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
Don't Listen To The Critics
kay, so I agree that we are on Star Wars overload. And it's getting so that I don't want to see one more thing about Star Wars. Except The Phantom Menace. It is great! George Lucas has outdone himself. It took 16 years for it to come to fruition, and it was well worth it. I would just like to say a couple of things.
First, we heard that the critics were panning the movie. Well, they didn't like the first three movies either, and the fans proved them wrong, and now they've changed their minds. In case you haven't figured this out yet, don't listen to critics. See for yourself.
The second criticism is that the movie is for kids. Well, duh! The first three movies were for kids also. Let the inner child come out and enjoy the movie.
The third criticism is about character development, or lack thereof. Well again, look at Star Wars: A New Hope. Let's be honest. There wasn't much character development there. We saw Luke Skywalker, a moisture farmer who was bored; Obi-wan Kenobi, an old man with delusions of grandeur; a scoundrel of a smuggler named Han Solo; Princess Leia, a chick with a really weird hairdo; and one great evil dude, Darth Vader. It was not until the next two movies that we really get to know these people and what they are really made of.
So to recap, critics don't know what they're talking about. The Phantom Menace is for kids (yeah!). It tells us the beginnings a great story, and I for one can't wait until the next installment. Oh, and in defense of Jar Jar Binks: I think he was a welcome addition to the movie and I definitely hope that he is in the next one.
Janice Scheib
trekkermom@earthlink.net
The Critics Were Right
am not a professional film critic and I frequently disagree with the established Hollywood film aficionados, but as a science fiction enthusiast I was severely disappointed with the latest Star Wars installment. In fact, I concur with many of the points made by Jason Hill in his letter posted in Issue 110, the only difference being that I truly did not enjoy this film. I found the Queen's costumes interesting and of course the special effects were excellent--like most of the current crop of science fiction films--but the screenplay was choppy and disjointed, the characters had no more depth than a Saturday morning cartoon, and the "Disneyification" of the creature characters, especially the bumbling, irritating Jar Jar Binks, almost drove me from the theater. A university student asked me what age group I felt the film was designed for and I told her maybe an eight year old if they were not too mature.
Perhaps seeing this childish fantasy after viewing a very mature and sophisticated The Matrix was simply too much of a contrast. People may say my inner child is dead, especially if they have never seen my office decorated with Darth Vader and C-3P0 multimedia banks, General Ursus Planet of the Apes 30th Anniversary collector's edition figure, 11 Star Wars transforming action play sets, a Borg escape pod, numerous Star Trek ships and action figures, and my latest addition, the Mummy's Tomb action play set with ancient sounds and undead lights. I truly enjoy "fun" movies even with almost impossible plots but The Phantom Menace was just not one of them.
Mary Harrsch
mharrsch@oregon.uoregon.edu
Thank You George Lucas
peaking as a fan when Star Wars first come out, and now a parent of three kids, all I have to say is...thank you George Lucas! My kids (and I) left the theater wanting to see Star Wars: Episode I again. My seven-year-old daughter loves Jar Jar and Queen Amidala. Thank you again, Mr. Lucas, for giving my kids what you gave me 22 years ago.
Susan Conner
stikeforce@webtv.net
The Phantom Menace Was Flawed
he Phantom Menace is a momentarily brilliant film with a lot of flaws.
I can see why some critics panned this film,
although I think it is overly harsh to call it a bad movie. In terms of
production, The Phantom Menace has set a new standard in visual effects.
The richness of the canvas that George Lucas has painted will prompt comparison
with any movie made subsequent to Episode I. It's just too bad that
the story kept all the cheese (plus more) from the original movies with
only a taste of the epic grandeur that kept the first two films from
becoming parodies of Saturday morning cartoons.
My favorite moments from The Phantom Menace:
Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan's entrance into the hidden underwater city; this sequence has a sense of wonder, a feeling of discovery and of entering a magical kingdom which the best fantasy stories can evoke. Unfortunately, the sense lasted only a moment.
Lucas did a fine job with the final sword battle with the two Jedi and Darth Maul, intercut with the other scenes of combat. The sword fight
was appropriately splendid. Only the most jaded would complain that the droid
battles were anything less than spectacular. I do wish that we saw
more of the space battles--and without Anakin playing his video game in
the cockpit.
