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.
-- Scott Edelman, Editor-in-Chief
Send us your letters!
Got a gripe about something going on in the science fiction world? Want to call attention to an overlooked genre gem? Do you disagree with one of our reviews? Would you like to tell the editor of Science Fiction Weekly what a great job he does? Write a Letter to the Editor and send it in! You'll have the satisfaction of knowing that your letter will be read by thousands of SF fans. Doubtless, fame and fortune will follow (fame and fortune not guaranteed).
An SF Grandmaster is Remembered
was so saddened to hear the news about the recent death of L. Sprague de Camp. He was a dear friend of 25 years.
In 1975, after admiring his work for years, I finally wrote him a "fan" letter. Imagine my surprise when I received not only a wonderful letter, but a recent photo and corrected galley proofs of the recent biography he had just had published on H.P. Lovecraft. For a then-18-year-old high school student, I was very impressed!
He wrote some of the most sophisticated fantasy that I ever had the pleasure of reading. Yet, he also wrote some of the most witty books and stories as well.
He and his late wife, Catherine, were the most charming people. Catherine was such a classy woman who was the sweetest person. Always had a good word of encouragement and always interested in what you were doing.
Sprague was such a delightful man who always made me feel that he was interested in what I had to say. His comments on any subject matter were highly enlightening.
I will also say that they were always talking about their family. As popular as they were, they were both just like any other parents. They both loved them dearly and were quite proud of them indeed.
The thing I will always remember more than anything else was how devoted they were to each other. I used to tell them that when I get married, I would be happy if my marriage was half as happy as theirs.
Dear people. Wonderful friends. I will always remember them with a smile. Weren't we lucky to have had them for just a little while?
Jim Morrow
j2morrow@hotmail.com
Novels Diluted for the Small Screen
'd like to weigh in on the issue of science fiction novelists writing screenplays. The first thing than comes to mind is the frustrations Harlan Ellison went through with Star Trek's "City on the Edge of Forever." People who read science fiction are a bright bunch who like mind-candy--new, plausible, tantalizing ideas. Similarly, the writers have to be near Renaissance men in the sciences to create the plausibility. On the other hand, science fiction for screen or TV has to be geared to a broader audience--often alienating the reader with its light-weight approach. A lot of mind-candy is not very visual, a major requirement of screen and TV, and is often relegated to a secondary focus in those productions. (Action sequences get emphasized.)
Sure, there are some authors who could do both--Michael Crichton; that's to be expected. But like Ellison, I think many would find their works being watered down and actioned-up. So, I see the relationship of written science fiction to screen and TV science fiction like the overlapping circles in the Venn diagrams from grade-school math--some overlap but are in many ways separate worlds. (That's why serious SF readers are upset at the increasing trend of books from TV shows, because the stories are at TV/screen level.) I'd like to see Heinlein's "All You Zombies... " (I am my own grandpa) on "Outer Limits." It could be an acting tour de force for someone--or (wink) you could cast Don.
Barbara Goldstein
barb2051@aol.com
There's No Such Thing as Bad SF
just read "To Much Sci-Fi" and I have to agree with the author about the glut being good. But then I am a science fiction fanatic--I have never read, seen, or heard a sci-fi story I didn't like. And most I love. So I guess I'm no judge, huh?
Ilsa M. Matthews
aailsacrag1@aol.com
We Shouldn't Forget Jack Kirby
n reading the review of the X-Men DVD, the following quote caught my eye:"...X-Men, based on Stan Lee's long-popular Marvel comic book series...." The X-Men were the comic book series that got me started as a comic book collector, way back in 1980 or so. As a long-time fan, I feel it's my duty to point out that Stan hasn't written the X-Men since the mid-sixties or so. I'm actually not sure who the current creative team is (financial constraints and a growing disinterest in the story-lines caused me to give up buying X-Men around 1990 or so.) If the intent was to give Stan credit as the creator of the series, then it's still not completely accurate since he was only the *writer* of the first dozen or two issues of the title. Legendary comics artist Jack Kirby deserves at least an equal share of the creative credit.
Stewart Tame
sbt@ans.net
Farscape's Emotional Rollercoaster
w! In response to Tom Francis' letter ("Farscape Should Show Zhaan the Door") about Zhaan's future on Farscape, I wonder how much of this season he's actually watched.
