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.
-- Brooks Peck, Editor
Witchblade Won't Have Lexx's Style
h, this is rich! Witchblade, the on-again, off-again, right-back-on-again series destined for TNT last time I'd heard, will finally make it to televisions everywhere. The very thing Turner Network Television wanted all the time...glorified violence and T and A (which they tried to infuse into Crusade without any success) will finally be within their grasp. How the hell can we true fans of great and well-written science fiction and fantasy expect to respect those pinheads after the utter crap they pulled? I've read a few of the Witchblade books and I tell you, it's nothing but big breasted women with very big guns (and biomech weaponry) and very short tempers blowing High Helena out of any and every joker within a 100 foot radius or more. It's a flaming joke! At least Lexx has the stones to admit it's silly SF funnin' with its ode to Red Dwarf and The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. Hell, that episode where Xev and Stanley go to the orbital whorehouse and all hell breaks loose (with a lot of interesting comments about the moods of disgruntled employees and an enlightening aspect of robot rape) has got to be one of the funniest episodes not only of the series, but of all SF shows of recent memory. (You've got to like the way the head "zookeeper" called his bosses "pimp-sisters".)
The producers of Lexx know it's a silly show and they go out of their way to deliver. I just have the very sick feeling the producers of Witchblade will just do some violent and sexist rehash of Wonder Woman or the like, and once again prove that TNT has a little problem finding good quality series to call their own. I'll be waiting to see if they can prove me wrong, but I wouldn't hold my breath.
James K. Chambliss
WeirdArchives@excite.com
Even Lexx Haters Watch It
was reading your reader's comments about how Lexx "blows chunks," and I couldn't help but notice two of the three people that did not think Lexx was any good claimed that they watched Lexx either "off and on" or "sometimes." These people, even though they claim not to like the series, still watch. That is why Lexx will survive. Even the people that don't like Lexx will still watch, if only to see what indignity the show will air next.
Matthew Shealy
euro2@innova.net
Lexx Protests Are Old News
alk about major flashbacks! It's absolutely incredible that the comments about Lexx being somewhat immoral and the characters being superficial are exactly the same that I heard over 20 years ago. Back then, everyone was lambasting a new series on television that had women running around half-naked, and farfetched plot lines that were way too improbable to believe. People complained that the network must be out of their minds to allow such tripe to be shown during a time period that could be viewed by impressionable children and young adults. Read the pans in an old TV Guide and you'll see what I mean. The series, of course, was Star Trek.
Joe Flaugher
jflaugher@hotmail.com
Values Will Change In The Future
ast night I watched a 1936 film called Flash Gordon Against the Tiger Man from Mars.
The special effects were rudimentary, yet charming, and the acting and the story kind of reminded me of current Star Trek: Voyager story lines. Today, in the year 2000 we laugh when we watch how the people from 1936 thought the future would be. They act and talk according with the values and beliefs of their era, and I wonder how would they react if they somehow got a glimpse of current TV shows. (In the 1800s to see a woman's legs was considered pornographic.)
So, all these people complaining about sex on Lexx are reacting the same way; how do we know the sex standards from ages to come? Will full frontal nudity and fully exposed sexual intercourse be considered pornographic on the year 2500? How about 3010? Will we keep our 20th century values in the 26th century?
If, someday, we could get that imaginary time machine and watch tomorrow's TV shows, I'm sure our 20th century values would be shocked!
At least Lexx is a unique show that makes me feel like I am in another era, with different values and traditions. And that's what good science fiction is all about!
Dario Antepara
ender001@earthlink.net
We Prefer Violence
hy are so many people frothing at the mouth about Lexx? I've seen Rated Lexx, and the first two episodes shown on SCI FI. No, they didn't do much for me, but I'll try to give it a few more episodes. Sure, it is more openly sexual than a lot of American fare, but I've always thought it was kind of sick how this country seems to find it more acceptable to see a person plunge an axe into a breast rather than see one kissed. Maybe if more characters were killed after being sexual, folks would find it more acceptable. Me, I am looking for more story.
John Sheffield
jcsheff@mindspring.com
Can't Support Lexx
have had mixed feelings about Lexx from the beginning. On the one hand, I like the cast, and it is visually inventive. It definitely isn't like anything else on the air. But I am a Babylon 5 fan, and I cannot forget the battle J. Michael Straczynski had with TNT over the B5 spin-off Crusade. TNT wanted more sex, including a sexual-explorer character. At first, I was really defending Lexx to the B5 community, but my conscience started to bother me. Is a sexual-explorer really any different from a love-slave? I had to conclude that it was not. It wasn't easy for me to criticize Lexx--ever since ABC canceled the innovative Max Headroom series in the late '80s, I have tried to support series that try new things. This time, however, I just couldn't. Lexx has some really good things going for it, but the sexual content detracts from the interesting stuff.
