Alan Moore's Thoughts On TV

Commentaries from the Maestro himself, Alan Moore, on the Idiot Box. Check out the original article on Wizard Universe. Here's an excerpt with his thoughts on "Battlestar Galactica" and the recent state of TV series, by and large. "I have seen the first half of the final series of 'Battlestar Galactica.' It's well done, but I'll reserve judgment until I've seen the final episodes, because it could, as with so many of these things, end up as a bit of a mess. It seemed that they got a bit self-conscious about making some kind of political analogies that ended up being a bit confusing and ham fisted and perhaps spoiling. I feel that the big problem with most of these programs is that people start off with the good beginnings of an idea. That is disastrous because that is enough to get a show commissioned. So you've got the beginnings of a good idea and if it's not brought to its conclusion properly, it won't be a good idea at all; it'll be a waste of everybody's time. It'll be a waste of the creator's time, and more importantly it'll be a complete waste of the audience's time. I mean, if you have been following a show expecting it to have a kind of payoff and you've been following it for three or four seasons and then at the end, it turns out Bobby Ewing comes out of the shower and one of the characters wakes up and says, 'Oh, Bobby, I've just had the most strange dream!' You know? There's a lot of hours, days of your life that you're never gonna get back again, you know? So if people are gonna invest this much time and enthusiasm, genuine enthusiasm, in these shows, I really think that they ought to pay off. The writers ought to know what the end is; at least the important parts of it before they start and not do anything that is gonna turn out to be irrelevant, pointless or just a confusing red herring." Oh, and not to forget his very brief remarks on the fan-favourite "Lost". "I saw the first few episodes and there were already so many inconsistencies where all the writer would have had to have done was check back to the previous episode. I have no confidence in them knowing where they are going. I think they're just thinking of weird things week by week."

Pandamen VS The Super Inframan

Jay Chou just unveiled what according to him, the "first Chinese Superhero ever". "為什麼有《熊貓人》這個想法？首先以愛為出發點，這個熊貓超人的爸爸之前是一個慈善家，做了很多公益活動，也是帶著熊貓的，你知道就像那些玩偶在發糖，在遊樂園給這些小朋友吃。因為也是一樣樂於助人，所以有一天有一個綁匪挾持了這個兒童，熊貓爸爸跑去救他，犧牲了自己的生命。於是這個小孩用他爸爸的頭，以熊貓的姿態，當他未來的精神。所以之後他穿熊貓裝，在社會上打抱不平。 另外一個角色是在動物園打工的這個，在動物園做清潔工，其實我真的講太多了。" With unquestionably annoying naivete displayed from his interview (rant on and on about how he managed to strike first by launching a media premiere and how that meant he is the winner), I'm sure he know nuts about the real deal. I'm sure there had been a handful, but for starters... Hell, I know. The "S"logo. Anyway, the Super Inframan movie, released in 1975, featuring the titular character, a Tokusatsu-style superhero that managed to rip off not one but two Tokusatsu Icon, Ultraman and Kamen Rider. But that was then, and all things considered, it was rightfully deemed as a bold move in what were still a relatively new movie industry back then. Hell, even the great Roger Ebert gave three stars out of a possible four for it. "Mighty Peking Man is very funny, although a shade off the high mark of Infra-Man, which was made a year earlier, and is my favorite Hong Kong monster film. Both were produced by the legendary Runme Shaw, who, having tasted greatness, obviously hoped to repeat. I find to my astonishment that I gave Infra-Man only two and a half stars when I reviewed it. That was 22 years ago, but a fellow will remember a lot of things you wouldn't think he'd remember. I'll bet a month hasn't gone by since that I haven't thought of that film. I am awarding Mighty Peking Man three stars, for general goofiness and a certain level of insane genius, but I cannot in good conscience rate it higher than Infra-Man. So, in answer to those correspondents who ask if I have ever changed a rating on a movie: Yes, Infra-Man moves up to three stars." Which makes my point: Ripping off Kamen Rider back in 1975 was an understandable shame. But ripping off the same source in this time and age and having the cheek to boast about creativity?