These characters have been through a lot! People going missing, brainwashing, attacks, rescues, near-starvation, losses...you name it. This season is about how the characters have come to depend on each other. Zhaan has found herself needing the others more and more. It no wonder her emotions are running all over the place; from her perspective, she's constantly facing the possibility that she's going to lose somebody she cares about. And she has! This season she's experienced deep feelings that even retreating into the Seek couldn't spare her from.
What's really interesting is comparing Zhaan and Aeryn's ways of dealing with the group interdependency. They both resist and are drawn to their relationships with their crewmates. It's been a roller-coaster ride for both these characters. No wonder they're twitchy!
Matthew Williams
mptw@hotmail.com
Chakotay Gets Cheated
have some further ideas to give Chakotay more to do on Voyager. If Chakotay's mysticism is played up, his intuitive insights would probably be met with ALOT of skepticism from that paragon of efficiency, Seven of Nine.
Just think--If Chakotay, acting on his intuitions, started questioning Janeway's decisions, it's likely Seven would jump to Janeway's defense. (Janeway and Seven having developed a mother/daughter relationship, Seven might feel compelled to defend all of Janeway's decisions.) A nice dramatic triangle could develop here where Chakotay has to break up the Janeway/Seven axis on a decision before it leads Voyager to do something seemingly sensible but ultimately dangerous. What great character conflict!
It's crude, but you get the general idea. Chakotay, of course, would be proven right, and for once Seven would have her logical mindset challenged. Interpersonal conflict would be a nice change of pace to shake up the bland interactions of the Voyager crew. It's a cost effective way to write in more conflict without relying on another CGI heavy, "Alien Menace of the Week."
Gary Gin
garygin@hotmail.com
Open Your Heart to Dragonheart
made a discovery this last summer that I would like to call to the attention of other Dragonheart fans. My wife and I walked out of the first movie saying "Wow, that was great, but the producers left a hole big enough to drive a starship through for a sequel." The producers, apparently, agreed. They made a sequel. Dragonheart, A New Beginning. Here's the weird part; It never (that I know of) made it to theaters. I've found it only on DVD, though I'm assuming it was produced on tape as well.
I first found the DVD at one of the local rental houses. The cover art and description intrigued me, so I picked it up. I wasn't sure what to expect, especially since it had none of the original cast, but I was leaning strongly towards "Great, another demonstration that no sequel could ever live up to the original." My wife agreed, but we fed it into the player anyway (it was Friday night, and we were both tired and bored).
Fellow dragonfans, I could not have been more wrong if I had claimed that our homeworld is flat. The movie not only equaled (easily!) the quality of the original, it surpassed it!
The story picks up some years after the death of Bowen (Dennis Quaid in the original, though he's not in the sequel). It turns out that Draco had, unbeknownst to anyone, entrusted Bowen with the location of the last dragon's egg. Bowen, out of a well-founded sense of responsibility to his scaly friend, saw to it that the egg was well-hidden with a group of monks before he died.
I can only speak for myself, and I'm not, in any sense of the word, a professional movie reviewer. However, I'm also notoriously hard to please where movies are concerned. I look for a deep story-line, good character development, and a good sense of humor. Dragonheart, A New Beginning has them all in my eyes.
Bruce Lane
kyrrin@bluefeathertech.com
Andromeda Makes Her Week
ndromeda is the best thing to happen to Sci-Fi TV since the launch of Crusade. Next to The West Wing, it's the TV high-point of our week. It's smart, funny and fresh. All of the special effects don't have to look as if they're from Industrial Light and Magic. Real sci-fi fans know that the story and characters are paramount and effects is just eye-candy. Watch The Twilight Zone some time. This is a show where the plot unfolds weekly, and the main character is learning along with the audience. By the way, we have 2 generations of fans in our house: mom and dad in their 40s who have read all the major and some local sci-fi authors and who are fans of The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, Blade Runner, Fifth Element, Star Trek, Earth: Final Conflict, and Babylon 5 and a 16-year-old son who is at the beginning of his sci-fi journey but already likes the above, plus X-Men, which he has introduced us to. Effects-driven film and TV can be quite boring.
Mary McMorris
mcmsan@telocity.com
Unbreakable is Indestructible.
egarding Patrick Lee's review of Unbreakable, I have to take issue with a couple of specifics.
