus and its next phase being X-Men-based.
Ironheart was dumped out in three-episode batches with little fanfare, too late after it should have aired, and seemingly with no large plans to plug these great new characters in anywhere else. That's a shame. Watch it, appreciate it, but I guess now we just move on.
Follow me on Twitter, YouTube, Bluesky and Instagram.
Pick up my sci-fi novels the Herokiller series and The Earthborn Trilogy.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Forbes
an hour ago
- Forbes
Where To Stream 'Sinners' Online As 2025's Best Movie Finally Starts Streaming Today
Sinners There have been quite a few excellent films in 2025, but few as compelling or memorable as Ryan Coogler's Sinners, which finally comes to streaming starting today. Once you're done with your 4th of July festivities, wind down your evening with one of the best movies of 2025. Of course, this isn't exactly a wind-down movie. The story is set in the 1930s in Mississippi and follows twin brothers, 'Smoke' and 'Stack' who have returned home after years spent as mobsters up north during the prohibition era. They've come home with their ill-gotten gains in the hopes of starting a juke joint for the local black community. Things don't go quite according to plan. Both Smoke and Stack are played by Michael B. Jordan. They're joined by Hailee Steinfeld, Li Jun Li, Omar Benson Miller, Wunmi Mosaku, Jayme Lawson, Delroy Lindo and Jack O'Connell, who plays a mysterious stranger with his own plans for our heroes. The KKK makes an appearance as well, though they're far from the most terrifying foes our heroes encounter. This is a great movie on so many levels. Terrific action, brilliant performances, a tightly wound story that's at once scary, sexy and bloodsoaked. Like other black horror films such as Jordan Peele's Get Out, it takes a hard look at America's past and the ways racism shaped this nation. Sinners was a commercial and critical success, earning over $360 million worldwide against a production budget of around $90 million. This is an enormous hit for an R-rated original film, especially in a day and age when big franchises like the MCU dominate the box office. The film boasts a near-perfect Rotten Tomatoes score with both critics and audiences. 97% of critics recommend the movie, while Sinners earned a 96% from audiences. This is one of those rare films that both groups seem to love equally. Sinners is available now on HBO Max. Of course, if you want to watch it in all its 4K glory with the best sound possible, I recommend you order the 4K Blu-Ray version. Physical media still gives you the best picture and, more importantly with this movie in particular, the best sound. As action-packed and terrifying as Sinners is, it's the film's music and the way the music ties into the story that sets it apart from the rest of 2025's offerings. The 4K Blu-Ray releases on July 8th. You can read my review of Sinners right here. Have you seen Sinners yet? What did you think? Let me know on Twitter, Instagram, Bluesky or Facebook. Also be sure to subscribe to my YouTube channel and follow me here on this blog. Sign up for my newsletter for more reviews and commentary on entertainment and cult
Vox
an hour ago
- Vox
The bizarre true story of Disney's failed US history theme park
How we tell the story of the United States — and who's included in it and how — has been an ongoing battle in the country for decades. It's one currently being waged by the Trump administration, such as when it scrubbed references to Jackie Robinson and Harriet Tubman from government webpages in the name of clamping down on 'DEI.' And in the 1990s, Disney had a particularly zany idea of how to tell the story of America — one that set off a culture war as the company sought to create an amusement park focused on US history, warts and all. Disney's America, the doomed amusement park, would have contained the story of immigration told through the Muppets' musical-comedy stylings. It would have had sections dedicated to the Industrial Revolution, Native America, and the Civil War. It would, as Disney executives put it at the time, 'make you a Civil War soldier. We want to make you feel what it was like to be a slave.' The ensuing battle over Disney's America would be one of Disney's biggest failures — and a precursor to battles we're still fighting today. To learn more about what Disney tried to do, what ended up happening, and what it all means, Today, Explained co-host Sean Rameswaram spoke with historian Jacqui Shine. Below is an excerpt of their conversation, edited for length and clarity. There's much more in the full podcast, so listen to Today, Explained wherever you get podcasts, including Apple Podcasts, Pandora, and Spotify. Where does this story begin? It begins with Michael Eisner, who came to Disney as its CEO and chairman in 1984. Eisner is ambitious, aggressive. Over the next 10 years, in what Disney buffs called the Disney Renaissance, the company has this enormous