Oh, and the pod race was pretty cool too. Except for the announcers, who
seemed to have escaped from a Disney cartoon. Jar Jar Binks was actually
kind of funny, eliciting several laughs, although a couple jokes fell
totally flat--I sat in a nearly full theater with quite a few teens, and
some of the sight gags were met with dead silence. But overall, Jar Jar
wasn't a disaster as I had feared. Certainly not as annoying as a gaggle
of Ewoks.
My least favorite moments:
The scene with the Jedi masters was painful to watch. I swear that I
could feel a palpable force all right: embarrassment as the audience
nervously chuckled at the cheesy dialogue, and the totally offsetting
Samuel Jackson whose performance just didn't work for me. He's a great
actor, but he didn't fit the scene at all. Perhaps if he had been given
something more substantial to say...
The movie stopped dead in its tracks when the moment for choosing
Anakin's fate came along, the scene punctuated with Anakin's "Yippee!"
I thought I would puke.
Actually, just about all the scenes where Anakin talks were irritating.
Thankfully, he doesn't have too many lines. The sad thing is, I think I
sensed what Lucas was trying for here and it could have worked
brilliantly: a strange boy wise beyond his years strikes mythical resonances.
Fortunately, there was enough of the "good" stuff--battles, sweeping
landscapes and special effects--to keep my interest, but I don't think
I can argue with people who were totally dissatisfied with this movie.
Jee Hoon Lee
dorok@accessnv.com
Lucas Screwed Up This Time
remain amazed at the lengths to which some Star Wars fans are going to defend The Phantom Menace, which, for all its admittedly superb special effects, is a dull, lifeless shell of a film.
There isn't an engaging character in sight. There are only ciphers. Say what you will about the quality of acting in A New Hope, its characters at least had personality. The same cannot be said of The Phantom Menace's characters. They are either cardboard cut-outs (Qui-Gon, Anakin) or juvenile comic relief (Jar Jar Binks, the podrace announcer). George Lucas does nothing to foreshadow that Anakin could turn to the Dark Side except to have Yoda babble some out-of-context gibberish about fear. In his attempt to make Anakin likable, Lucas has made the character boring. It makes you miss Luke Skywalker's constant whining.
Yet the moment someone points out the many and obvious flaws of The Phantom Menace, some Star Wars fans--by no means all of them--go on the defensive. They call critics names and tell everyone that The Phantom Menace must be viewed through a child's eyes.
This is nonsense. As an adult I am perfectly capable of enjoying many children's movies without somehow dumbing myself down. I didn't enjoy Episode I.
It's a sad fact that Lucas screwed up this time. So what? That doesn't invalidate the rest of the Star Wars saga.
Franklin Harris
tfharris@hiwaay.net
Jar Jar Is Part Of Star Wars
hile reading these recent letters about The Phantom Menace, I came across one of the people that I always refer to as one of "those" people.
If someone tells you that they are a Star Wars fan, but they just hate Return of the Jedi because of the Ewoks, then this person is not a Star Wars fan. Sorry. Ewoks, and Jar Jar Binks as well, are very funny, it's true. And the kids like them. So? Is this bad? The Ewoks or Jar Jar do not turn any Star Wars film into a kids movie, it is just a fact that the kids like them. You expect everything to be completely serious, all the time?
Ewoks and Gungans are in Star Wars because Lucas wants them there. Star Wars is his and his alone, and he will do with it what he wants. You like Star Wars or you don't. Ewoks and Gungans are just another part of Lucas' grand universe.
So get off your high and mighty pedestal and enjoy some funny stuff in between mass slaughter and the battle of good vs. evil.
Eric Spratling
Jediof81@aol.com
Not Another Three Years!
took three kids to The Phantom Menace, ages ranging from eight to 12 years old. Myself, I saw the original Star Wars when I was 17 years old.
The kids and I loved it! Oh sure, for me the experience of seeing
Episode I was a little like when I first saw The Empire Strikes Back--as soon as it ended, I said, "Oh, no! Not another three years!"
