I am really glad he emphasized the word "mainstream" because I think we have many creative people today they're just being drowned out by the mainstream garbage

Alan Moore’s valid criticism aside, I like to playfully believe that he is not happy simply because J.K Rowling did not cast him as a professor in the Harry Potter series. Considering he’s a magician himself 😂.

Alan Moore did think it was unfair however that he didn't get cast as Dumbledoore or Hagrid!

I think the main reason why Mr Moore's not too fond of the HP series is because it isnt brave storytelling and thats his whole thing

Harry Potter is a good example of what he's talking about. The charm quickly wears off as each book is a facsimile of the last. Like the MCU or Star Wars it's about spoon feeding the market more of the same, not creativity, and not meaningful discourse about the human condition.

I love the fact he explained mainstream. But still some very diplomatic shitting on harry Potter

Ai ARTISTS.. People using Ai Generators and calling it "Their Art".. Even though it bears a remarkable resemblance to the artist that it was stolen from..

The big difference between now and the 20th century is that almost everybody now is a "content creator". There are few barriers to putting stuff out there so the quality is lost in an ocean of junk.

His Australian Fans Would Like To Tell Him; You Sir, Are A Legend.

The art we remember today as high culture or classic was mainstream in its day, that's how they became remembered.

He’s completely right

I would say the last three in the series is pretty good

Alan is a very wise man sometimes.

The camera positions in this video are terrible, and it's very obvious at the beginning that it's too close to Alan's head.

Dumblemoore

Frankly, an Alan Moore penned HP story would be a million times more interesting than the slavery simping and New Labour wish fulfillment dross Just Kidding came out with.

All values have eroded..

❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤

That what one fire does to a man

It has 🙁

Ursula le guin. JIll murphy Diana wynne jones If you dont know these names but you think Rowling is good. You havent read enough books. And thats the main issue that le guin was making in her criticism of Rowling. The mainstream read harry potter and that was it. They didnt stick around to read fantasy after that.

I always thought Harry Potter was a second rate version of Roald Dahl and Diane Wynne Jones.

Differences Between Comic Book and Novel Adaptations. Superhero stories are meant to be episodic ongoing adventures. Book adaptations such as Harry Potter, Game of Thrones, Narnia, Earthsea, Lord of the Rings, detective books, manga, horror, western, slasher, and sci fi novels. On the hand, are not episodic ongoing stories like superheroes. There once in a lifetime experience. They are meant to alter changes to the source material. People have to deal with it. Novel adaptations are meant for die hard fans, scholars, and librarians alike. Changes to their source material need to occur. To feel justified. Even if novel readers don't like the changes. Too bad. What is the point of adapting them in the first place? It doesn't matter if the novel creators aren't involved, it's okay. Being book accurate is no longer an excuse anymore. You can't judge book adaptations. If they alter book adaptations, changes it's source material to fit the runtime, I am not arguing about it. Producers, do your own thing. Creative interference needs to happen. "Film and tv directors, you cannot get what you always want to do. Because, life doesn't work that way. You are told what you are tasked to do. There is no need to be rebellious. Deal with it".

Did Alan Moore took into account that mainstream media changed along with how accessible it became? The further back in history, the more ,,mainstream media" becomes dictated by rich and powerful - people with actual time and resources to engage with it. And the more common folk was involved with the media, the more Marvel movies were involved in the mainstream. I know it sounds classist, but can you deny it's true? Because I am curious how Alan Moore, such a grand critic of fascism and consumptionism, feels about the fact, that all those great achievments of culture back in the day, got their recognition thanks to the very people who steered the wheel of capitalism and elitism.

Timothy Hunter anyone ?.

Ahhh, this is the perennial worry about/accusation against mainstream culture! But it becomes comparing apples with bananas. Brecht is now considered "high culture" for better or for worse. Thats why Moore picks him. Will Rowling get the same treatment in 50 to a 100 years? I really dont think so. Does anyone now consider her works high culture? No, not even at the present.

Children's kwrap

wheres the lie

I do love me some alan moore. But ummm. HP is a children's book? Its not ment to go up against deep high end lit? Its intended audience is 8-12yrs? We house it with the 47storie tree house and wimpy kid diaries?

old man speaks old talk

What "values" is he talking about, though? (Certainly in terms of moral and of human values, Rowling's fiction outstrips that of Moore's!)

"everything was better in the old days"

JK Rowling reminds me of George Lucas. Both plagiarised from other sources, tried to make something new and it became a worldwide success. And before everybody realised that their ideas weren't original or that their series wasn't all planned out from the beginning, they already made their billions.

I love Alan moore but he is a grumpy old sod.

Saying Harry Potter is bad is just ludicrous I've read comics since I was young. The only thing Alan's work that I found really enjoyable was The League, a very good book brilliant in fact. I respect his ability as a writer, but he has built a cult of personality around himself more than his work. In my honest opinion what he says about Harry Potter, particularly the books, he just comes off in my opinion how he always does just a snob and a hater. He never gives any writer any due, he's pretty much up his own arse all the time. I find Watchmen the most overrated piece of literature in history. I would like to point out Rowling, much Martin was able in the books at least. Combine many characters' life through the past with their parent's experiences and rivalries informing the events of the story, and having consequences for the characters in the present of the story. While Voldemort in the books is a spectacularly written villain, unlike other fantasy villains he's not unlike real life cult leaders, criminals, serial killers and dictators. He is at his core a narcissist obsessed with himself and being special. Also because of the circumstances of his birth he is almost divorced from emtion and purposefully does so as he doesnn't trust things like love, as love didn't have any part in his conception. The line were he says to Dumbledore in The Hald Blood Prince when Dumbledore asks him about not liking his name and replies "There are a lot of Toms" is so excellent as it inform the character he so well and what he will become, but that dark vanity was in him from the beginning. It's not a crime to be popular and no publisher thought HP would be but it is, he just comes off as a hater. I think that's ultimately what he is tho as well as a hypocrite.