critical and commercial success with a run of animated movies. The juggernaut of this is The Little Mermaid, followed by Beauty and the Beast, The Lion King and Aladdin. Maybe high on that supply, Eisner announces this plan for what he calls the Disney decade, which is this broad expansion of the company's parks and resorts. The most high-profile project here was Euro Disney Resort, which is now Disneyland Paris. And there's high expectations for the Disney decade and for the success of the Parks program. This doesn't go quite the way that they hope it will. Euro Disney doesn't do well at opening. It loses nearly a billion dollars in its first year. So the failure of Euro Disney leads the company to want to pivot to more US expansion on smaller park projects. In 1991, the head of the parks division brings Eisner and Disney's president Frank Wells to Colonial Williamsburg. This inspires this plan for a history-themed Disney Park, Disney's America. They want to put it in Virginia because they imagine that it can become part of the DC-area tourist economy, and that a Disney theme park that is about American history will fit really well into this context. This is not a project that was supposed to involve Mickey Mouse or any of the Disney icons. Disney was starting work on Pocahontas. Eisner says that he was reading a lot about John Smith and Pocahontas and that internally, the company was interested in democracy as a sort of, as a thematic subject. So Eisner and Disney have an idea of what they don't want to do, and perhaps more importantly, what they do want to do with this park. To build it, obviously you're going to need some land. I imagine Disney just didn't already have a huge parcel of property in northern Virginia-ish. Do they buy some? They do. Between 1991 and 1993, Disney secretly begins buying up parcels of land in the area through shell companies. The guy who was in charge of buying apparently used a fake persona; this was very undercover, this is all happening secretly. It is also less than five miles from a National Park Service Civil War Battlefield: Manassas. This is a place where about 3,700 men died and where there were about 25,000 total casualties. They're doing this secretly. At what point does Manassas find out that Mickey Mouse is buying up their land? Almost everybody finds out in November 1993 when Disney announces the project. I think initially people receive this warmly, because Disney's promising a significant amount of economic development for the region and Disney is promising a complex experience of American history there. The guy who heads the Disney's America project, Bob Weis, says in the press release they envisioned Disney's America as a place to debate and discuss the future of our nation and to learn more about the past by living it. And they are quick to say that this is a project that is not going to whitewash American history. Eisner is interviewed in the Washington Post the next day. He says that the park will present painful, disturbing, agonizing history. We're going to be sensitive, but we will not be showing the absolute propaganda of the country. We will show the Civil War with all this racial conflict. This was a very serious, very powerful, very successful entertainment executive saying, 'We're gonna make a kiddy theme park that will take our most brutal history seriously.' Yes. And I think, like you, a lot of people had trouble with that contradiction. The day after this press release is issued, Disney holds a press conference in Haymarket. At this presser, Bob Weis, who is the senior vice president of imagineering, which is Disney's creative division, says, 'This will be entertaining in the sense that it would leave you something you could mull over. We want to make you a Civil War soldier. We want to make you feel what it was like to be a slave or what it was like to escape through the underground railroad.' This moment, I think, comes to define this conflict in the public eye. It's such a nutty thing to hear a serious person say. Your kids could come to our theme park, home of Mickey Mouse, and find out what it's like to be a slave. I imagine at this point, people are just like, 'I'm sorry, I'm gonna need some more specifics.' Yes. They put out a brochure, which is where a lot of the information that we have about what this would've been like comes from. 