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
Honored Or Upset By Crusade?
appreciated August Ragone's comparison of Crusade to Star Blazers in his Issue No. 112 letter "Crusade Sounds Like Star Blazers."
It's incredibly obvious to anyone who has seen Star Blazers that Crusade was taken from the Yamato saga. Two things you did not mention, that I recall...the Excalibur's "main gun" simply is the Yamato's Wave Motion Gun, and guess what the Excalibur's commander is named? Captain Gideon! "Captain Gideon" is the name of one of the famous captains in Star Blazers, which is why I am sure that J. Michael Straczynski knew what he was getting into. Specifically, in Star Blazers he is the captain of the Earth Flagship Andromeda and shows
up in the second season of Star Blazers.
This seems to me to be an approving nod from the Crusade creators, indicating that they realize that we will know they took the story line from our beloved Star Blazers. I am just trying to decide whether I should feel honored or upset...
Bud Cox
gadson42@hotmail.com
Most SF Shows Had A Mixed Start
have been a Star Trek: The Next Generation, Star Trek: Deep Space Nine, Star Trek: Voyager and--my personal favorite--Babylon 5 fan all my life.
I have watched all these shows and they all started with mixed
feelings from the many SF fans that watched them. I remember when the
pilot for B5 aired, many of my friends who are big SF people had very
mixed emotions about the show and doubted if the series would live up to its
expectations. Well, need I say that it did? B5 was a tremendous series that told many stories and that crossed over many episodes, which were all part of the one large story being told over the five-year story arc.
Well, now there is Crusade and it also is starting with mixed emotions
from SF fans, but give it a chance. I think that the opening show was
great. It had plenty of action while setting up the premise for the story
and introducing the characters that hopefully (if TNT or SCI FI
picks it up) will take us on a five year series that will tell us a story that will stay with us forever.
I for one look forward to the next 12 episodes and will be hoping that
someone picks it up. Good SF is hard to come by these days. If I'm going to watch fiction then let's see some science fiction.
John Armstead
jarmstead@zoomnet.net
Crusade Is An Unworthy Successor
abylon 5 is the only television series I've ever taped in its
entirety. Unfortunately, Crusade seems an unworthy successor. The premise of the show inevitably renders it the Gilligan's Island of science fiction. Will they find the cure this week? Doubt it, there's a few more episodes to run. Babylon 5's premise allowed it to explore a variety of themes, but, much like the unlamented Star Trek: Voyager series, any exploration outside the primary mission (get back home/find the cure) is open to the accusation that the characters are indulging in distractions and leaving the important work undone.
The only suspense in the series is whether J. Michael Straczynski will allow Earth to perish. It seems unlikely, however. His Earth of the future is such an
abstract concept that I'm finding it difficult to work up much concern.
I'll continue to watch, and hope for better in this limited run of the
series.
Anthony Hauck
ahauck@eypae.com
SF Has Come A Long Way
fter seeing several critical letters regarding current SF, I feel
the need to say that this year is better than, say, 10 years ago. Back then
we had a few movies that used SF in an action story and the early, weak
seasons of Star Trek: The Next Generation. Now we have Star
Wars back, Deep Space Nine going out strong, a hopeful Crusade and SF being the go-to genre of Hollywood.
Sure, Hollywood blows it more than they get it right. At least the
genre is well considered now instead of laughed at. Recent events that I'm
happy about:
- The Phantom Menace: It had weaknesses but was enjoyable overall. I was hooked as soon as the crawl came on. Too many computer characters and over seriousness of the human actors were problems. My big concern is over the Jedis. They are the protectors of the universe but do nothing to help Naboo when it asks? Qui-Gon Jinn can't steal what's needed on Tattoine but can gamble or try to influence someone's mind? The Force is now in one's blood? What happened to reaching out for it as in the first trilogy? In spite of these problems, I'm down for the next two, but please George, give me the whole Jedi council going into battle.
