I got my hands of the trade paperback of the first Superman '78 comic! A local reseller surprisingly had it in stock, so I pounced when I saw it. So now I have read both, the first story of which was published over 2021 and the second (which was the first book I got) was published over 2023-2024.

They're continuations of the Christopher Reeve Superman universe, and I was excited to read them, though when the plot kicked in I paused and had the very distinctive thought, "Oh no... bad things are going to happen to Clark! I don't want bad things to happen to Clark!" Even though bad things have to happen in order for there to be a story at all, but there was a funny mismatch in my brain because the Reeves Superman movies are so comforting and familiar and safe, while you don't know what you'll be getting with new canon! ("Canon", of course.)

Anyway both stories are charming and earnest and funny, but nowhere near as goofy as the movies were*, which I think is a consequence of trying to tell a story set in that era now, with our modern sensibilities and nostalgia and reverence tangled up in each other. Plus, it may just be the format, since there's no cinematic pauses or dramatic music to amp up the feeling, but I felt there was less weight to the stories, though the first story literally up-ends the status quo by ( spoilers ) Clark makes his typical choices and sacrifices in both stories, but he's noble and at most sad about it. He doesn't get angry or have break downs as he does in the movies.

*The plot and resolution of The Metal Curtain is goofy but in an idealistic way, where doing the right thing immediately has his "enemies" realizing that Superman has good intentions and doing a heel face turn. It's not goofy in a Superman-turns-back-time-by-flying-really-fast or throwing-nukes-into-the-sun-creates-a-sun-based-villain way.

Also! Very funny that the plot of the first comic sounds like what James Gunn said the second Superman DCU movie is going to be about, namely ( potential spoilers for a future DCU movie. ) That's this comic!

I might've waited longer to make a post, but I just finished The Listerdale Mystery, which is a collection of twelve short stories, and I had such a fun time I had to post ASAP! It's different from the previous short story collections I've read in that only one is a proper murder mystery, while the rest are murder without the mystery, murder adjacent, or do not come anywhere near murder at all! (Look at me being so excited, when it may turn out Christie has plenty of these.)

Some of the stories were centered on a twist that, by virtue of being a short story, made the twist far more important to the story itself, like anthology episodes of Alfred Hitchcock Presents or Twilight Zone (in terms of story structure, but with mundane concepts instead of fantastical). By the time I got to story ten there were some tropey repeats, especially featuring a man being pulled into an adventure by mysterious girl, but overall it's a fun mix and I really enjoyed myself.

Only caveat I would say that classism is particularly strong throughout in terms of justification for certain characters' successes or assumptions being proven right, but sometimes it seems earnest and others it seems ironic. I say that because another repeated topic of the stories is to not believe that people are who they say they are without proof, but the working class characters who get scammed this way tend to be rescued by their honesty, while the upper class characters who get scammed are either able to brush it off or are able to notice just enough truth through the scam to be rewarded by it.

Particular shoutouts to:

• The opening "The Listerdale Mystery", about a widowed mother who finds a house for rent that seems to good to be true; the story is, if you think about it for two seconds, a ridiculous concept, but it's a particular kind of romantic id that you'd be well used to if familiar with Bollywood films and I found it kinda charming for that;


• "Philomel Cottage", the most Alfred Hitchcock Presents of the bunch, with a recently-married woman realizing that her new husband might be planning to murder her;


• "Accident", where a retired inspector suspects that a neighbour is a twice-murderess who is going to kill her current husband and wants to try to prevent it, ( spoilers )

Besides that, I've also read two more Christie short story collections, both of which are Poirot collections and thus more traditional mysteries: The Adventure of the Christmas Pudding and Murder in the Mews. The best thing about short Poirot stories is that Poirot can show up at a scene of the crime, take one turn of it and solve the mystery immediately. Which is neat!

In Christmas Pudding, I did like the one about the elderly estranged twin men, which kind of deceives you into thinking it'll be a switcheroo between the twins but is actually a switcheroo of a different kind. But quite a few (three, I think) stories involve disguises to make the murder appear to have happened differently or at a different time, and it kind of kicked my disbelief a bit too hard, especially the one that hinges on the murderer leaving it to chance that another character won't see the body after the murder.

Murder in the Mews has four short stories, with three being meatier than the fourth, and they’re kind of bound together with the theming of the "crime" isn’t exactly what it looks like. Well, the third one, "Dead Man's Mirror" is way more in line with Christie's precise murders, right down to the layout of the room being key to what's happened, but all of them are in the same realm. The only qualm I'd have is with the last one, "Triangle at Rhodes" which is the shortest of the lot and the assumptions are a bit of a stretch for me, in terms of what Poirot observes of the relationships that's happening vs. what we the reader are shown of those same relationships.

I must've gotten Mara Wilson's memoir Where Am I Now?: True Stories of Girlhood and Accidental Fame during one of my trips to UK, because it has a price tag in pounds, but heck if I can remember when. What I do remember is that I put the book at the back of the drawer because I was annoyed and/or upset at her for something she'd said online. I no longer remember what it was! So I suppose it's time to be reading.

There is a feeling at the start that Wilson was way too young to be writing a memoir, but upon reading it it does make sense, because the bulk is about her time as a child actress and the fallout of that into the neuroses of teenhood and young adulthood. And going through that same thing we all do, where in growing up we become conscious of certain kinds of privilege we don't have and having to reckon with that, except Wilson's realization of the importance of looking traditionally pretty isn't just about trying to fit in and get friends, but also to get acting work. (Ow.) She namechecks as specific examples her peers Kristen Stewart and Scarlett Johansson who beat her to roles and did get to make the transition to acting adults, and her raw frustration that this was not something she could balance out with talent.

Tangled up in that is the intense celebrity-adjacent subculture of growing up in Burbank, California surrounded by peers who want to "make it" into the business and thus have feelings about those who do when they do not. Mean girl culture in a greater Hollywood setting, baby! (Ooofff.) This is probably the most fascinating section of the book to me, of how that world warps the expectations of children and teenagers who feel they're in the pipeline to showbiz greatness. Also, by her reckoning, there's lore than the Californian school subculture of show choirs that she participated in was what inspired Ryan Murphy to make Glee, though that may be more guesswork than cold hard facts.

Wilson specifically lived through some rough times (including the early death of her mother), but she got out of showbiz with relatively less trauma than other child actors, but it's still only other child actors who could understand what it was like to grow up in that environment and have so much of your personality and looks dissected by people who don't know you. Also, to have creepers think it's fun to ask a child questions about mature topics they haven't yet grappled with. Toxic and sadly familiar.