And, like Empire, in Phantom Menace there were things I wished I saw more of, but, as the kids that accompanied reminded me, enjoy the adventure, enjoy the action and don't focus so much on minor details.
They laughed at Jar Jar Binks--I found him a bit annoying. They
didn't see anything wrong with the dialogue--I found it, at times, a bit
choppy. We all wanted to see more of Darth Maul!
In short, we came out of that movie with an experience that will give us
a good memory which will last us, and when you look at Star Wars: Episode
I - The Phantom Menace from that perspective--ain't that what going to
the movies is really about?
Ricky Cruz
RCRUZ01@compuserve.com
Star Wars Provides A Great Escape
went to the original Star Wars movie 32 times because each time I wanted to see a movie, I looked at what else was out there and decided nothing was better than Star Wars, so went to see it again. The movie climate has changed somewhat now, and there are more action/adventure and space opera movies than there were 20 years ago. But I still base all my movie-going decisions on whether or not it's better than Star Wars. Not that Star Wars was great theater, or great story, but because it was for me an intensely satisfying entertainment.
This is how I feel about The Phantom Menace. It was intensely satisfying entertainment, and I will go to see it again, probably several times in a big theater before I buy the video or DVD. I don't go to movies for great literature, I read books. I don't go to movies for horror or blood and guts because I can watch the TV news for that. I go to movies to escape the cares of my world and to enjoy the plots and solutions to them in other worlds. That's what all the Star Wars movies provide me, and I am grateful to George Lucas for giving me exactly what I want.
Jim Warner
jwarner@insync-media.com
Jar Jar Is Unforgivable
thought The Phantom Menace was pretentious, dull, condescending and
stupid. First off, the effects looked computer generated (the Gungan ruler was the worst) and the lip synching on the trade federation aliens was way off (I saw no less than five instances were they were either talking and their lips did not move or their lips were moving and no sound was heard). The podrace seemed tacked on and was too long, most of the "cute" aliens are
basically there so Lucas can make them into toys, and all the aliens had
Earth accents (Japanese, Jamaican, etc.) and there were quite a few
scenes that only seemed to be in the movie to show off the special effects.
I found
the dialog asinine and condescending (Lucas was treating the audience
like they are stupid) and forced more often than not. The dialog was
about as bad as an Ed Wood script. The actors seemed like they were
there to say their lines and go home. Most of the cast just didn't seem
"into" the roles. They were unenthusiastic and dull. The music even
seemed wrong for the movie. But the thing I will never forgive Lucas for
is Jar Jar Binks. He is the stupidest, most annoying, asinine, moronic,
pointless, useless character I have ever seen. Not only his character
but his voice just cuts into you. I think Lucas really screwed up this
time. I feel ripped off and I want my $6.00 and the 2-1/2 hours of my life I wasted on this back. You won't get me into Episode II without a fight.
Josh Hadley
MHadley@webtv.net
Jar Jar Makes The Ewoks Look Like Shakespeare
've waited years for George Lucas to finally get around doing Star Wars: Episode I and this is what he comes up with? All special effects and no character
development makes this like a painting with no meaning. Story was
sacrificed for wackiness. Jar Jar Binks was a horrible character. Someone
who was put there for comic relief and for kids toy boxes. I could
barely understand him and he made the Ewoks look like Shakespeare. Do we
ever get to know Qui-Gon Jinn or any of the other characters? Nope! Do
we ever really find out how evil Darth Maul is? If I had wanted to watch cartoons, I would have stayed home and watched the Cartoon Network. If I
had wanted to play a video game I would have brought my Nintendo out of
mothballs.
Yeah, the film is pretty, but I wanted more. I deserved more. I left the
theater feeling empty, but Lucas is laughing all the way to the bank.
Next time George, lets take out the rubbery creatures out and concentrate
more on character and script.
Mike Mora
mgm@ix.netcom.com
I'll Wait For Episode II
agree with the comments that I read about the newest addition to the George Lucas story. I was not disappointed, but it lacked the "feel" of the old characters. I missed some things when I saw the movie opening "morning" at 12:01 a.m. but decided it was the lack of sleep. It was better the second time, and I'm sure I will discover more the next time. See it again? Naturally.
