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
Heinlein Is Turning In His Grave
o, the BKN network is going to air a children's series based on Starship Troopers. I am absolutely sure that this is exactly what Heinlein was thinking when he wrote the book. Not!
It was bad enough when the movie came out and missed the point entirely. Now some idiot thinks the book needs a child treatment about a "cool war against bugs." It is a real shame that now we will have a children's series glorifying the war on bugs instead of a children's series against war and its atrocities, as the book intended.
Heinlein is turning in his grave.
Dave Kopp
Dolby1000@aol.com
Kids Shows Should Be Kids Shows
was disturbed to read that a cartoon version of Starship Troopers is being prepared. Children's shows should not be based on adult rated R films. This just encourages children to watch movies that are too mature for them. Children's shows should be children's shows, not adult shows washed down. I have long been dubious of making children's action figures of movies the children are too young to watch (like Aliens), but making cartoons of them is even worse. I work with children and I'm tired of five year olds asking me if I've seen the latest rated R film and proceeding to try to explain it to me. Parents, stop taking your children to these films and industry, stop encouraging the children to become interested in these films by making them appealing cartoons.
Shawna Prested
trbnrocks2@aol.com
George Lucas Is A Decent Man
eorge Lucas and his rules? I too agree, not just with what he has done but with the principles behind his decision. Here's a rich man who's all the richer because he is a decent man who thinks of the every man.
Remember Battlestar Galactica? In its day a great SF show. But if you looked too closely at the science of the story concept instead of the story then you certainly were one of those who didn't/don't like the show much at all.
Bobo R.A. Harper
Chaosite14@aol.com
Recent Events Can Trigger SF Recall
t's funny how we recall books or films from years gone by when
recent events trigger recall. Stand on Zanzibar had just
resurfaced in my thoughts in connection with the tragedy
at Columbine High School.
While not an exact analog, Brunner's term "muckers" would
seem applicable, and the atmosphere of stress and paranoia generated in the society which spawns them seems accurate.
We may well be ahead of that aspect of the book.This is
not a proud achievement.
It is fortunate that we have an insightful and extrapolative genre that can give even general clues to the future.
Harry Britt
Brittville@aol.com
It's How We Use Old Ideas
'm writing in response to those who complain that there is nothing new or original in books or on the screen. The written word has been around for how long? Let's just fudge and say 2,000 years. How many original ideas are there left after 2,000 years of writers? Yes, as technology and times change new concepts are born, but after so long I don't see how one can expect something wholly original every time they pick up a book or walk into a theater. It's how old ideas are used and the spin put on them that makes them fresh.
Keith Rowland
rowboat@netsync.net
Science Fact Isn't Science Fiction
have been reading some pretty funny letters about SF and about how SF is no longer original. I also read a letter that said that some SF movies and books were not using science fact. Well, what I have to say about that is: It's called science fiction not science fact and the reason why they call it science fiction is because what they write in books or make in the movies is dreamed up. And as a science fiction writer once told his publisher, "The only difference between fact and fiction is that fiction hasn't happened, yet!"
Jessica Long
jaina@hctc.com
Anime Isn't Juvenile
n Issue 106, Shane Kliese wrote that anime is juvenile. Obviously,
Shane is one of the many people whose sole exposure to anime is probably
the kid-ified Battle of the Planets or DragonBall. Many people in
America believe that cartoons are only for children, which has been
proven untrue in Japan with their anime. Movies like Akira and
Ghost in the Shell are very far from being juvenile. They have
intricate plots and very detailed characterization that one may possibly
find in the United States as a well done TV series like Star Trek or
Babylon 5.
Todd Behrmann
owlbot@hotmail.com
Some Anime Is Great
omeone in a letter to the editor made some comments about anime that I found quite disturbing. This person had the audacity to call anime juvenile and for those with short attention spans. In Japan, anime is a big part of their movie culture. This person has obviously not seen any good anime. I'll concede that most of the dubbed stuff is horrible, but then so are a lot of movies from over here. Most anime is not juvenile, and it's wrong to assume that just because it's a cartoon (I'm not saying all people do this, but most I've talked to do). Some anime can be great, but some of it truly sucks.
Emily Helton
nerdqueen@geocities.com
Nothing Satisfies SF Fans
have noticed something about my fellow science fiction fans.
Nothing ever satisfies them.
The person who starts counting scientific inconsistencies in a movie has
a problem, not the movie. That person needs to unclench a group of muscles and learn to have some mindless fun every now and then.
It is entertainment.
When you walk out of a movie, you should ask yourself if you enjoyed it,
not wonder how many folks caught the wrong 17th digit of pi they
displayed in the movie.
Did the movie make you laugh, cry, feel scared or provoke thought?
Was the acting acceptable? Was the plot obvious, or did you have to think?
Was the movie consistent with itself?
Now, I liked The Matrix.
Did it have scientific flaws? Sure. So what! I was entertained. I wasn't looking for the answer to the meaning of life, I just wanted to be entertained for a couple of hours.