Tammy Smith
gkarfan@webtv.net
Censorship Of Lexx Is Tyrany
exx is good, but censorship is bad. Being a longtime fan of SF, I have always enjoyed the sense of freedom SF books and movies have consistently upheld as an ideal. Even when fighting the tyrants of the universe, freedom is valued above all else. Over and over the same freedom theme appears. And then a series like Lexx hits the SCI FI Channel and of course, what is the first thing the network execs do...censor it. Just rate the damn show...and let it go! As an American citizen and a strong believer in freedom for everyone in our society, I say just rate the show and let it go. Freedom (as guaranteed in our Constitution) has no exceptions in my mind, unless you count tyranny as the one exception to freedom. Freedom is being able to watch what you want to watch and not watch what you don't want to. That is freedom. So what about Lexx? I watched the first show and saw how silly it was, so I took it as the spoof it is obviously meant to be. I watched the first five minutes of the second show and switched to another program, not because I was offended by any nudity that may have flashed across the screen, but because my stomach turned when I saw the first indication of censorship (a blurred out area). Only tyrants censor, or hasn't anyone noticed?
Paul Sorrells
wizard2000@austin.rr.com
Whither Gambit?
have not seen or heard of an
actor for Gambit being in the cast of the X-Men movie. Now I know he's
not the most important character, but can they really do the
movie without our favorite Cajun swamp rat? They have Rogue, and while she's a lot more than Remy LeBeau's
(a.k.a. Gambit) love interest, it seems kind of hollow to
have her without Gambit. Though I must grant, too many
wonderful characters have graced the X-Men comic book for
them to do them all justice in a two-hour movie, and some
people will just have to be disappointed in their favorite
character's exclusion, but I thought Gambit was a sure bet for
the include list because he is so popular.
Kelly Ann Hampton
kahphoenix@hotmail.com
France Was Indeed The U.S.'s Enemy
would like to comment on Steve Block's Issue No. 143 letter, "Jack's Politics Are Backwards." In it, he says that at the time, the United States was friends with France and opposed to Great Britain in the War of 1812.
This is simply not true. In the many Anglo-French wars from 1799-1812, France tried to drag the U.S. into its wars with the British and was also impressing American sailors much as the British were doing! In fact, the situation grew so bad that the U.S. Congress passed a bill authorizing the use of force against French ships and banning French ships from American ports.
Also, it was Napoleon's manipulation that helped cause the War of 1812 with Britain. The U.S. passed a law stating that no trade would go on with Britain or France until they stopped impressing sailors. It also went on to say that when one of them did this, the U.S. would cease all trade with the other. So naturally France stopped and Britain paid the price in U.S. trade, thus increasing Anglo-American tensions. And then France went right back to impressing.
So the truth is that the U.S. was unofficially at war with France. Napoleon only sold Louisiana because he was strapped for cash while trying to take over Europe. This is why George Washington and Thomas Jefferson both warned against becoming involved in European wars and why our alliance with France collapsed.
Chris Linebarger
darkshadow39@hotmail.com
Martian Colors Predate Robinson
think there is an even older justification for the colors in the Mars flag than the books written by Kim Stanley Robinson. How about the explanation of how the Martians were able to see in the classic film War of the Worlds with Gene Barry? They used a device with red, green, and blue filters.
Tony Vickers
acvickers1@hotmail.com
Global Warming Is Propaganda
ust got through reading Lab Notes in Issue No. 143. Hurrah, hurrah! Isn't it amazing that in the early 1970s ecologists were warning about global cooling, and the only remedy was to shut down the U.S. economy? Now the are warning about global warming and their solution is to shut down the U.S. economy. Is there some kind of pattern here? Also, not long ago on a Discovery Channel/ABC "news" break some scientist was worried that if global warming continued and melted the polar ice caps, that certain viruses that had been found in the polar ice could cause diseases that were heretofore unknown. I would like to point out that the polar ice caps have been calving icebergs since the end of the last ice age. These icebergs have been floating south into warmer waters and melting for the last 100,000 years, releasing these viruses right along. Talk about your alarmist propaganda!
Michael Ball
maximumogre@hotmail.com
Join The Excelsior Campaign
was struck by the nearly overwhelming negativity expressed in the Letters to the Editor on this site regarding ideas for new Star Trek series. Especially those against George Takei and a possible Excelsior series.
One person stated they felt Takei was not "lead" material. I wholeheartedly disagree. Take a listen to the Excelsior audio adventures (I believe one of them is called "Cacophony") and you'll hear the voice of a starship captain.
More to the point, though, watch his performances throughout his career as Sulu. From a swashbuckler (under alien influence) to the captain of the Excelsior, Takei has already proven he can play anything. I have heard/read/seen a passionate love for this role from the actor. So many actors are afraid of being typecast--this is one who has no problem playing a part he loves for as long as people will watch it. And if you've ever seen an interview, this man has presence! He's right up there with Patrick Stewart or Avery Brooks.