'Any kind of debate about public history is always going to be about trying to stake some sort of political or ideological claim about the meaning of American history.' You enter at Crossroads USA, and there you board an 1840s train that takes you first to President Square, which they say celebrates the birth of democracy. It's about the Revolutionary War. You follow that to Native America. They say, 'guests may visit an Indian village representing such eastern tribes as the Powhatans, or join in a harrowing Lewis and Clark raft expedition through pounding rapids and churning whirlpools.' We're going to be educating people about Manifest Destiny here. We move from Native America to the Civil War fort, where they say you're going to experience the reality of a soldier's daily life. After the Civil War fort, you go to a section on American immigration. And they're going to build a replica Ellis Island building. Some sources indicate they would've done a show called The Muppets Take America. The next section is a factory town called Enterprise that centers on a high-speed adventure ride called the Industrial Revolution. That involves a narrow escape from its fiery vat of molten steel. Then you go to Victory Field, where guests may parachute from a plane or operate tanks and weapons in combat. You then hit the last two areas, State Fair and Family Farm, to learn how to make homemade ice cream or milk a cow and even participate in a nearby country wedding, barn dance, and buffet. This sounds like one doozy of a brochure. Does it work? Does it convince everyone? Yes and no. Does that slow down Michael Eisner? Is he ready to give up? No. And that is where the fight begins. People hook in, in particular, to this idea that Disney's going to include some element about American chattel slavery. And he is aggressive about saying, No, we weren't going to do that. Why would you think that? He is really persuaded that Disney's big swing can work, that this idea has value and merit, and that the people who are standing against it are misguided. At this point, is this fight relegated to Virginia, or is it getting bigger? This is obviously an international company with a huge cultural footprint. It's getting bigger. One of the things that contributes to this is that the Washington Post does a lot of coverage of this, which makes it go national. And it starts this debate in editorial pages about whether or not Disney can responsibly represent American history and whether or not the Disneyfication of American history is advisable. And what happens when national papers, opinion columns start weighing in on this debate? A few things happen. In early 1994, a strong coalition of opponents develops, including people who are concerned about preserving the environment there. But then the historians get involved. The big guns come out when this group called Protect Historic America launches. This is a group of big-name, high-powered academic historians. This group of major figures stepped forward to say they're concerned about education around the Civil War and about the park's location near Manassas. In very short order, dozens and dozens of historians volunteer their time to write editorials, to comment to the media. They're really fired up about this. I read that this fight also somehow made it to the United States Congress. Why is this even Congress's business? This is one of the interesting things that comes out of Senate Energy and Natural Resources subcommittee hearings. The entree into this is that this involves public lands of national importance. Five hundred people come to the Senate hearing, and Eisner's really combative. He says about the people who are opposed to this, 'I sat through many history classes where I read some of their stuff and I didn't learn anything. It was pretty boring.' At this point you've got historians speaking out about this. You've got op-ed columns being written, it sounds like all over the country. You've got a hearing on Capitol Hill. Are people out in the streets protesting this somewhere? They are. Eisner is on the Hill trying to make nice with DC politicians and invites them to a special screening of The Lion King. But when they leave the theater, there are about a hundred protestors outside. Bigger than this though, in September 1994, 3,000 people march on the National Mall to protest Disney's America. Nationally, public support for the park has dropped to like 25 percent. At the end of September 1994, the company announces that Disney is withdrawing from the Virginia site. It's clear that people don't want it to be sited where it is, and they're giving up. It's over for Disney's America. It is curtains for Disney's America. How do you think what happened in the '90s connects to the kinds of fights we're having about our history right now? Any kind of debate about public history is always going to be about trying to stake some sort of political or ideological claim about the meaning of American history. Right now we see this very direct, very aggressive effort to insist on a positivist narrative about American history. One of the things that I think people found puzzling about the early days of the Trump administration was that the National Endowment for the Humanities cut an enormous amount of active grants. And they issued new guidelines seeking projects, they say, that instill 'an understanding of the founding principles and ideals that make America an exceptional country.' I think partly this is the administration's backlash to efforts in the last decade to bring a more nuanced and complex understanding to structural oppression in US history.