Star Wars has been a part of me and my children's lives and it has been a good part. So has Star Trek, Aliens, and etc. I appreciate a good action movie with amazing special effects, great music, somewhere in space, things or buildings blowing up, heroes with a great sense of humor and a sly smile, bad guys that you love to hate, special effects, and at the end there is one main person who has saved the world with a six shooter and attitude.
Mr. Lucas, I will wait for No. 2, but in the mean while I'll see No. 1 a couple more times. This time I take my grandchild.
Rose Ollis
rose.ollis@suntrust.com
The Force Is In The Writing
had a great time seeing The Phantom Menace, but I am always disappointed with how little of the resources expended on mega-budgeted films goes toward the writing.
I read once that Melville, while crafting Moby Dick, was simply telling a story from the heart, and was consciously unaware of the themes and
metaphors that he was creating. Yet somehow, the author hit metaphorical
nails right on the head. One wonders if George Lucas is similarly, but less
successfully, in the dark about his own creation.
In the first Star Wars film, The Force was a wonderful metaphor
for being true to oneself. Was Obi-Wan really speaking to Luke in the Death
Star trench? Or was it Luke's own memory of Obi-Wan's lessons of
self-confidence? It didn't matter. The metaphor was clear. The Force was
available to every common person, as long as she or he did the right things and believed in him or herself.
The Empire Strikes Back detracted from that metaphor very slightly by making Obi-Wan "spiritually immortal," but that's forgivable in order to extend the Star Wars series in a new direction. Yoda's teachings contained classic exchanges about personal growth and self-confidence which bolstered the original Force metaphor.
Return of the Jedi threw that all out the window and made The Force a hereditary power. Only the Skywalker family has it in any quantity. The metaphor of The Force became less about "knowing oneself" and now was about-what? Money, I think. Inherit it, and you can make a difference in the universe.
In The Phantom Menace, The Force is suddenly quantifiable, measurable,
and revealed, not to be created by all life as Yoda explained in
Empire, but from a particular microorganism that ostensibly holds sway
over human fate, even to the point of deciding that it's a good
time for the virgin birth of a Force version of Hercules. The Force is now most
definitely not for the common person, but for heroes and gods. What is Lucas
trying to say now? Is he blindly drawing on mythology to create a muddy
SF pastiche of contradictory metaphors?
The Force aside, I think he made one other critical mistake to no benefit--he
should never have used the name "Skywalker" in Phantom Menace. Simply by
referring to Anakin only by his first name, future generations could have
watched the two trilogies in either order to good effect. By using the
family name, Lucas has ruined the surprises in Episodes IV, V, and VI.
Omitting the few mentions of the name, he could have easily created a
story line out-of-order that would also work well chronologically. He could
have fixed all the things I've griped about here with a few slashes of the
pencil and made a wonderful introduction to the Star Wars series. Maybe we can hope for a special edition in which he overdubs several lines to remove
the name Skywalker and to get rid of the reckless and unfortunate
descriptions of The Force and Anakin's birth.
Lucas produces enjoyable adventure yarns (that inspire lots of toys), but as
one of the de facto torch-bearers for a modern American mythology, he sadly
drops the ball. Writing is not only the core of any cinematic story, it is
also easy (and cheap!) to fix a film at that juncture. I am amazed at how
many tens of millions of dollars are spent on stories that were not thought
through in the word-processor stage.
Ken Tkacs
ken.tkacs@jer.com
Phantom Was The Best Star Wars Yet
am a huge Star Wars fan and, of course, have seen The Phantom Menace. I thought it was a superb film that far exceeded my expectations and in my humble opinion was the best of the entire series. I liked all of the characters (yes even the despised-by-many Jar Jar Binks). Jar Jar was the only Star Wars character to be completely humorous...my hats off to Ahmed Best for the great job voicing Jar Jar. The only problem I had was the lack of Darth Maul...for him to be the "villain" he didn't show up much and he had but a few lines of corny dialogue. All in all I think it was a fantastic movie and another great effort by George Lucas.
Ben VanSickle
darkthorne@usa.net
Episode I Needs A Plot And Characters
irst of all, let me say I'm enough of a Star Wars fan to
have happily sat through episodes IV-VI in one afternoon, and
a long-time enough fan to have lined up for Episode IV.