Was it 100 percent original? No. So what! I was entertained. It was a well made film that served its purpose: tell a story, make money.
Was the acting Oscar level? No. So what! I was entertained. And science fiction films are so well known for their quality acting after all...
Was the Keanu Factor overcome? Yes. The movie was good despite all the real and imaginary flaws of some actor I do not care about.
Is it going to be known as the Citizen Kane of late 20th century science
fiction? No, but it isn't the Fantastic Four either.
Brooks Blain
vitoyoder@yahoo.com
See The Matrix For Its Beauty
he Matrix is a good movie. Agreed, it is "for the masses." Agreed, it is neither new, nor innovative in concept or storyline. Agreed, it is nothing spectacular in special effects.
However, I think the pundits who say it is bad and the groupies who say it is good have missed the true brilliance of the film.
Aside from a decent story line (I must say, it is the most twisted form of Neuromancer-esque plots I've encountered) and aside from the lack of acting ability in the lead actor (please, he's cute and all, but someone teach him not to be "Ted" in every film he makes), it is the filming that is the true triumph.
In each scene, don't look at the story, nor the actor, nor think about the plot--look at every single scene and how elegantly it was filmed. From the scene going to see Morpheus for the first time: Trinity and Neo standing before the dilapidated double door--the pale, yellow light casting an eerie glow. The angle of the camera set so we feel we are truly eavesdropping on their conversation. Now, move forward to the helicopter outside the office window, Neo firing a mini-gun into the room, the camera, positioned below the helicopter as the casings and band-strips fall toward the camera--the surreal, yet real aspect.
The Matrix is a great movie. Not for its plot, its story, its characters or its special effects--it is a great movie for its sheer visual beauty. Everyone who thinks they can make movies should see this film. Everyone who thinks they can write comics should see this film. Everyone who thinks they can write should see this film. If you can truly see art--if you can "get it"--you will walk away from this film dumbstruck--for its beauty.
Should they make a sequel? Only if they can recapture the amazing filming and story-boarding they put forward in this one. The plot is good for SF, the story is good, the acting is tolerable--no, it won't win an Oscar--few "good" movies ever do.
See this film. See it again. Discover a new way to watch a story unfold.
I regret that I have had but one chance to see the film--I plan to see it again...and again...and again...and I will buy it on DVD when released.
Evan Moore
evanmoore@aol.com
SF Films Are Keanu's Niche
have to agree with the comments that Keanu Reeves isn't the most versatile actor out there, but there seem to be certain roles where he does rather well. All of his latest SF/cyberpunk roles are played rather well in my opinion.
Johnny Mnemonic, Chain Reaction and now The Matrix have provided him some rather good roles that he has carried off with some style. Since I haven't seen him in anything other than Speed and Dracula I can't comment on his acting in more dramatic parts, but I believe he has found a niche in SF films of this sort.
Kevin Adams
kadams@apk.net
The Matrix Is Not An SF Novel
find it surprising that there's so much controversy about The Matrix among SF fans. I finally saw the movie--I really enjoyed it, but for what it offered as a movie, which is different from what I expect in a book. It seems to me that a lot of the controversy stems from fans wanting a great SF movie to be like a great SF novel. Although it sounds trite, it should be obvious by now--especially to SF fans, who are supposed to think about things like this--that different media are better suited for different messages.
First, unlike most others (it seems), I thought Keanu Reeves was great in the role as Neo. It wasn't supposed to be a dominating role, and anything more dynamic would have made the movie more about him than about the ideas. He was good at allowing the action and interactions among characters tell the story, and that was critical to The Matrix story. A movie doesn't have time to be about all of character development, plot, background assumptions and their implications, and action. The Matrix made some choices, and Reeves played his role well within those choices. He helped make it a good movie.
The visuals were stunning. I don't think anything else has come nearly as close to Blade Runner in recent years. The movie captured visually what the best SF novels capture conceptually--something rare and to be well appreciated.
From a dedicated SF reader's perspective, the plot was disappointing. As I said leaving the theater, in the books I'm reading now my favorite line from the movie ("it's not really a spoon") would have been uttered around page 90, and Neo would have realized the same about the bullets around page 105 (in a well-crafted novel, exactly two pages after I thought of it so that I could feel smugly superior but not bored). Then the fun would have started as the author and characters really pushed and played with the ideas and their implications for The Matrix.
But face it, the movie was made to be commercially successful (as many others have written in to say). Making it like a hardcore SF novel would have turned it into a cult movie rather than a broadly successful one. This way, maybe it will stimulate some people to read more of the ideas in written SF.
I have to admit I've always been a much bigger fan of the print medium than the film medium for SF (except for Star Wars). Since we became parents, movie going has become much less spontaneous and much more expensive (baby sitters are not cheap), so we spend our movie dollars very carefully--almost always on big SF movies. The Matrix was released at an inconvenient time of year and arranging the outing was hard, but it was well worth it! It used the film medium well to create a great SF experience. I wish we had more like this.
Martha Maznevski
martha@virginia.edu
