Adnan Bey

A common critique of any new movie, book, tv show or anything, a common criqitue of any new story in the written medium, (whether script writing or otherwise) is the lack of originality. Originality is defined as 1) existing from the beginning, 2) created personally by someone or 3) not dependent on other ideas. But is anything at all independent of ideas, or 'original?' One can now start to argue that everything's been done before, from new world with strange creatures, to magical schools, to a climactic battle between good and evil. I pose three question: Does originality exist any longer? Does originality need to be redefined? Or do we need to change the way we criticize storytelling?

There's a lot of time travel in fiction and many times, it makes no sense. Sometimes, the nonsensity is a strength, other times a weakness. Examples of media that use this trope (not necessarily have to be used) are Steins;Gate, Harry Potter and the PoA and of course, Avengers: Engame and Back to the Future. This topic should explore when time travel is done right, what constitutes it being done right in the writer's opinion, and of course, delve into the types of time travel (multiverse, paradox and time loop), and whether it's a good idea for fiction to use it.

Perhaps a good idea would be to examine how differently this trope is used in different medias, whether TV or film.

Many times in television, TV shows air way past their expiry date. That is to say, it got old, it got ridiculous, and it's still airing. Other times, genuinely good shows have been cancelled despite a good following. Sometimes, a show is cancelled after several seasons, perhaps due to lack of ideas and not wanting to 'milk the cow' so to speak. Other times, a show is done to death regardless. This article should explore why. Explore what makes both happen. WHat are the network's incentives to keep a show running? Do ideas have anything to do with it, is it what they believe audiences want? An agenda? All three? When, ideally, should be the time to cancel a show or keep it going.

Sometimes, filler is dreaded. It's a time when an Anime fills in a gap with unneeded material, usually to give it's source material time to give them more material, and fans start letting out a groan of frustration. But it's not always bad. Sometimes, it's good. This article would explore when filler is actually good, and by good, we define it as something that, in a way, adds something to the fictional world or plot of the show.

Is it correct when people say that a musical must have a basis on stage? What, by definition is a musical? Should Disney movies count as musicals? Must musicals be live-action or can they be animated? Does Mary Poppins count? What strictly, is a musical?

Will there come a point where systems and consoles are obsolete and the franchises migrate to online instead. We’ve seen it happen with Legend of Zelda and Elder Scrolls. Might this happen with Pokemon? Kingdom Hearts? Will this repel some fans or bring in new ones?

Anime is mostly known for filler, but sometimes, even books or movies, TV shows or anything else, can have filler too. This article would examine such instances and how they were received.

Sometimes, an Anime ends before it's supposed to, or it ends in a poor way, a way devoid of any meaning. Surely it's not just a decision on the part of the directors to discontinue it without giving a coherent ending. Anime like Pandora Hearts, Blood Lad, and Darker than Black gives that sort of vibe. Why does this happen, what options can a viewer explore if they want to satiate their hunger for more?