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
DiCaprio Has Copious Evil
eonardo DiCaprio as Anakin Skywalker? Why not? We scoffed at Tom Cruise in Interview with a Vampire, and as it turned out, he was well cast. Give Leonardo a chance. As a gunslinger in The Quick and the Dead, he showed an evil side that would well fit the future Darth Vader.
Tim Volk
trvolk@hotmail.com
Acting Doesn't Matter To Lucas
he basic reason Leonardo DiCaprio would make a horrible Anakin Skywalker is his size. Sure, he makes a logical progression from little Anakin--same cute towhead, just a little larger. But how would Lucas explain Anakin going from this little waify guy to the hulking, towering Darth Vader? Does the Emperor give Vader lifts? Implants?
The acting issue is ridiculous when mentioning Star Wars. Leonardo is a pretty good actor when given a good script. Which he wouldn't be given if the writing for Episode I is an indication of what's to come.
Besides, who needs acting ability in the Star Wars world? Could Mark Hamill really act? His resume since Star Wars seems to answer that. But was he a great Luke? Of course! Carrie Fisher? Great Leia, but I wouldn't watch much of her other work. The only good, young actor in Star Wars was Harrison Ford. Liam Neeson can act with the best of them, but he stunk in Episode I because he had no material to work with.
You don't need a good actor because George Lucas doesn't care about acting. Lucas has gone from creating mythic storylines with lovable characters to unimaginative scripts and digitally manipulating any sincerity that might have existed on the studio floor. I heard that 95% of Episode I was digitally manipulated--including actors' performances being spliced together and a main character who was entirely digital. In his effort to create beautiful movies and realistic effects, he has gutted the soul from his projects. That's why acting ability is irrelevant; it would be wasted. I'd love for Lucas to focus again on characterization rather than eye candy.
When it comes down to it, Lucas needs to find someone who physically bridges the gulf between the little blond kid and the enormous Vader, acting talent aside. I'm sure there are a lot of tall guys out there who could easily fit the role.
Rick Blanchette
RBlanch@ballpublishing.com
DiCaprio Lacks Spidey's Stature
eonardo DiCaprio's much too short for the role of Spider-Man. Spider-Man, whether in comic or cartoon form, had to have
been at least six feet tall! Maybe if Peter Parker were bitten by a
radioactive spider at the age of 15, DiCaprio could have a small part early
in the film as Spider-Boy. But since he was bitten shortly after beginning
college, this would certainly be unlikely. I think the best choice to play
Spidey would be Casper Van Dien. Not only is he the right height, but he's
already played heroic roles in Starship Troopers and Tarzan. So not only
would he be in terrific shape, but he's still youthful-looking enough to
pull off the role as the college-age Peter Parker who would soon be the
web-swinging, wall-crawling hero he's destined to become.
C. Simmons
Cliffbxny1@aol.com
Trek Is About Characters, Not Effects
think what a lot of the people out there are missing when they discuss new ideas for the next Star Trek series is that the cast and crew make the whole show worth watching. I'm hearing ideas of shows with different characters every week, which I guess people believe will make Star Trek fresh and different. I don't think this would work at all. One of the main reasons the first three series were great was that we came to love the crew and the way they interacted with each other. What would the original series have been without McCoy and Spock's bantering? My personal favorite, Star Trek: The Next Generation, was great because I loved watching Data, Worf, and the others develop their characters and grow over the course of the series. Who can say that Star Trek: Deep Space Nine would have been DS9 without Quark constantly trying to outwit Odo, or Bashir and O'Brien trying to defend the Alamo together? These are the things that make a show worth watching. Setting, special effects, and alien planets are nice, but they're the background. Without the characters and their depth and relationships, it's just another SF series.
Steve McAce
Redhaven1@aol.com
Voyager Debate Is All Whining
egarding the Issue No. 147 letters "Voyager Rips Off Dr. Who" and "Most Voyager Fails to Incite Wonder," I have to say just how appalled I am at the stubbornness and hypocrisy of modern Star Trek fans. Star Trek: Voyager may not exactly be the cup of tea for these people, but one thing Paramount must surely have learned long ago with Trek is that they are never going to be able to please everyone. Voyager is different from the other shows on purpose, by design, so there will always be those turned off by one aspect or another.
This is obviously a long-running debate, except that it's not a debate. It is people whining. Alleged Star Trek fans constantly put down the series--so why do they continue to watch it? Or they put down the show without even having watched it fully and wind up making unsupported statements.
And as for the recent episode with the WWF wrestler in it, I admit I was nervous about this but I gave it a chance. Not only was the wrestler's brief appearance (despite all the hype) inoffensive (it was actually amusing), but the rest of the story was also very powerful in terms of drama, character development and social commentary. To not even watch the episode, as one letter-writer admits, and then put it down based solely on one person's appearance (come on, it was a cheesy wrestler, it wasn't as if O.J. Simpson guest-starred), is pure hypocrisy.
Adam Goss
argF91@hotmail.com
Solid Ethics Defines Trek
've noticed a lot of people proposing innovative new formats and
situations for future Star Trek series. Some of them sound good, but
others seem to want Star Trek to stop being Star Trek and be something else
instead. The defining feature of Star Trek for me is an ethical vision.