- Crusade: Great effects, and the characters have potential. Babylon 5 and its characters will show up, but don't except them to be the main focus. This is a new show, it has to find its own niche. It does seem foolish to have one ship in such a desperate quest. Gary Cole is another captain who seems as blandly heroic and rule-bending as Sinclair and Sheridan were. I love Galen and Durenna, but the others need time they may not get. J. Michael Straczynski does SF so much better than others, even Trek, although I love them too. A real tragedy if the show doesn't get past 13 episodes.
- Star Trek: Deep Space Nine: Great ending, a real ending and not left open the way the Star Trek: The Next Generation cast has to be at all times in order to have another movie. Sisko's fate seems contrived and a set up for later on if they feel like it. I think the next Trek film will grab people from all casts except Voyager and show a crisis from different points around the Federation
Still, I'm more happy now. Remember the many shows that lasted half a season in
the '80s? We've come a long way baby!
Mike Nelson
miskonelson@prodigy.net
DS9 Left One Loose End
watched Star Trek: Deep Space Nine's final episode and was very pleased! Most loose ends and characters were dealt with very well. The only item I would like to have seen dealt with that wasn't is the tension between Jean-Luc Picard and Benjamin Sisko. At the start of the series it was revealed that Sisko felt that Picard was partly responsible for his wife's death. It would have been nice to have the Enterprise involved in the war effort and possibly "save" the Defiant at the last minute, thus tying up the
last loose end.
Kenneth R. Harrison
krharrison@icnet.net
I Didn't Cry For DS9
here's a saying in the theater (that applies somewhat less so to TV and
movies) to the effect that when the actor cries, the audience doesn't have
to.
Last weekend, Channel 11 in New York City showed the final episodes of both Deep Space Nine and Star Trek: The Next Generation. Seeing the
TNG finale made me realize what I missed at the end of DS9. By the end of DS9, the various characters have moved on in one way or another, and they've all said goodbye to each other. At the end of TNG, the entire crew is sitting together, playing poker. We, the audience, have to say goodbye to them. Much more powerful, that.
Jon Delfin
jondelfin@aol.com
Worf Forgot Jadzia
verall, I thought Star Trek: Deep Space Nine wrapped up the series really well. The whole flashback sequence had my wife in tears! So it's ironic that the only problem I have with it is in the flashback sequences, particularly Worf's. All of his memories are of Ezri Dax and none of Jadzia. Remember her? His wife? I mean, come on, sure she left the show, and it may not have been on the best of terms, but I find it difficult to believe that Worf's lasting memories of DS9 would not include his wedding.
Andrew Wang
aywang67@hotmail.com
The DS9 Ending Was A Letdown
loved the last two seasons of Star Trek: Deep Space Nine. They seemed to be purposeful, deliberately avoiding the episodic "all's well that ends well" trap. Decisions had consequences that haunted the stories to come. All of this made me look forward to the series finale.
What a letdown! What utter crap! What could have been a masterful
and well-honed one-hour show was bloated with saccharine nostalgia shots
whose only purpose seemed to make us reflect on how truly good the good old
days were. Blech! And the holo serenade? Really. My fiance astutely
remarked, "They're leaving the station--don't they have enough friends to have a real going-away, sad-to-see-you-go party? Instead they cart in fake hologram well wishers." Maybe this crew was so unpopular to the station at large that everyone who's not a hologram is thinking "good riddance."
Pat answers and ho-hum resolutions to what had been a gripping
season. Oh well.
Sisko's in the wormhole. Sure. And when he has the chance to
communicate with someone on the station to let them know what's happened,
does he call out to his only son? Does he bring Jake (metaphorically) to
the celestial temple? No. No, he just talks to that chippie he's known only
for a few years. If I were Jake, I'd feel betrayed and insulted, not to
mention abandoned.
A better ending would have been to have Odo reach the Great Link
only to find that it's too late, that there are some problems that can't
magically be undone and neatly resolved. That the Federation is truly
guilty of genocide.
I believe that bringing Worf onto DS9 saved the show. After that
the writing seemed more exciting and organized--the stories improved and
the actors responded to that. If only there were a way for him to save
Voyager. Or as we call it, The Ship of Fools (or Lost in Place).