First, Spencer Treat Clarke played a much more credible child in Unbreakable than Haley Joel Osment did in The Sixth Sense. This is at least partly because Clarke's character was more realistically conceived and much better written. Lee seems not to have noticed.
Second, Unbreakable is a more subtly constructed story and all-around better film than The Sixth Sense. I found The Sixth Sense heavy-handed and blatantly manipulative. I never felt that way during Unbreakable and its surprise ending was foreshadowed more effectively.
I am not easily pleased by a movie, and hardly ever make an unqualified recommendation. There is usually at least one jarring point in every film that shakes me back to reality and reminds me that I'm sitting in a theater. This almost happened in Unbreakable when I briefly wondered whether one character was being played by Shyamalan himself (as was indeed the case). But this moment was fleeting and did not divert me from the story.
I thoroughly enjoyed Unbreakable.
Matt Chew
arcana@mindless.com
Dark Angel Takes it to the Max
ast night I watched my first episode of Dark Angel. Let me start by saying it wasn't the "tough-chick-with-a-bike-and-big-gun" type show that I expected. It was a really interesting show about a group of genetically-enhanced killing machines in a dismal future struggling to become their own human identities. Thankfully the intro to the show tells the background story so I wasn't too lost. The actress that plays the main character Max is awesome. She mixes just the right blend of sarcasm, as well as sexy comments with just a dab of muscle (not overdoing it) making it more believable than Buffy the Vampire Slayer. Don't get me wrong I love Buffy, but I was just expecting a Buffy/Lt. Ripley clone and was surprised as well as happy not to have gotten just that. I think the story-line and characters have promise. Everyone should give it a chance because after all it is just the first season. Even Roswell got better in the second season. First seasons are always the "groundwork" from where the series is built!
Anyway, the strangest thing is my mother, who is 54, and thinks anything after Star Trek The Next Generation is trash, is the one who persuaded me to watch the show, telling me it was her favorite, that there is nothing else on TV like it. She agrees with me that Max is the most! All in all I'm a fan now!
Tony Wallace
just5ive@yahoo
Wonder Woman Keeps Him Wondering
andra Bullock, Catherine Zeta Jones, Mariah Carey, and 3rd Rock from the Sun's Kristen Johnston... What do these names have in common? They have all been rumored as a possible choice for the Wonder Woman movie.
Just who is doing the casting for this film? EGADS! I just can't take it! With the possible exception of Mrs. Zeta Jones, these are terrible choices. (No disrespect is meant to the actresses named.)
The Wonder Woman actress chosen must have a very strong (not light or, Zeus forbid, ditzy!) persona. Why don't they find an unknown actress and/or very new, newcomer if these are the best selections they can come up with?
How about the Dark Angel (Jessica Alba), Lucy Lawless (my number one choice), Charisma Carpenter, (even her Cordelia character on WB's Angel is more serious/less ditzy than Johnson's character), or Terry Hatcher (Lois Lane from The Adventures of Lois and Clark)?
I'll bet your readers could come up with literally hundreds upon hundreds of better choices that those who, to date, have been rumored to be choices!
Why doesn't somebody connected with the film sponsor a contest to "Find Wonder Woman"--anything would be better than the lack of progress they have made to date!
Mr. Randy Gaudian
R12347@aol.com
Andromeda Should Be Accepted
n response to the many letters on Andromeda, I also feel like the series needs a chance to develop. Star Trek: The Next Generation took a season to be accepted in its own right and proved to be a tremendous hit. I compare Andromeda with Trek in the major similarities and believe these elements will prove to be the keys to its success. The things the audience have to realize is that these differences need to be realized before you can enjoy it for what it is, another Roddenberry show.
The two big similarities are 1) The Federation = The Commonwealth. The Federation is an intact government, the Commonwealth is not, therefore, the story-lines, costumes, character relationships, and adversaries will all be different. 2) Both shows have emphasized relationships among the characters. 3) There are moral choices and lessons to be learned with each episode. The writers have altered the universe to fit those changes. This is why I feel the show Andromeda will be a really good show if people would give it a chance and consider these differences without slamming the show.
True, Kevin Sorbo is not William Shatner or Patrick Stewart (thank goodness), he is a warrior/leader able to fight to restore the Commonwealth. Can you see Picard negotiating with the Neicheans for peace? I don't think so. Don't get me wrong, I loved all of the captains in the parts they played, but this universe demands a different sort of character. Sorbo fits the bill.