Star Trek captains do the right thing, even when it's not the advantageous
thing. The Star Trek universe at its best is one which transcends the
petty politics and shallow ends-justify-the-means pseudo-morality of today. Star Trek is also about the idea that society is improvable, that maybe
we're going somewhere and with a combination of good will and technology
things can be good for everyone.
There are great series about tainted heroes getting their hands
dirty.
Moral ambiguity and pervasive darkness are all over TV. There isn't a
problem with that, but if Trek jumps on that bandwagon it won't be Trek any
more.
Rufus Polson
dpolson@sfu.ca
How About A Federation Utopia?
long ago moved somewhat away from Star Trek and more toward traditional science fiction. I watch the shows, but I'm not as "into" them as I once was. I absolutely detested Star Trek: Voyager for awhile because it was, let's face it, phenomenally stupid for a few seasons. However for some reason I've been surprised to find myself thinking of what a new series would be like. Personally I think they ran out of steam a long time ago and should take a break, but I might be willing to watch a series that went in a different direction. For one thing I would like to see more of the people who are not in Starfleet or the military at all. I am aware that might alienate some, but a large majority of the Federationers are surely not working for the military or government.
In fact, I would not mind seeing a series that is largely not set in space at all, but on planet. It could be set on some sort of unallied trading world where various species, some decidedly non-humanoid, live together. That might sound like Babylon 5, but I do not think the cosmic conspiracies would be necessary, and the familiar Star Trek races would be predominant. Another show could be set decades after the Dominion War when the Federation has entered a sort of Golden Age. Species line up to join, peace is universal, and the Federation is rich enough to make whole worlds devoted to research. Some of these worlds do research that the Federation deems dangerous, and none more so than the one in question. The scientists here see the Federation as a static Utopia that achieved all its goals, and may be a victim of its own success. Unlike in the past where the Federation is right, except when it violates its principles, this could more question the whole concept. That might be a little too daring, but many of the scientists can often be made to seem like malcontents who are nostalgic for a time that was not so great. Questioning does not always mean refuting. Also a Dyson Sphere or alternate Earth could be intriguing.
Joseph Fourier
JFourier@sff.net
I Fancy More Fantasy
ith all of the science fiction movies that are out, I think that there needs to be a little more focus on fantasy, like the movie Willow. A movie with the graphics of Star Wars, but the storyline of a fantasy book. A good author of science fiction that I would like to see made into a movie, is R.A. Salvatore. With the way his books are written, a movie based on his storylines of Drizz't would be an asset to science fiction films. With the right cast, I feel it would be a great hit in the movies.
Jesse Rozplochowski
polishgoste@aol.com
Free Enterprise Is A Waste Of Time
fter reading your review of Free Enterprise, I don't know what's more pathetic: the fact that this pointless movie was made in the first place, the fact that the filmmakers thought that the world needed a DVD edition of a movie that saw no real theatrical release (complete with outtakes and commentary, as if anyone cares), or that producer Mark Altman is still carping, three years later, about being "former editor of Sci-Fi Universe." And he wonders how he got the nickname "The Al Bundy of Fandom." The magazine's dead, this movie isn't anything but a waste of perfectly good DVD disks, and Altman really needs to take the advice of his role model and get a life.
Rob Miner
vicgrego@yahoo.com
Sliders Lacked Any Closure
ast week I watched the finale of Sliders and was very disappointed. I was not an avid watcher but I did watch from time to time. When a show says it's the final episode, I expect to see some sort of closure. Where was it for Sliders? That was the most wide open episode I've ever seen on any show.
Janice Rosato
jrosato@enter.net
Sliders' End Leaves Room For More
eople are complaining that the end of Sliders wasn't a good episode because it left the viewers hanging. Did Remy die? Did Earth Prime defeat the Kromaggs? Are Quinn and his brother still lost forever? I thought it was classic SF--right up there with some of the best, and I think the acting was some of the best that the cast has ever done.
The finale reminds me of a story that I read in high school called "The Lady or the Tiger." In it, a man is given a choice of two doors. Behind one of them is a beautiful woman. Should he pick this door, he would live out the best years of his life with a woman who would give him everything he ever dreamed of. Behind the second door, however, is a ferocious tiger that hadn't been fed in quite some time. Should he pick this door, he would be immediately torn to shreds.
The man looks at the two doors, wondering which he would wind up picking--a great life or a quick and terrible death.
He reaches out, opens the door....
That's where the story leaves off, leaving the rest of the story to the imagination of the reader.
I think that's what the writers were intending.
Nothing in life is instantly solved. Some things must remain a mystery.
Not all storylines are wrapped up in nice, little packages. Not to mention that it also leaves the door open for possibly some feature flick or a return of Sliders sometime down the road. I, for one, must give a very high score to the final chapter.
Carl Riley
Carl_Riley@ccmail.wiu.edu
Lexx Is Too Crude To Be Funny
am very disappointed in the Lexx series. The storylines are shallow and the content is too crude to be funny. Yes, I admit there are a lot of programs on TV that deal with sensitive subject matter, but I don't believe the SCI FI Channel needs to try to sink to their level, or in the case of Lexx, lower. I haven't talked to anyone who likes the show, and the main complaint is that the main character is too slutty to be sexy and the poor attempt at humor--using sex as the only subject matter--is overdone and too graphic for the taste of the SF fans I know. Overall when Lexx comes on the channel is changed.
Bill Holliday
wholliday@fwi.com