But I'm not a happy camper regarding Episode I. George Lucas has
lost the thread of his epic. The script was fragmented and
the dialog, well, stupid. The acting, especially where
reacting to computer-generated characters and scenes, was appalling. The
blatantly referential ethnic stereotyping was unnecessary
and sad. Characters--both live and CGI--were mostly
uninteresting (the queen and the junk dealer being notable
exceptions). The music was hysterically intrusive. The cast
of thousands of CGI critters was visually impressive, but
no more so than the crabs in Starship Troopers. And there
is no reasonable way, within the story line, to explain why
all of the on-screen technology of Episode I disappears by Episode
IV.
Special effects are now passe. It's time to return to plot
and character development. I won't see Episode II unless
someone I trust assures me there's a story
Matt Chew
arcana@mindless.com
Star Wars Can Only Get Better
almost believed in The Phantom Menace until they discussed who Anakin's father was. Then I lost all belief in the story. What a disappointment.
The film was good as a teaser to what will happen in the later films. Some
parts of the film were downright dull, but others harkened to the three
previous films, giving that feeling of suspense and thrill that you made
you cheer for the heroes.
It can only get better from here...
Katie Loomis
loomis@oak.ait.fredonia.edu
The Phantom Menace Was Pure Star Wars
lot of Star Wars fans have become afraid of seeing the new movie
because of negative reviews. Well, I've just seen the movie twice and I
say, if you loved the first three movies, you'll love this one.
Some critics have said this movie has boring exposition sequences. Well,
those sequences last about a minute each. To me, that's hardly enough time
to get bored. Some critics have said this movie is aimed more at children
than at adults. Well duh...this is Star Wars. When I saw the
original, right after graduating from high school, in 1977 (before it had
the subtitle Episode IV -- A New Hope) I was initially disappointed
because I wanted Patton in space or The Forever War or Star Trek's "The Balance of Terror." But as time passed, I lightened up and came to accept Star Wars for what it is.
The Phantom Menace is more richly textured and complex than the first
film, but less literate than The Empire Strikes Back. In short, this
movie is Star Wars. If that's what you want this movie to be, you won't
be disappointed.
Bill Olson
wdso@hotmail.com
Lucas Doesn't Know What Fans Want
have noted, on many occasions, that SF fans worship the ground upon which George Lucas walks. To a very limited extent, this is acceptable. Lucas changed the way in which effects were used in movies and he has pioneered changes in the effects industry. Next to that, Lucas is a poor writer and director, and is unaware of what people want.
Lucas has tried to recreate Star Wars in The Phantom Menace. This is impossible to do. Star Wars' popularity is derived from its innovation and because it caught the entire nation off-guard. What Lucas offers up in The Phantom Menace is nowhere near as innovative or subtle. The effects we've seen before, mainly in the special editions that Lucas released, and also through work done by Industrial Light & Magic for other movies. And The Phantom Menace doesn't have the ability to be released without being drowned in its own hype. For all of his intelligence, Lucas was unable to realize the impact that The Phantom Menace would have, and that impact is very little.
There are those people who will see it over and over again and ignore the flaws which run ragged through the movie, instead praising Lucas for his brilliance. There are those people, in which category I fit, that will see the movie once because we have seen the rest. And there are those who saw the others and have no interest at all in seeing the new movie.
Lucas, in attempting to recreate Star Wars, wrote the script himself and directed it himself. Neither the script of Star Wars nor the directing was that spectacular. In fact, the script of Star Wars is hampered because of the dialog which the characters must deliver. The story line is simple, which is a strong point, probably the only one for the script.
The script for The Phantom Menace is also hampered by the dialog, particularly any scene in which Jar Jar Binks makes an appearance or Anakin. The scripts for the other movies improved when Lucas was not the only person writing the script. Both Empire and Jedi are crisply written. The Phantom Menace is not.
Critics of critics argue that Lucas made The Phantom Menace for children. While this may be true, Lucas has lost sight of what children are interested in. Jar Jar would be funny to a four year old who thinks that toilet humor is funny. Even Disney does not stoop this low. Anakin may be appealing, but Anakin is the ultimate wunderkind. Luke was appealing to children in the '70s because he wasn't perfect. Parents today expect perfection from their children. Children watching this movie, with parents who expect them to be perfect, will only be overwhelmed. Anakin is not a character which they will wish to emulate.