E. Torres
eliani@together.net
Sliders Is Nothing Without Jerry
've watched all of the Sliders episodes and the first season was
the best. Then they started to fool with it, and now they are doing it again. What a way to end a great show. In my opinion Jerry O'Connell is Sliders. Without him it's just not worth watching.
Ann Schwartz
ann-s@webtv.com
If You Love Starships...
kay, so you're a SF fan. Unwilling to consider yourself specific to a
genre--you're not a "trekkie," you don't wield a plastic lightsaber, you
don't wear black gloves and a psi symbol, etc. You just like science
fiction with a healthy dose of the unreal, lots of interesting situations,
and--especially--star ships!
Have I got a suggestion for you. I will warn you, it can get costly if
you allow yourself to fall headlong into your quest for a truly marvelous
fleet. Still...
Okay, it's called Battlefleet: Gothic. It's a tabletop miniatures game
from a company called Games Workshop. It is based sometime in the year
40,000. Huge, hulking ships with multiple types, styles, etc. Technology
has been developed, lost, refound, lost, redeveloped, lost, etc.--until now
you have starships, shields, lances, torpedoes--but when they stop working, you have to contact your techno-priests to perform the holy rituals to make it work again. It's a good mix of super-high-tech and barbarism.
For those of you who love the idea of starship combat--but couldn't quite
finish your third Ph.D. necessary for understanding Starfleet
Battles--this is the game for you. Ships come unassembled and unpainted--so you can assemble whatever configurations you desire and paint them your own leader's colors.
Yes, it is 2-D--but the rules take into account that you're operating in 3-D
space. And the ships are truly remarkable. It is fun. It's like
hyper-chess on a grid-less playing board with ranged weapons, torpedoes,
fighters, bombers, ship-to-ship boarding actions, gravity wells, dodging
asteroids and using gas/dust clouds as cover.
Check it out--at the very least, traipse on down to your local hobby store
and look at the box--the artwork is worth it. Be careful--it's addictive.
I've spent close to $1,200 on it so far--and my fleets are just beginning to
coalesce where I want them.
Just a suggestion for all you starship lovers, hungry for a little
conflict. Short games can take 2-4 hours. Long games can take a whole
weekend.
Evan Moore
evanmoore@aol.com
Dark City And Armageddon Don't Compare
o the Saturn Award for best science fiction film went jointly to Dark
City and Armageddon. Excuse me? How can you possibly compare
these two films? Dark City was rich, well written, well
executed science fiction. It had strong characters, interesting ideas, and
excellent special effects. Armageddon, on the other hand, was one of the worst films I've ever seen in my life. The characters were awful, the acting was awful, the writing was awful, the story was awful, the music was awful, the
direction was awful, and the editing was awful. Why, then, did Armageddon get to share this award with a good movie? Because no one saw Dark City and Armageddon had Bruce Willis and
Aerosmith. Pretty lame.
Michael Heumann
aboo@primenet.com
Clarifying Some Misconceptions
must clarify a few misconceptions about the letter I sent regarding
Tamara Hladik's review of Suzy McKee Charnas' book The Conqueror's Child. I never in my letter suggested that Charnas' book be banned as John Savage erroneously contends in his Issue No. 113 letter "The Pot Calling The Kettle Black." Every book, even hate filled ones, have a constitutional right to be written. As an avid reader however, who must plunk down
limited funds for an intelligent read, it is my duty to point out the
gender warfare and female centrism evident in Charnas' book as critiqued by
Hladik.
What do starship captains have in common with lesbians? My point was the
radical-feminist hatred portrayed in a book about a vengeful amazon society. This was born out by several other readers of Charnas' prior work. It seems
that everything written by or about lesbians lately is in this vein. That's what I meant about their getting entirely too much attention.
To all you current or budding authors out there. Please no more books
about dystopias. This is an overdone and hackneyed plot premise.
