Mag Shot

Somebody gimme clues: what external forces could have propelled me to blow P250 yesterday on a couple of magazines. Boredom? A need for new insights? Or are you gonna be so lowbrow and say "the cover girls"?

I admit, the cover girls are all eye candies. But, it’s the articles listed on the cover of both magazines that had me curious. Okay, so maybe just one of two magazines. I bought Manual because I wanted to know about "10 Pinoy Bands I must listen to". As for Action & Fitness, well, I’m just too drawn to Riza Santos’s allure.

So yesterday, I got the April issue of Manual, and March-April issue of Action & Fitness. And then I went home and gave both their much needed visit to the toilet (isn’t that what mags are for?). I’m not editing this. Shut up.

Manual has good writing. The layout is teeming with black and gold and silver, which I find a bit to be on the clichéd grunge side. It’s not ugly, but it’s not original either. The content isn’t dissimilar to other men’s magazine, which shouldn’t be surprising, as it is also a men’s mag. And that’s a problem. Besides not having tacky pictorials of women undressing, there isn’t much else that distinguishes Manual from the glut of other men’s mags, such as FHM or Maxim. The plus side is the "10 Pinoy Bands I must listen to" article that I mentioned a while ago. It’s an informative take of what pinoy bands are worth your attention. I don’t just find it a satisfying-read; I find it a surfeiting-read. The listed bands lean towards rock, though, which shouldn’t be a problem if they don’t all sound and dress alike. They mostly do, although there’s one that’s distinctive. I also enjoyed reading the interview with Sam Oh. Then again, is it even possible to be bored from reading about Sam Oh?

Action & Fitness could benefit from a more attentive editor, as there are a few glaring grammatical errors. That aside, I like Action & Fitness a lot. The way its articles are described on the cover may sound as boring as the senate’s hearing, so I tell you now, they’re not bad. They are, in fact, excellent, because they’re helpful, and they’re blunt and pithy, making reading them not too taxing. Its subjects are mostly about how to be healthier and more active. I must say, it makes exercising sound fun. But by far the best thing about it is the features about Kota Kinabalu, and Micronesia. Their photographs look too tempting, that I’m hating every minute of not being there, and instead, being on this overcommercialized wasteland they call “Manila”. The Riza Santos interview is too short, though, and I don’t know how it ties with other articles. Also, one writer writes that she “lurves” something. Lurve? Just what on Riza’s ample breast is that babytalk “lurve” doing inside a magazine? What’s with all the “lurves” and “luffles” anyway? Why can’t people say they LOVE something instead? 

Anyway, who do you think is prettier, Kim Chiu or Riza Santos?

Kim looks too much like a Chinatown denizen who likes to webcamwhore, and likes to upload those pics on Friendster or Facebook. And she looks underage too. She has a hug-able appeal, but then again, I sometimes find her cuteness grating.

Riza has better curves and has a far greater sex appeal. Before she joined Miss World Canada (I don’t know what that is) she had been in the army and was, among her troops, the one using the heaviest machinegun. So, yeah, she’d totally fit in on a Michael Bay movie and she can blow things up. I mean, blow things like buildings and cars and, well, what were you thinking? I like Riza Santos better. And I’m gonna stop now before this post become my shallowest yet.