The Letters to the Editor department is intended to be a forum for our readers to express their own opinions and ideas. While we appreciate the many complimentary letters we receive each day, you won't find them on this page. Instead, you will find letters that go beyond or even contradict what we have written, letters that offer a different perspective and provide a different view of science fiction. If you would like to submit a letter, please use our feedback form or send a message to scifiweekly@scifi.com.
-- Craig E. Engler, Editor
The Matrix Is A Shot In The Arm
aving just seeing The Matrix, all I have to say is wow! This is just the shot in the arm SF movies have needed lately. This was an intelligent story that really left you thinking. Also, the special effects were excellent. Some of the fight scenes kept me on the edge of my seat. It was like a comic book come to life. Laurence Fishburne as Morpheus was the highlight of the show. He came off as a natural leader. All I can say is, see this movie. You definitely won't be bored.
Rick Haney
erhlah@aol.com
The Matrix Is Just Another ID4
recently saw The Matrix and, although it got off to an interesting start, it soon degenerated into gunfights and video game-like sequences. Schizophrenically, it went back and forth between examining the nature of reality and mindless combat scenes, using the Hollywood idea that the bigger the explosions and deaths, the better the movie. I personally am tired of this kind of movie; it's just another Independence Day, strip-mining ideas out of good, literary SF and burying them under a ton of special effects.
Of course, it made scads of money and we'll probably be treated to Matrix sequels ad nauseam. If you want to see a good movie about the nature of identity and reality, rent Dark City.
John Madigan
mastiffson@yahoo.com
The Matrix Is One Of The Best
enjoyed the perceptive Jeff Berkwits' review of The Matrix. Unlike most of the reviewers in the mainstream press (Roger Ebert, Entertainment Weekly, The New York Post, etc.), Jeff understood that many philosophical questions were imbedded in the film. Most reviewers focused on the "action" rather than the questions about reality it raised. My son and I are both big SF fans, and we thought it was one of the best films in years--a perfect blend of ideas, adventure and action. Even my SF-adverse daughter loved it. We plan to see it again since we probably didn't get all the allusions and ideas on the first "reading."
J. Gary Fox
jgfox@aosi.com
The Matrix? Get Real!
, for one, was not enamored of The Matrix. It was a hash of many different SF movies from the past. Contained within its goofy plot were Tron, Johnny Mnemonic, Blade Runner, Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, Dune and even some Krell sound effects from Forbidden Planet. The audience in Des Moines, Iowa, were oohing and ahhing over the thing. I found myself saying, "Oh come on, get real!"
Beowulf Limery
I_Beowulf@JUNO.com
Space Truckers Was In Theaters
n Mark Wilson's review of the video release Space Truckers it was noted that the flick was a "non-theatrical" film. This will no doubt cause some confusion to those of us who saw the movie around two years ago when it was theatrically released in Europe, where it did dismal business. However, he was correct that its special effects are impressive, and they look even more so on the big screen. The movie's biggest failing is that it has no idea what it is. Is it a farce or an action flick? Hard SF or space opera? Horror or juvenile romp? It certainly has all these elements and more. I suspect that the long wait for the movie to make it to video was primarily caused by total befuddlement on the part of the marketers on how to package this curate's egg. Still, it's perfect entertainment for a night in with a six pack and a brain numbed into silence.
Chris Halliday
otherchris@erols.com
Editor's Note: Thanks for the correction. Unfortunately for us, the video distributor made no mention of Space Trucker's European tour.
SF Is Here To Stay
oy oh boy has there been a lot of grief on this page lately.
Can't we all just get along? Doesn't seem likely, so I'm going to go ahead
and weigh in.
First off, almost all of the arguments have been one sided and
annoyingly so. Fantasy fans don't put down science fiction, women don't
say men can't write (or don't write well), Trekkers don't claim the rest of
us aren't passionate enough and, if you think science fiction is dead or
dying, then hit that back button on your browser and spare us all your
misery.
Fantasy and science fiction are two sides of the same coin. As Arthur C.
Clarke said, any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from
magic. Certainly bad fantasy devolves to magic, but bad science fiction
devolves to deus ex machina (or virtual reality these days). Even the
hardest science fiction does not even come close to science fact. I get so sick of reading about high ideals like terraforming Mars when we can't
even terraform Terra. These are supposed to be hard science fiction? At least the fiction part is right.