Forbes
2 hours ago
- Forbes
Disney's Controversial ‘Snow White' Is 2025's Biggest Critical Failure—So Far
The long-awaited live-action remake of Disney's classic 'Snow White' has been hailed by critics as the worst of 2025's widely released films so far after years of pre-premiere controversies that included racist backlash, concerns about the casting of dwarves and politically motivated criticism of its two leading ladies. Rachel Zegler stars in "Snow White." Disney 'Snow White,' which was released in 4,200 theaters in March, was reviewed favorably by only 39% of critics on Rotten Tomatoes. With more than 250 critics weighing in, the movie was called "contrived," "cheesy" and 'mediocre' on its way to becoming the worst reviewed of the year's biggest films so far. Despite the unfortunate claim to fame, "Snow White" has grossed $87.2 million to become the 11th highest-grossing film of the year as of June 30. 'Snow White' is one of five of the year's highest-grossing releases that received a positive rating from less than 60% of reviewers, as did 'A Working Man (47%), "A Minecraft Movie' (48%), "Captain America: Brave New World' (48%) and 'Karate Kid: Legends' (59%). Get Forbes Breaking News Text Alerts: We're launching text message alerts so you'll always know the biggest stories shaping the day's headlines. Text 'Alerts' to (201) 335-0739 or sign up here : Despite also being among the worst-reviewed films of the year, 'A Minecraft Movie' has made more than any other U.S. release. The film has grossed $423.9 million since April. Key Background Plans for a live-action remake of 1937's "Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs" were first reported almost a decade ago, and news broke in 2021 that Rachel Zegler, a Latina actress, would star as the title character. Since then, the film has been a hot bed of controversy. The decision to cast Zegler was met with immediate backlash online and racist comments about the decision to cast a person of color as the "fairest of them all.' Others were angered when Zegler called the original story, first told in a 1937 animated movie, "dated" and referred to the story's Prince Charming as a "stalker," vowing the new adaptation would take a 'different approach.' The inclusion of actress Gal Gadot as the film's Evil Queen was met with calls for a boycott over her pro-Israel stance. The actress is Israeli, served in the Israel Defense Forces and has publicly supported Israel since the start of the recent Israeli–Palestinian conflict in 2023. Zegler has been publicly pro-Palestinian rights. In 2022, the concept of the new 'Snow White' film was criticized by actor Peter Dinklage, who has achondroplasia, a form of dwarfism, when he questioned the need for dwarfs in a modern-day retelling of the story, calling the original 'backwards.' Other actors with dwarfism spoke up to express the opposite view, saying not casting dwarfs would be a "missed opportunity to make a movie with seven little people." Ultimately, the seven dwarves in the remake were created using CGI, instead of being played by actors. Gal Gadot in "Snow White." Disney 'You're progressive in one way but then you're still making that f—ing backwards story about seven dwarfs living in a cave together, what the f— are you doing, man?' Dinklage said. 'Have I done nothing to advance the cause from my soap box? I guess I'm not loud enough. I don't know which studio that is, but they were so proud of it. All love and respect to the actress and all the people who thought they were doing the right thing. But I'm just like, 'What are you doing?'' Tangent Supporters of President Donald Trump vowed to boycott 'Snow White' after Zegler spoke out against his election in 2024. Zegler posted on Instagram to say she hoped "Trump supporters and Trump voters and Trump himself never know peace". She said his election would lead to "another four years of hatred." Trump supporters demanded Disney fire Zegler, including conservative media personality Megyn Kelly, who called Zegler "a pig." Zegler later apologized, saying, "I let my emotions get the best of me." Disney reportedly hired a social media guru to vet any further online posts from Zegler between the election and the film's March release. Further Reading Report the details...