T. Hannibal Gay
Hannibal@Hotmail.com
Yes, Quarrel Over Books!
rron Perkins comments in his Issue No. 113 letter, "let's not quarrel over books, okay?" thus supporting the notion that a book is just an entertainment; a pap for the masses with no more substance than a dull TV show or a bad movie. In my opinion, books are one of the few things truly worth arguing about, for
books present ideas and it is ideas that plant the seed of all change in our world and in our lives. Argue on, people! Never let anyone make you afraid to explore a new idea.
Curt Phillips
Absarka@naxs.com
What Do Critics Want?
would like to ask the critics, who so far in the last six or seven months
have complained about every SF movie released, what do you want? Tell us
the type of movie that would actually make you happy. Let everyone know
exactly what has been missing from such films as Star Trek:
Insurrection, The Matrix and The Phantom Menace among
others.
So far every letter criticizing these films has been either vague in its
criticisms or has produced only lame excuses and almost no valid
criticisms. Certainly I am not suggesting these three films are perfect, but
they are nowhere near as bad as some previous letters try to make them seem.
Also, it appears to be the same people whining about every movie. It seems obvious to me that some of these people are incapable of enjoying what is supposed to be entertainment. I don't recall George Lucas or Rick Berman ever saying their movie contained any deep philosophical meanings or recipes
for perfect societies, yet some contributors appear to feel movies such as
The Phantom Menace, in particular, should have had such elements.
My suggestion to these people is stop looking for something that was never
there in the first place.
I would also suggest they examine exactly what they want from a good SF
film, and I think if they look at the films of the past six months to a year
objectively, that they have already been given what they want but are too
arrogant to notice.
Shane Kliese
shanok@hotmail.com
Jar Jar Teaches An Important Lesson
efore I saw Episode I, I was fully expecting to hate Jar Jar, like almost everyone else. But after seeing it, I don't. Firstly, I personally didn't find him that annoying. But secondly, and most importantly: how the Jedi treat him and his people is a valuable lesson of how we can have tolerance, understanding, and respect for
others who are different.
Usually, when a figure in a movie has the funny and silly characteristics
of Jar Jar and his "king," that person is a target of ridicule and abuse.
But here, from the very first time that Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan meet Jar Jar,
there is not even a hint of patronizing or sneering attitude on the
part of the Jedi. The lesson here is that everyone, no matter how "silly"
they may seem, should be treated with respect.
And what leader is more laughable than one who blusters and burbles his words
and face? Yet here he is, the head of a real, respectable culture, and the
Jedi treat him as such.
I think we have a lot to learn about how to respect others, despite their
surface traits and appearance, from how the Jedi treat Jar Jar and his
people.
C. Cojeen
xarina@iname.com
Why Are Star Wars Fans So Defensive?
hy are Star Wars fans so defensive about The Phantom Menace?
It is almost as though they were defending a religion and not
a movie. Are we seeing a new form of political correctness developing
in science fiction where criticism of the Star Wars franchise is deemed
unacceptable, and if so, why?
For a contrasting example, the first Star Trek movie was not
all that good, the second movie was fantastic, the third one was so-so,
the fourth one was excellent, and so on. My point is, when you get
together with a group of Star Trek fans, it is not uncommon to hear
people rate the movies or the TV episodes according to how much you like
or dislike each one.
If you come across a bad Star Trek episode, Trek fans are
usually the first and loudest to make that point. The very same is true
of Babylon 5 fans, as anyone who reads the moderated Babylon
5 Usenet news group can plainly see the most devoted fans are also the harshest critics.
But in Star Wars we have a movie where the critics themselves
are verbally attacked, sometimes on a personal level. Why? Weeks
before The Phantom Menace opened the media contained plenty of
interviews of fans espousing the virtues of the Star Wars series, and I
wonder if some of these people, after the fact, now feel
defensive about their comments.
Personally I felt the same way about The Phantom Menace as I do about
Star Trek: The Motion Picture. Okay movie, but not something I
would pay for to see again.
Joseph O'Neil
joneil@multiboard.com