The proposition that women can't write SF is really hard for me to
fathom. The first science fiction book I ever read was Patternmaster
by Octavia E. Butler, a woman. The argument is so silly that I'm just
going to list some of my favorite books by women authors: Cyteen (very
believable hard science fiction story) and Cuckoo's Egg by C.J. Cherryh,
Dinosaur Planet by Anne McCaffrey, An Alien Light and the Beggars series by Nancy Kress, and Grass and A Gate to Womans Country by Sherri S. Tepper. I'm sure I've left out some, but this should be enough for even the most misogynistic science fiction fan to get started.
Science fiction is not dying, is not sick and is arguably more
popular today than at any other time. It's no longer fringe culture
(although it has a fringe), and some people will resent the hell out of the
genre and its now larger fan base for this. That's the only explanation
for some of these letters that have been showing up. As a body of work,
science fiction grows by leaps and bounds every year. It is not
diminishing. With the exception of Dr. Who, there are no lost works of
science fiction. This fanzine is proof of science fiction's rise. Every
two weeks there is enough new science fiction to fill these pages. Print,
TV, movies, audio and Web pages, science fiction is here to stay.
Tim Huck
Tim.Huck@Tandem.com
SF Has Moved Overseas
cience Fiction isn't dead. It just moved overseas. I am an avid fan of manga and anime. That's where I get my science fiction/fantasy from. After seeing the entire Neon Genesis Evangelion series, Star Trek makes me sick. After reading Ghost in the Shell and watching Akira, Total Recall becomes a walk in the park. Too many of the SF novels I've seen are just a continuation of a movie, video game or TV show that wasn't "great" to begin with. If you've become disappointed with the current status of American SF, I suggest you look to the Land of the Rising Sun. Anime and manga are growing and resistance is futile. Why be called a "Trekkie" when you could be one of us, the few, the proud, the "Otaku."
Samuel Skiff
LoganColt@aol.com
The Key Word Is 'Willing'
illing suspension of disbelief is at the heart of controversy lately. Without it, no fiction would survive; not SF; not fantasy; not crime fiction; certainly not romance fiction.
But so many letter writers seem to be missing the point. The key word in the above paragraph is willing. I don't go to movies to be made to believe. I go to willingly suspend my prejudices of what should and shouldn't be possible. A recent letter asks "...is it really possible to build a space station the size of a moon? Probably not." How do we know until we try? Was the same question asked about the Dyson Sphere episode ["Relics"] of Star Trek: The Next Generation?
One of the things that differentiates science fiction from other fiction is that many of the concepts, even the seemingly absurd and impossible ones, were originated by men of science. Many things that were impossible in H.G. Wells' or George O. Smith's time are so commonplace now we think of them as quaint.
An entire space-based communications station carved out of an asteroid and using vacuum tube communications? Ridiculous, some people would say now. I, for one, would love to see a movie based upon the Complete Venus Equilateral. I could suspend my disbelief for as long as it took to tell the stories. Not a problem!
I've said this before, but it bears repeating. The root for critique is the same as the one for criticizing. More movie reviews criticize than critique lately. I guess it is fashionable, but don't forget there is a difference.
Diane Catanzaro
catanz@flash.net
Where Are The Original Stories?
he biggest problem with the SF genre today is the video game spin-off books and the franchise books. I read almost everything in this genre and have found that it is full of ideas borrowed from other writers. What happened to the original concepts and story lines that used to be the core of science fiction writing?
James Craft
Craftjim@hotmail.com
SF Writing Is Well Ahead Of SF TV
loria Hoffner wrote that: "I feel Deep Space Nine, especially the war years, has opened an entire new area for science fiction writing."
I'm sorry, but anyone who really believes that needs to read more instead
of watching the TV. SF writing is well ahead of TV and is likely to
remain so.
Take her example: "To what lengths will a civilization go to maintain
its strengths..." Far from being new, it is an underlying theme of Iain
M. Banks Culture novels. And need we mention Ursula K. Le Guin's short
story "The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas"?
DS9 may be opening new ground for Star Trek, but not for SF.
Paul King
paul@morat.demon.co.uk
Star Trek Is Not Good Or Bad
loria--Bravo on your letter to SF Weekly. I completely agree with your
statements regarding Star Trek, especially Insurrection. My wife and I saw the movie together (she's not as huge a fan as I am), and she not only liked the great outdoor scenery (which was spectacular), but really "got" the plot and understood that Picard was standing for something, even though he had to stand against the Federation to do so.