Dharma James
daj1999@yahoo.com
Is Babylon 5's Widescreen Wise?
abylon 5: more or less? I am enjoying the run of Babylon 5 on SCI FI. Being able to see the episodes every weeknight, with only occasional interruptions in the schedule, gives a new appreciation for the depth of the story that is being told.
At first, I was looking forward to seeing the episodes in wide screen mode, since JMS said that all the show was originally shot in that format. However, I find myself looking at screen and wondering if I am seeing more than I did when the series was first shown, or less. In close-ups, the actor's chin, or the top of his head, is always cut off, which makes it look as if the top and bottom of the picture are being cropped. I am pretty sure that this was not the case in the original show, since it would have indicated terrible camera work.
This distraction is the only thing that lessens my enjoyment of this presentation of such an excellent series. It would behoove SCI FI to take a look at what it is showing, and whether they are actually showing us the whole picture.
Lannie Kenton
lkenton@cognex.com
Buffy Should Listen to Charlie
et me first begin by stating that I am in deed a fan of Buffy The Vampire Slayer, as well as many other WB shows. Now, let me state my opinion of Sarah Michelle Gellar, as an actress: I think she is great and exhibits a lot of raw talent (not to mention a heart-felt connection to each character she plays) that she has learned to mold into whatever character she plays. By far she is under-rated. There is little doubt in my mind she would do an awesome Buffy flick, but lets face it, with Christy [Swanson] or Sarah the movie wouldn't work. A movie based off of a television series based off a movie in which the main character was played by a different actress? Buffy works for Tuesday night TV but not for the movies. A perfect example, imagine if they had decided to do Highlander: Endgame by doing away with the character of Duncan (TV series) and instead had Adrian Paul take over the roll of Connor (movie character) because they felt he did a better job of acting then Christopher Lambert? God forbid!
Not only would every fan (once again) be ticked off but we'd have another Batman franchise going on, where anyone could play the main movie character. I myself like consistency in a series as well as the person who portrays the character. What they do later on, when the show is off the air, is up to that generation. Sarah is smart in not wanting to tackle that right now. It's too soon. Lets just wait until after the series is over for a big movie make-over!
Case in point: Charlie's Angels would have never made it as a movie in the '70s. Especially within five years of it going off the air and three different actresses playing the parts of the original "Angels," not to mention comedically!
Theodore Wilczynki
toysoldiers2001@yahoo
Buffy's Swanson is a Star
would like to take issue with some of Frederick D. Weaver's statements ("Gellar and Swanson Vie For Buffy") concerning Kristy Swanson. I'm not suggesting that a Buffy movie should star Ms. Swanson or anyone other than the TV cast. However Mr. Weaver's argument that Swanson is somehow not qualified as an actress is uncalled for. Specifically, he claims that "Swanson has not starred in any feature films, major or independent, in the past decade. I don't think she has even had a cameo role on a TV series in this time." Anyone who knows how to use the Internet Movie Database can quickly discover that Swanson has been in 18 movies or television shows since starring as Buffy, some of them as recently as this year. She is a talented actress and has played a variety of types in these projects. Furthermore, just because her original Buffy was a bimbo doesn't mean she couldn't play an older Buffy who had grown beyond bimbo-ness.
Personally, what I'd really like to see is Kristy Swanson guest star on Buffy as a different character all together, or possibly in a flash back as a former slayer.
Dominic Lopez
dominic_lopez@yahoo.com
Lynch's Dune Did Not Disappoint
just read the review of the new Dune mini-series, and though I have yet to see it...I have to admit that I was shocked to have read that David Lynch's version of Dune "failed." That is real news to me, and the many other fans of the film. That film had vision, and is one of the few films I enjoy watching over and over. I hope the new version does the story justice. If it is only as half as good [as Lynch's] I will be impressed. I feel the reviewer was a little too harsh on passing judgement. It is easily a hallmark film in the shadow of which others can be judged.
Jerome R Winder
Typhoid86@hotmail.com
Fandom Can Find Room for All
just want to make a few comments in reference to several recent letters. First of all, Sarah Michelle Gellar's Buffy is the only Buffy worth watching. I've only been watching the series for the last year, but I've seen the original Buffy the Vampire Slayer movie and there just is no comparison between Sarah and Kristy Swanson. Sarah is the better Buffy, hands down. Buffy is an awesome show.
