The thing is, I can't see that "the rest of Everyone" will magically start watching a show that they haven't watched for its first few years, no matter what changes are made. If only the diehard fan base is watching, changing the formula will drive them away but won't really attract anyone new, because by definition…

In my opinion, the first half-dozen or so episodes are rocky, but definitely the first 2 or 3 are not so great. The series as a whole, however, is awesome if you can just kind of "go with it." It gets a bit weird and silly often, but that's also part of its charm.

I was thinking along similar lines, but not with specific authors in mind. Instead, I have to wonder if the recent overwhelming prevalence of anti-heroes and horribly grim tales in which there is never really anyone admirable to be found, merely reflects society's attitudes or will help to shape it for the worse?

"CW president Mark Pedowitz "

Didn't i09 have something about him working on a feature, actually? Back when they posted his short "the gift" —shortly thereafter there was an article about him being well into development of a feature-length sci-fi film.

"M13 poses no threat to humans — it can only infect bacteria-"

"Everbody loves a good dark, horrible fantasy. A misanthopic adventure, in which everybody is morally compromised, and we all live and die in the dirt. "

"Should we be so eager to strip mine the moon and destroy its surface to provide a clean energy source for Earth?"

I think the whole thing is the distinction between "spinoff" (that happens to opccur at an earlier time frame) and "direct lead-in".

I dunno, I think we could get pretty clear. We have the ability now to make *detailed* imagery that will last a long time, whereas our predecessors did not.

"This almost makes it feel..."Avatar-ish". Not ideal when the subject matter is much darker..."

I remember someone commenting, way back when this remake first came on the radar, that Quaid was really supposed to be sort of a nebbishy Everyman... who, like Jason Bourne, suddenly finds himself not only inside a conspiracy, but shockingly able to deal with the situation. This commenter suggested that Steve Buscemi…

I definitely agree with this. The way that the camera focused so much on the staff, and everything (literally) being turned on its head, while the Avengers bickered with each other, clearly indicated to me that the staff was a factor in the scene—another character influencing things. It's like the scene at Rivendell…

Hey, that's a pretty good angle that I hadn't considered. I'm not sure I agree, though, because of the slow nature of the transformation—it seems to me like Banner was fighting hard to regain control, but losing due to the overwhelmingly stressful situation.

"Anger is losing control".

There's no need to guess what the secret behind the vanishing of energy-related resources will be. This is JJ Abrams. We'll never learn the truth anyway (or else the answer will be another non-answer, like "they went away because some Mysterious Force caused them to vanish into a wormhole" or something).

"WHY is stealing and murder wrong? Replying with "it just is" isn't an acceptable response nor is "because it's illegal.""

@ tonyG: no. No we won't. I guarantee it.

Do Unto Others is a pretty reliable maxim. Sure, it breaks down if you happen to be a masochist, but otherwise it's pretty solid. SO, basically, I'd argue that the "greater definition of right and wrong" does not hinge on an authority figure. It's an inherent quality of human psyche and living in a society.

"Maybe I'm just the most naïve cynic on the internet."