I also loved your idea about Voyager (which, unfortunately, does not air
here in Columbia, S.C., as we have no UPN affiliate and no one
willing to negotiate with them for "secondary" affiliation). The idea that
Kathryn Janeway might have to deal with all kinds of infighting--and end up
leading the Federation back on track--would make absolutely great
television.
Thank you for your support of Star Trek in the way that Roddenberry meant.
As for the rest of these "SF bashers," please get off your high horses
(not you Gloria); Star Trek is neither bad nor good in comparison to any
other shows. Star Wars is not inherently better than everything in sight. Each and every series, episode, book, movie, and even CD-ROM game must stand on its own. There is greatness, certainly, but there is greatness in each
area.
Martin Cahn
m2cahn@mciworld.com
Don't Take Tech Too Seriously
n response to Dave Graham's letter "The Problem Facing SF Is Reality," I'd like to say that our incredible
reality is both a benefit and a detriment to SF. SF is in no way
eclipsed by the technological advances in real life. It can take them
and discuss their ramifications, which is where it shines. The advances
in technology present a multitude of ideas for discussion.
The main problem I see is with SF stories getting quickly outdated. This
is especially true for SF which centers around a certain technology. I
have recently read Harry Harrison's Plague from Space and found many of
the futuristic descriptions there to seem ludicrous in the face of
today's reality, and the plague handling and conclusion were very
disappointing, considering the advances made today in genetically
engineered viruses.
Of course, the more fantastic the reality, the longer it would take for
a novel (or movie) to become obsolete. And a good plot and interesting
characters could still make a book worth reading. But anything that
discusses things like human clones, for example, may become somewhat
obsolete when these truly become available.
Which is perhaps where the strength of space opera lies. Star Wars or
Star Trek (the original) don't take physics and technology too
seriously. They weren't that logical in the first place, so it doesn't
matter as much if they become even a bit less logical. They're just fun
to watch. Newer Star Trek shows, on the other hand, took their
technology more seriously (introducing techno-babble), which is why they
sometimes sounded wrong even when they first aired.
Eyal Teler
teler@cs.huji.ac.il
Give Farscape A Chance
just wanted to express my appreciation for the pure SF/fantasy that has become part of SCI FI's weekly programming in the form of Farscape.
I agree with some of your other critics in that there needs to be more character development, and maybe some planetary visitations (whether home worlds or others). Though some of the characters have the distinctive Jim Hensen muppet-like appearance, this past week's episode of April 2 began exploring some solid SF themes: i.e. intergalactic wars with new weaponry using quantum singularities and the associated time/space distortions, and decent special effects. Let's not forget that we have only seen three or four episodes. Some legendary SF was canceled after two-plus seasons to later become the foundation of a multi-show franchise as Star Trek. Let's give Farscape a chance to develop. To me, it is a refreshing addition to the now "popular" conspiracy themes that are also quite entertaining.
Warren DeLuge
ldeluge1@tampabay.rr.com
MST3K Is The Funniest TV Show
few weeks ago it came to my attention that Mystery Science Theater 3000 would be canceled after this season. In doing so (in my opinion) the SCI FI Channel has made a grave mistake. MST3K is the funniest, and one of the best, programs that is currently on the SCI FI Channel.
MST3K, through its making fun of movies and the misadventures of Mike
and the robots, is a breath of fresh air. Unlike other programs, whose humor
is either unintentional or misses the mark, MST3K's humor is very intentional and usually hits dead on. It achieves this for several reasons of which a few are:
First, the movie comments are well written, usually taking full
advantage of the movies or shorts they show. The jokes are very good at using
the weak points, flaws or overly serious moments for humorous impact. Next,
the interaction between Mike and the robots is always funny and frequently
hilarious. In addition MST3K uses a skillful mix of popular culture (e.g. Mike's version of Lord of the Dance), references to older movies (visual
references to 2001 at the beginning of the MST3K movie), TV, other references--and just plain silliness--to make the comedic effect complete.
In short, MST3K is one of the very best comedies on TV period. Its
cancellation is not only a low point for those of us who are MST3K fans but its a low point for the SCI FI Channel whose shortsightedness is
disappointing. It is ironic that many of the movies and shows that will be
shown in its place are the same that MST3K would normally be making fun
of--only without Mike and the robots, they won't be nearly as enjoyable.
Fredric P. Conrad Jr.
FredPAC@aol.com