Now on to Andromeda: I think it's shaping up to be a very interesting and enjoyable show. It has its problems, but each week it improves. Jon Sumner's ("Andromeda is Out of Uniform") ideas about what sci-fi fans want to see, seem a bit skewed to me. For example, I love both Star Trek and Babylon 5. Trek, with its "neat as a pin" uniforms, and its "we're all just one big happy family" attitude, no hunger, no poverty, is my preferred vision of what the future might be like. On the other hand, Babylon 5, with all its continuing struggles and conflict, with its thinner line between right and wrong.....it seems like an entirely realistic possibility too. I think there's room for both in sci-fi fandom. Also, I wouldn't call that catsuit Seven of Nine wears exactly Starfleet Issue.
Speaking of Trek, I agree that Chakotay needs more to do. His character should have been explored more. I still think a romance with Captain Janeway would have been great. Sure, since he's the first officer it wouldn't have been appropriate under normal circumstances...but the Voyager crew isn't under normal circumstances.
Also, I take issue with Tom Francis' letter, ("Farscape Should Show Zhaan the Door"). Zhaan is a great character and an asset to the crew. I think the reason Zhaan's behavior has become so inconsistent is that the writers are too distracted with Chianna. Truthfully, though I find her interesting and I've found her relationship with D'Argo interesting. I was originally disappointed that Chianna stayed on board Moya full-time. I felt that, given enough time, a relationship might develop between Zhaan and D'Argo. There were certainly enough signs. Nay, if anyone should leave, it's Chianna.
Lisa Cypert
necro1@primenet.com
Andromeda Still Shows Potential
few weeks have now gone by and we've seen enough Andromeda to at least form the beginning of an opinion. So...
First the cons. Andromeda suffers from several crippling problems. The worst offenders I have seen are costume design, music and effects. The costumes do not appear to me as something a person might actually wear. To be fair, I would say the same for nearly everything that has ever appeared in a Star Trek episode. And absolutely everything that has ever appeared in Hercules: The Legendary Journeys and Xena: Warrior Princess. A little more attention to practicality and a little less on how revealing we can be would be good. Dylan's uniform... well, it reminds me of something we might have seen on a serial back in the '60s, with a '90s twist. But it's not unworkable. The music I find awful. It's not dramatic in the least, so far as I have heard. It reminds me of some of the worse cues used in Hercules and Xena. Now I'm not asking for a repeat of Trek or B5 for the soundtrack, but I find the music in the show distracting. A unique sound is all well and good, but I find this one to be detrimental to the dramatic tension.
Now the effects: My impression is that Andromeda is aiming at being different enough to be noticeable at a casual glance. Well, they've succeeded. I find the effects (space in particular) to be somewhat distracting. They are too crisp, too clean. They actually look too much like a model. (If it were an unconvincing model) A little dirt would be nice. More importantly, I would hope that the producers do not make the same mistake as those on Voyager. There is nobody out there to repair this ship, and there is a skeleton crew. Let's see some scarring on the hull that remains through the years. Sure this requires more attention to detail in the long run, but nothing tells a story about a vehicle quite like the nicks and dents.
Now the pros: I actually don't find Sorbo to be replaying Hercules on this show, contrary to some others. (including my wife). Though getting rid of the energy stick would really help if they don't want people drawing parallels. His hair is a bit long too, but I suppose military regs don't have to be identical to those of today. Also... (I can't think of his name... the big tough guy) is actually not a bad character, thus far. At least, he seems to have a brain. The jury is still out on the others.
The ship itself has potential, though I find the cleavage distracting. (No, not in THAT way!) It doesn't seem appropriate for the computer of a military warship to look that way. Yes, she's an attractive actress, but it doesn't seem appropriate. Thus far, I haven't cared for the show, but I will watch it on occasion. Hopefully, things will improve.
Max F. Exter
mexter@core.com
Andromeda is No Star Trek
hen watching Andromeda it seems to me that the back-story on the websites promoting it would make a much better show than the actual premise.
Really, do we need another crew of badly dressed people who can't get along with each other but have to hang together in order to fight latex covered aliens where each episode ends with another deux ex machina the audience can see coming a million miles away.
