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.
— 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). If you would like to submit a letter, please use our feedback form or send a message to scifiweekly@scifi.com.
want to express my great appreciation to SCI FI for the excellent new Babylon 5 movie, The Legend of the Rangers. I watched it several times and am hoping that SCI FI will consider making a series on the Rangers as a follow up to the movie and, hopefully, include some of the characters from the original Babylon 5 series. I am a 61-year-old grandma who has been a staunch supporter of Babylon 5 and would love to see it continue on. I never seem to tire watching the old B5 series and am so glad you continue to re-run them.
Velinda Jonson
jonsonec@sprintmail.com
wanted to express a more balanced opinion of Babylon 5: Legend of the Rangers than the gushing letters of praise posted in your Jan. 28th issue ("Rangers a Legendary Movie" and "B5 Deserves a New Beginning").
This film was at best a so-so effort. Quite frankly, I was stunned that Science Fiction Weekly gave it a "B+"—one has to wonder if there's a bit of "grade inflation" due to the relationship between Science Fiction Weekly and the SCI FI Channel.
During the now-legendary feud between J. Michael Straczynski (creator of Babylon 5) and TNT over the direction of Crusade (the previous B5 spin-off), Straczynski chafed over TNT's demands for more action, fisticuffs and cheescake. Ironically, B5: LotR is the pilot TNT execs would have killed for! What happened?
Andreas Katsulas shines in his return as G'Kar. I wish I could say the same for the new cast. Their performances are serviceable, but not stellar.
Let's hope, if B5:LotR is developed as a regular series, that they dump that ridiculous holographic weapons system. Myriam Syrois' kung-fu conniption fit toward the end of the film is quite possibly the most embarrassing moment in SF TV since Turnabout Intruder, the final episode of classic Star Trek.
Having said all this, I am still an ardent supporter of the B5 franchise—but being a supporter is not the same as being a sycophant. B5 lovers should insist on nothing less than excellence—that's why we love B5!
John C. Snider
editor@scifidimensions.com
Science Fiction Weekly's editor-in-chief, Scott Edelman, comments:
Longtime readers will be able to attest to the fact that the Science Fiction Weekly/SCI FI Channel relationship exerts no influence over the independent ratings of our reviewers, who are allowed to honestly express their opinions. A quick glance back at some of the grades given to SCI FI Channel programs—which in one instance meant a lowly "D+"—should help convince you that on the occasions a show is given a positive grade, the enthusiasm is genuinely felt.
So please feel free to disagree with the opinions of our reviewers—but don't worry that we're interfering in any way with that opinion being an honest one.
ow let me get this straight:
1. An ancient alien race is using others to do their bidding.
2. We are not privy to the reasons for this undertaking.
3. This take place in the Babylon 5 universe.
4. Rangers are good, the alien unknowns are pure evil.
5. Ghosts abound...
Why have so many people seen the Legend of the Rangers? Could it be that the original concept brought them back, but they are not really happy with this present metamorphosis? I'd much rather see a TV-movie or miniseries about the Crusade branch of the B5 universe. Just because TNT could not do it justice doesn't mean the SCI FI Channel would have the same problems.
Marc Ehrenpreis
qpapc@aol.com
fter watching the Golden Globe Awards last week, I can't help wondering why they never nominate sci-fi series for awards. They are just sometimes better than the drama and comedy series they always nominate. There are always being more made, so they could even get their own category. They could have awards for Best Sci-Fi or Fantasy series and Best Actor & Actress for a Sci-Fi or Fantasy series.
Maybe someone should start a petition to get science fiction recognized, as every other genre is. Science fiction and fantasy is always growing and getting more popular, and so should be recognized by all awards including the Emmys and Peoples Choice. All sci-fi and fantasy fans should get together and see if our favorite genre can get recognized.
George J. Kennedy
timetravel@cqnet.com.au
here was a time—not so very long ago—that the SCI FI Channel was on nearly all the time at my house. I'd watch my favorite old series during the day, such as Probe or Highlander the Raven. I'd would turn it on in the evening to catch Babylon 5 or Quantum Leap, but Fridays....
Fridays became my night. Like a one-two punch from a heavyweight boxer SCI FI created an awesome combination of The Invisible Man and Farscape that caught me and held me; often for both showings. There always seemed to be little things I missed in the first showing I was able to catch in the second for both shows.
Well, the one-two punch is falling apart. Next week (Feb. 1) is the final episode of The Invisible Man" on the SCI FI Channel. The loss of the show has been very bitter to the fans and has caused quite a few to turn off the SCI FI Channel except when the show airs and once it has left many of them will be leaving as well. And part of the reason is SCIFI.com's handling of the cancellation of the show.
"The Invisible Man is about to vanish. Vent and lament at the I-Man bboard."
That is what appears on the home page of SCIFI.com today. (Jan. 25th) To us, the fans, it's just another knife in the
back, more salt in the wounds, another reason to leave once the final episode has aired and to never return. And this is an improvement over the one posted a week ago which read:
"The Invisible Man is disappearing soon. Share your grief on the I-Man bboard."
All this on top of the continually running ad on the channel itself that guarantees our disgust and outrage every single time it appears on our screens.
Am I ranting? Yes, a bit. Am I bitter? You bet. The SCI FI Channel has made a colossal mistake in canceling The Invisible Man which pulled in a demographic Ms. Bonnie Hammer claimed to be looking for—female viewers. Many of whom stuck around to watch Farscape as well. I like
Farscape, myself, but I discovered it because of I-Man and I can live without it. Farscape may not run in syndication, but I can go out and buy the DVDs and enjoy them at my leisure—unlike The Invisible Man.