While I have nothing against other ideas (continuing the 24th century stories, jumping ahead, Starfleet Academy, etc.) I think the best way for Star Trek to survive (and, no, it does not "need a rest"--if done right, nothing "needs a rest") is to go back to its roots. Sulu and the Excelsior are an excellent way to achieve this.
In this regard, and based on news from this very site, Demensions has joined forces with the International Federation of Trekkers and their Excelsior Campaign to bring Sulu to television in an ongoing series.
We hope everyone will get Paramount's attention and give Sulu, the Excelsior, and its crew a chance to shine.
Martin L. Cahn
editor@demensions.freehosting.net
Make Star Trek TV Movies
've read the rumors about Star Trek:
Starfleet Academy, Enterprise and other concepts the producers are
supposedly pitching, and find myself uninterested.
There are a horde of Star Trek stories which can be told using the
existing characters. The current support behind a Sulu series is
evidence of this. Most of these stories are not involving enough to make
a series, but they might make interesting TV movies. In this manner we
could see Sulu as captain, Dr. Crusher in command of her own medical
rescue vessel, Quark taking on the Orion Syndicate, Chancellor Martok
leading the Klingon empire or the Doctor in his bid for
recognition of sentience. And if they want to do a movie about Starfleet
Academy or new characters, they can do so without completely abandoning
those icons we already enjoy.
Perhaps this is not moving forward in the sense that many fans have
called for, but it is progress in that it perpetuates the mythos the
fans enjoy and fleshes out the existing universe. Furthermore, it will
reduce the volume of Trek on the airwaves and allow for hopefully more
quality.
Philip Mitchell
mitchell@ns1.jmcp.com
Trek Has Lost All Humanity
he problem with Star Trek now is that it has lost its humanity. I'm all
for cool gadgets and tech stuff, but somewhere along the line it
got out of hand. How many times can you upgrade the phasers or deflector
dish? Modulate the shields, fix the power couplings, do this or that to
the warp core. Blah blah blah, yadda yadda yadda. Who cares. It's all
arbitrary. It's there for an episode, then forgotten. Nothing changes.
They move on, but they go nowhere. (Example: Star Trek: Voyager's "The Year of Hell") Too many episodes are like that. It's too much.
Too much time is spent talking about the treknology. Too much time is
spent speaking trekspeak. Too many episodes focus on treknology. What's
worse is that they have sacrificed the characters on Voyager to the
treknology. So many great character moments have been lost because the
needs of the treknology was greater than the needs of the crew--or the
one.
What's worse, it's always the same. How many times have we seen the same
episode disguised as a new one. Change the name of the radiation, add this
new component to the warp core, and stick in the generic alien requiring
rhinoplasty and viola!
Andy Byron
AByron@LSIJAX.COM
Bring On Trek's Dark Side
was reading through the letters and spotted several mentions of a Star Trek series based around Starfleet "SEALs." This struck me as a really good idea, if done right. Starfleet is both the exploration and peace-keeping arm of the Federation, dedicated to fostering peace and enlightenment throughout the galaxy (or so I've picked up from the few dozens various episodes and movies I've seen). Sometimes, to keep the peace, you must make war.
The series would work, I think, if it played up that dark aspect of the Federation. The soldiers depicted would be Starfleet's elite, and the missions they'd go on should be, at best, morally ambiguous. They would be, perhaps, killing machines in a society that looks down on such things. The series could focus intensely on these episodes. Also, the politics of the Federation, including the shadowy things that go on behind the scenes, would be emphasized.
The soldiers would go on missions ranging from simple guard duty to assassination ops to spy jobs, each with the flavor of the unexpected. Just what is the mission about? An interesting twist might be assassinating a Vulcan leader who is very vocal in support of the Federation, only to link the assassination to Romulans, Cardassians, or whatever, to undermine support for them in a border dispute. Things like that which cast a dark light on the Federation's squeaky-clean image and reveal the things the Federation does to further the cause of peace.
As far as the cast and characters go, it probably wouldn't work to have actors from previous series in without good reason (though the soldiers' paths could cross theirs occasionally). An all-new cast would be best; it would be even better if they were chosen for acting ability rather than sex appeal.
I know it's probably not in the spirit of Star Trek, but this series could be like Star Trek: Deep Space Nine, revealing the seamier sides of the Trek universe. It would have all the good elements: action, suspense, politics, corruption, ethics, intrigue, and espionage. Add in the emotions of the characters and you've got a good formula.
Of course, in real life, it would never work: in the interest of ratings the executives would probably make it into an "us-versus-them" thing with the brave, stalwart, gung-ho humans killing every alien that moves and sleeping with each other in between, plus lots of sexy young Melrose Place rejects with cool-looking guns.
Richard Gaulding
f.gaulding@students.oglethorpe.edu