From where I'm sitting, comparing Andromeda to either Star Trek or Hercules: The Legendary Journeys is being too charitable. Both had fully realized universes and worlds while Andromeda looks like an attempt to cash in by combining Star Trek and Hercules with the same awful episodes as Star Trek, with a below Hercules-quality cast and a five-dollar-per-episode special effects budget.
We need bold, new and original science fiction on television, not the same old gunk under a new name.
John Bierce
jbierce33@yahoo.com
Trek's Technobabble is Too Much
he other night I watched an episode of Star Trek: Voyager featuring the often neglected ever brilliant Ensign Kim as captain aboard an alien starship. I'm amazed at how these lost souls in the Delta Quadrant can seemingly walk/beam into a situation already versed in alien (alien as in these Federation folks have never seen this species or their technology before!) hardware and software. In fact, the first time Ensign Kim beams aboard the damaged alien ship, he walks up to an alien console, clicks a few alien console buttons and is able to ascertain in seconds that the "warp core is intact." Kim then turns to an apparent alien lackey and ask, "Can you monitor anti-matter flow?" Of course alien lackey boy is ignorant to the inner-workings of the starship that his people built to haul his alien buttocks across the Delta Quadrant. (Imagine climbing into an automobile not knowing how to read the fuel gauge!) After giving alien lackey boy a crash course in reading alien consoles and "routing emergency power to structural integrity," Kim and his shipmates, Neelix and Seven of Nine, bring the alien ship back online. All this is accomplished without looking at an owner's manual!
The ease with which the Voyager crew can talk Federation technobabble and use interchangeable Federation parts (one size fits all!) with new alien species and their craft dulls the otherworldliness of the Delta Quadrant. I won't even address how all the species in the Delta Quadrant can speak fluent Federation English except to say that maybe they've been monitoring old Lucy episodes or those Federation universal translators are truly universal!
Realistically, adapting to any new technology isn't always a smooth transition. There are just too many variables to take into consideration. It takes time to import the information into our brains and regurgitate it into something we can...well, hmmm...assimilate! I suppose for the sake of story telling the writers forego any learning curve which, to me, makes the story a lot less believable. (I'd like to see Ensign Kim sit down and command my Linux box!)
The extrinsic Delta Quadrant was what made Voyager different from the other Treks. The writers have become stagnant and expect us to suspend logic (Did I say logic?) to get this week's moral point across. Sometime in some Trek series I'd like to see a Federation-trained individual or individuals aboard an alien ship not knowing which button to push. That would make for an entertaining hour.
I will close by stating that I'm a Star Trek fan. I've been a fan since the original series. It just difficult to be entertained by these quick feats of deciphering alien technologies on-the-fly. I am of the mind that these feats are impossible unless, of course, you are Borg or Vulcan.
Curtis Dunlap
webwiseguy@yahoo.com
Abandon the Big Screen Buffy
would just like to clarify a couple of things that Frederick D. Weaver said in his letter. ("Gellar and Swanson Vie For Buffy") He stated that Sarah Michelle Gellar is better than Kristy Swanson for the role of a big screen Buffy. He said that Kristy had not starred in anything in the last decade. Funny, since she has done 13 movies since Buffy and done stints in two TV series. Gellar has done six movies and one TV series.
If he had bothered to watch the two movies that Gellar made and he brings up as high points, he would not be so keen on having her on the big screen. I Know What You Did Last Summer is one of the worst horror movies in the recent spate of teeny-bopper slasher-pics. Cruel Intentions, he says is the other highlight. If you watch Gellar's eyes, you can tell that she is reading from cue cards. Her eyes move from side to side as she is saying her lines. Her acting in that movie is about as lively as Al Gore. He says he would have to teach Kristy to play Buffy as she is on the small TV screen. I say that if they would have written a more serious script for the movie it would have more like the TV series. Instead they wrote it more comedic and the role more bimbo like. It would not have mattered if Julia Roberts had starred in the movie, they can only do what the script and the director let happen.
Now, I am not saying that there should be a Buffy movie with Kristy Swanson. I am more inclined to say there should be no Buffy movie at all. The TV series is not worth any more of my time. I have given it three hours of my life and was not impressed. The movie, however, is light-hearted and fun to watch. Nothing with Gellar has been worth watching so far. Maybe she should move on from Buffy and take a good role for a change.
Greg Kruse
THE_CROW@DTGNET.COM