While The Phantom Menace is an acceptable SF movie, the movie rests solely upon the strength of Liam Neeson and Ewan McGregor. Fortunately, both are able actors and the scenes in which they are in are well executed. With Liam Neeson removed, one has to wonder whether Ewan McGregor will be able to shoulder the whole of the Star Wars empire on his shoulders.
David A. Burns
dburns7@juno.com
Star Wars Was A Muddled Mess
ike thousands of other SF fans, I was there at 12:01 a.m. on Wednesday,
May 19th, to see the much-awaited, much-hyped Star Wars: Episode I.
It seems to me the rave fan reviews are more the result
of the hype rather than the quality of the film. Despite the attempts
by uber-fans to squelch critics by labeling others as "idiots" and
"morons," I wanted to put forth my views on the latest installment of
the Star Wars franchise.
I found the movie to be, in short, a muddled mess. Considering that George
Lucas has had 20-something years to sharpen the story, I'm amazed at
how cobbled together the final product is. I think it was overall a
fun movie, attractive mostly to boys under the age of 12 (and girls
under nine). The genius of the previous Star Wars movies was that they
had something to offer kids and adults, but The Phantom Menace skews way
pre-adolescent.
Special effects: Yes, it is absolutely packed to the gills with
excellent special effects (notable primarily for their quantity). The
effects are merely state of the art, nothing groundbreaking. The
Trade Federation aliens were truly embarrassing, with their Charlie
Chan accents and supermarionation mouth parts.
Acting: Dull and dreadful (there's only so much the actors could do
with the god-awful dialogue). We wait 22 years to hear Anakin
Skywalker squeal "yippee"? One possible exception is the actor who
portrays Palpatine/Sidious. He was a smooth cookie.
Action: Pretty good. I was engaged in some of the action sequences
(particularly the podrace and the duel at the end). But many of the
sequences were embarrassingly predictable with no suspense. Did you
really think Lucas was going to spend much time in the underwater
sequences? Slap in a couple of big fish who try--unsuccessfully--to
swallow them whole, and bingo-bango! Five minutes wasted.
Plot: Decent. The manipulations by Palpatine/Sidious in his rise to
power were interesting, but the rest was no better than a Bob Hope
road movie. Darth Maul is supposed to be a bad guy, but we never
actually see him do anything bad. Okay, he has a brief run-in about
halfway through the movie, and shows up for the climax, but otherwise
he has nothing to do! Are we supposed to learn that if you look bad
you are bad?
The Bottom Line: I don't think folks who liked this movie are idiots
or morons. I just think they let their excitement (that there's
finally a new Star Wars movie) get the better of them.
Chris Snider
chris.snider@sciatl.com
Episode I Wasn't Racist
would like to know what other readers feel about the racism charge against
the new Star Wars movie. For me, I would like to take a page from William Shatner's new book and say, get a life.
Star Wars is a science fantasy movie set in a time long, long ago and a
galaxy far, far away. These are not human, it is not an Earth-based culture
and it is wrong to judge aliens by earthling standards.
That said, I would like to remind those screaming racism that Jar Jar is
played by a minority who I'm certain is not a supporter of racism. Please remember that real science fiction--such as Star Trek, Alien Nation, or the movie The Brother from Outer Space--uses another world/setting as a way to teach lessons about the evils of racism. That was even true of the silly Mork and Mindy if you listened to the ending dialogue each week.
So please, enjoy the Star Wars movie as a fantasy about aliens who lived a long, long time ago.
Gloria Hoffner
Gloriah@phillynews.com
Decide About Star Wars Yourself
've been reading the letters in Issue 109, and I don't know where to start. I've seen the new Star Wars film and it is good. Jar Jar is annoying, but that doesn't take anything away from the film. See the movie and decide for yourself. You wont regret it.