I hope, for the sake of all the 'scapers out there, that their show continues to do well and that SCI FI can start using a little common sense where their shows are concerned. Many fans are losing many great shows this season, and while I did not care for all of them, there were others who did. It's such a shame that a network supposedly dedicated to one of the most exciting genres has so little knowledge of it, or of how loyal the fans are. Obviously they've learned nothing from the fandom that is Star Trek, which they air constantly to draw in those very fans.
Perhaps it's time for the powers that be at SCI FI to sit down and take a serious look at what they are doing, because with moves like the ones they made with I-Man, they will do nothing but lose
those viewers and Nielson points they so desperately crave.
A. X. Zanier
AlexXZ@aol.com
'm reminded of a quote that said something like, "Time is relative, but it should not be wasted." The Invisible Man was not given the time to fully grow and mature, even if time itself changes from one moment to the next. I fully understand that the SCI FI channel will stop filming I-Man, but that doesn't stop we I-Maniacs and etc., from finding it a new home. I only ask that you reconsider dropping your #2 TV show (I don't know why Farscape has the #1 slot), and reexamine what makes the show unique. The plot is complex, the characters are dynamite people one can actually relate to, and though the situation is beyond the farthest reaching medical experimentations, it is easy to imagine that the time when humans may become invisible is now. So, I ask why; why do you wish to get rid of the show which makes your channel so utterly one-of-a-kind? Don't leave I-Man invisible. As Bobby Hobbes said, "Bobby Hobbes doesn't bail on his partner."
Summer El-Khayyat
Bookster03@aol.com
fter reading Mr. Berkwits' interview with Mr. Rintaro and the reason why the question of how the two Metropolis films are similar in both content and image, I am satisfied with his explanation that the anime version is a complete separate movie and not an out and out remake of Fritz Lang's original work. However, considering that the imagery and storyline is kindred to one other, it would be prudent for Columbia Tri-Star, the American distributor of Osamu Tezuka's Metropolis, to give acknowledgment to the original 1927 silent classic when it hits video and DVD for the sake of mutual respect and inspiration even though it was unintentional. While I do realize some of my words from my previous letter ("Lang's Metropolis Must Be Remembered") were a bit rash, I still believe the anime Metropolis must pay respect to its unsuspecting "parent." Let's call them cousins, for they are of the same family, and Columbia Tri-Star must acknowledge that. I'm sure the fans will support the suggestion.
James K. Chambliss
WeirdArchives@prodigy.net
f two new TV shows ever had so much and so little in common, it's Enterprise and Smallville. While both take place worlds and centuries apart,
each is an "origin" series, an ongoing "backstory" of fictional American icons.
Ironically, Smallville has drawn praise for turning the Superman myth on its ear while Enterprise has incurred the wrath of Trekkers for the slightest stray from the official Star Trek history.
What we longtime fans of Superman and Star Trek seem to have forgotten is that both these interpretations are of heroes once again brand new to a generation of fans growing up in a much different world than we did.
Yes, Enterprise has yet to debut a "classic" episode to rival any of the original Star Trek greats, but as much as we older fans treasure "Mission of Mercy" and "Mirror, Mirror," there are many, many other "classics" we've wisely chosen to forget.
Smallville, while trying hard to create relevant and deepening teenage and adult relationships, falters in introducing yet another Kryptonite-effected mutant every week to take on the future Man of Steel. One wonders how memorable the combination of the two will be in syndication.
"Don't mess with our legends!" we Americans cry out, and at the same time..."Hey, if it's Superman and Star Trek, how bad can it be?"
Time will tell. It always does.
Kevin Ahearn
KEVTOMA@aol.com
lease help by writing something to help force Rick Berman and Brannon Braga to retool Enterprise before it is too late. Besides the improper definition of what the technology for that time period should be to be a real prequel to the other productions which is driving away viewers (basically insulting them). There are problems in the sociological definition that has kept Enterprise from being a good sci-fi that would draw in the fans (and give it good ratings). These are also very insulting and only killing the golden goose called the Star Trek franchise. Berman and Braga are ignoring the audience at large.
Unfortunately, I don't think their progress has moved an inch beyond babe-in-tights waiting for smart-alecs to come to the rescue. T'Pol is the only Vulcan in body-hugging jumpsuit. Even on The Next Generation they all wear flowing robes. One scene in the upcoming promo had T'Pol rolling over on top of Archer, in an anatomically challenged position. I think they are setting her up as the new ice-maiden to discover lust with an alpha male.
Seems to me that Berman and Braga are trying to expand popularity with Babarella tactics and to heck with what actually makes it a good and true sci-fi. When in fact it is disenchanting older fans more than attracting new ones.
This is from a Nielsen ratings analyst:
There has been a lot of talk about how one episode or another has caused people to leave the show in droves. This is gibberish. Many shows, from Seinfeld to The X-Files have had admittedly very weak shows interspersed among a season. Large numbers of people don't abandon shows because of one (or even five) bad episodes. They turn away because of a perceived overall inherent weakness in the show.
Part of the problem, I believe, is that (in the case of Enterprise) UPN has tried to improve the ratings by appealing to the non-core viewer, rather than the core Trek viewer. In today's fragmented TV viewing environment, a show like Trek is not going to get much more than a 6 or 7 rating with any consistency. It's the core audience that drives the ratings. Moving away from the core drives ratings down, because no matter how many of the peripheral viewers you get, they won't watch with the same weekly consistency needed to sustain high ratings. And once you lose your core viewer, it's very difficult to get them back. Many a show has been killed off by trying to appeal to a new audience and offending the core fans.
It doesn't matter how well they start to develop the stories and writing in Enterprise (which has been silly for the most part thus far), its inherent errors (and issues) will over shadow it in the long run.
Fred Cadena
fredcadena@lycos.com
Back to the top.