Edward Toler
edmale1@yahoo.com
Review More SF Books, Not Horror Or Fantasy
want to agree completely with Kelly Robson's latest letter praising Science Fiction Weekly's book reviews and suggesting that the number be expanded. I want to disagree completely with Kelly's request to review books in the horror and/or fantasy genres. What is the basis for Kelly's claim that "most SF fans read horror and fantasy as well?" Neither I nor most SF fans of my acquaintance read horror and or fantasy. I would especially hate to see the small number of reviews currently offered by SF Weekly reduced by the inclusion of horror and/or fantasy books. Further, if the number of reviews is expanding (as both Kelly and I hope they might be) then I hope they will be limited to the SF genre.
Cal Hylton
hylton@viclink.com
Curl Up With The Mummy
went to see The Mummy on the weekend because the lines for Star Wars were too long. I had been told by my 15-year-old daughter that the movie was "stooopidd" and I had the reviews and the trailer on which to base my own opinion.
I was quite surprised to find it a humorous send-up of '30s horror flicks, and I thoroughly enjoyed myself. High art it ain't, but if anyone's looking for some moderately neat effects and a pleasantly campy hour-and-a-half, you could do much worse than curl up with The Mummy
Simon Waldman
simplest@home.com
J. Michael Straczynski Is A Genius
just had to reply to all the negative letters concerning Babylon 5. First, the fifth season may have started slow but it did some great things as it progressed, especially concerning Londo, Lyta and Byron. Second, B5 is a great show that lived up to its promise. I am a big SF fan and enjoyed the show a great deal. It reminded me how Star Trek used to be, but B5 definitely stands on its own as a classic. J. Michael Straczynski is a true genius.
Paul Schell
pemmican@tp.net
Watch Crusade And Stay Loyal
can understand the comments about how Crusade isn't worth watching because we all know that Earth survives, but then the same logic can be applied to Star Wars: Episode 1 - The Phantom Menace.
We already know that Anakin Skywalker is going to become Darth Vader and we know practically everything that is going to happen in this episode and the two that follow, and yet people still watch it. Why, you ask? Not because we are curious as to what might happen. We watch because we are loyal Star Wars fans, and we enjoy the idea and the story lines, even if we know the outcome. The same thing goes with Crusade; we wouldn't watch to see if Earth survives, we watch because we are loyal Babylon 5 fans.
Also, just because you know what the final outcome is, tell me, can you say what is going to happen during the show's run? Can you tell me if anyone will die, if any of them will become ill due to their search, or what they will find on the planets out there other than the cure? I think not! So, if you don't want to watch it, that is your choice, but don't choose to not watch it because of what you saw in "Sleeping In Light."
Mat Walker
Merlin1@jps.net
Babylon 5 Deserves An Emmy And A Hugo
abylon 5 does indeed deserve a Hugo! J. Michael Straczynski managed to get a story told that spanned the history of humanity. There was love, hate, greed, war, friendship...the whole bag. Certainly season five didn't have the whiz bang special effects and battles of season four, but that doesn't mean there wasn't drama. Fighting for independence is easy compared to actually running a country (or alliance). Season five told the story of how hard it is to hold onto power, how to stand by your principals when it is far easier to give in and just blow everyone away.
As for Garibaldi's fall from grace, that was a great story line. Sure, you knew he was going to sober up, but the details made the story. "Sleeping in Light" deserves an Emmy and a Hugo. It was an episode that pulled at your heart, wrapped up many story lines (not all, life doesn't work that way), and made you feel the loss of a dear friend. I saw one of the strongest people I know reduced to tears over the ending. "Sleeping in Light" made you laugh, made you cry, made you feel, and isn't that what art is all about? Thank you JMS for reminding us that good SF is about people, not ray guns; about life, not about robots; and about what it is to be a human being, not just a huge marketing ploy.
Keith Amolsch
kaa@bigfoot.com
Experiencing The Story Is What Matters
believe that Mr. Rob Morganbesser errs on a few points in his
letter "No More Hugos For Babylon 5." But I am only going to touch the
sorest of those points. He says that "As for Crusade, we know the
Earth is going to get saved, so what's the point of the whole show?" I
believe he horribly misses the point. In the short story "Patriotism"
by Yukio Mishima the narrator tells us in the first paragraph how the
story ends: the main characters commit suicide. Does that detract from
the power and pleasure of reading it? Not one bit.
Stephen King often announces his characters' deaths before time and that
doesn't make the reader cringe any less when the gruesome fate arrives.
In Gene Wolfe's "Seven American Nights" we are subtly told at the
beginning that something wrong has already happened to the main
character, but we are curious to know how he came to such fate.
It is the process of reading, of experiencing the story, what
matters. If the three graces of characterization, story, and atmosphere
are good, then that should be enough. To use the Lord of the Rings as an example, did you really think Sauron would get the One Ring? Of course not. We all knew he would be defeated. What enthralled the readers were the
characters and their quest. Again, characterization, story, atmosphere.
Does this apply to special-effects-laden movies and TV shows? Does "a story is a story is a story" ring any bells? As long as the effects are not
used as a substitute for story content, the answer is yes.
If J. Michael Straczynski manages to get those three elements to work well and
powerfully in Crusade and sprinkle it with an atmosphere of mythic
depth, it wouldn't matter if all of the characters become spoo in the
end. Straczynski, like any other good writer, has a literary breadth
that includes much more than Lord of the Rings (has anyone noticed the names of Earth Alliance ships like "Prometheus" and "Talos" and the context in which they are? You can't do that by just reading, say, The Hobbit).
What's the point of the whole show? To quest, to experience, to
enjoy, to care about the characters . Straczynski uses the last lines
of the poem "Ulysses" by Tennyson to describe part of the spirit of
Crusade: "One equal temper of heroic hearts/Made weak by time and
fate, but strong in will/To strive, to seek, to find, and not to
yield." However, Dante tells us in his Divine Comedy that the
unyielding, hubris-filled "Ulysses" and his crew fell off the cliff at the
world's end and ended up in Hell. Does that detract from the value of
the story or our willingness to experience it? No.
Edwin Astacio
Severian@coqui.net
Babylon 5 Was Truly 'Science Fiction'
ob Morganbesser's criticism of Babylon 5 was way off the mark. Granted, if one is determined, one can find parallels in the story arc to the Arthurian legend or Lord of the Rings. But has there ever been a genre piece of any kind which has not been vulnerable to the drawing of such parallels to classic literature? If Mr. Morganbesser found "Sleeping in Light" to be boring, so be it; it was an anticlimactic episode, designed to tie up loose ends, and was not intended to be high drama. Judging from the "spoilers" I've seen, however, it apparently has been adjudged of adequate value in the SF community to have inspired some very striking parallels to the upcoming finale of another space opera. Indeed, the various Star Trek series have been having thinly-disguised B5 plot elements turn up in their stories for years. Imitation is a higher form of flattery even than Hugos.
I agree, to some extent, with Mr. Morganbesser's comments concerning B5's final season. What has to be remembered, however, is that it was by no means certain until very late in the game that there would ever be a season five. Many elements of the story arc which would, in the normal course of events, have unfolded gradually throughout the final season had to be crammed into season four episodes against the possibility that the arc might have had to be prematurely terminated. When TNT picked up the final season,
much of what it was originally meant to contain had already taken place, often in less than optimal fashion. These things happen in television, and they hardly detract from a fair assessment of B5 as a series.
Babylon 5 deserves all the awards it can get. It is virtually alone among recent SF series in truly deserving to be categorized as "science fiction," as opposed to "science fantasy." Its realistic portrayal of human nature and conspicuous, un-Trek-like regard for such trifles as the laws of physics, together with what, as a whole, was a first-rate story arc composed of strong individual episodes, earn it an honored place in the genre.
Robert Waters
aquaeus@yahoo.com
Babylon 5 Wasn't Just Science Fiction
abylon 5 wasn't just SF, it had a political side that was explored a little too much in season five but of course that's because J. Michael Straczynski's scripts were rushed when he tried to wrap it all up in four seasons fearing cancellation. And it was also a love story, a really good one too, that's why it will win the Hugo for Best Dramatic Presentation. "Sleeping In Light" was not about how Sheridan died, it was about how he said good-bye to the ones he loved and "Sleeping in Light" is simply the best show nominated. I only hope Crusade will live up to the legacy
Rebecca Alley
B5fan4life@aol.com
