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.
lot of times, a blockbuster never lives up to the hype. This is not the
case with the Spidey film. [Warning: Spoilers ahead.] Like many of his fans, I'd been waiting for this film for years. To finally see it and see it done so faithfully was a great experience. Yes, there are some differences and gripes but those will be there for every film. My two major gripes were that the Green Goblin's helmet made him look like a Power Ranger and that there was not enough use of Spidey's spider sense. Perhaps they should have just applied some makeup to Willem Dafoe like they did to Nicholson's Joker in Batman. Both the Goblin and the Joker have a perpetually maniacal grin anyway. As for the spider sense, at one point in the film, where Flash confronts Peter in the school hallway, we're almost lead to believe that the spider sense gives Peter almost precognitive/psychic powers. It shows him actually seeing the approaching fist of Flash. This should have been explained in more detail and further explored.
Other than that, the film was great. It was so good that even when Spidey wasn't on the screen, you were still interested. Can't wait for Spidey 2!
Jawad Shah
js1701a@yahoo.com
he only good thing about being old is the rare opportunity when one can say, "I know. I was there."
"Like costumed heroes? Confidentially, we in the comic mag business refer to them as 'long underwear characters'! And, as you know, they're a dime a dozen! But, we think you may find our Spider-Man just a bit ... different!"
In the spring of 1962, for 12 cents, I read those words and was amazed by a simple story that would revolutionize the comic book industry, and 40 years later, shatter Hollywood box office records.
By Marvel's standards, even in the '60s, the original Spider-Man artwork was primitive. There was no super-villain in that first story. No leading lady. No violent high-school bully and no J.J. Jameson. But there was magic.
Not even Stan Lee or Steve Ditko had an inkling of what they had pulled out of their hats. Amazing Fantasy was on its last legs. The 10-page tale was created as a going-away present for the title's few loyal fans. The rest, as they say ...
This week's letter's page will be overflowing with praise for Spider-Man, the movie, but it wasn't my Spider-Man. It couldn't be. No flashy FX spectacle with a Grade A cast, there was an endearing modesty, a unique smallness about the original "bookworm" Peter Parker and his Aunt May and Uncle Ben. Theirs was a family story, not a superhero saga.
Hollywood changed and added many things, but one scene from the comic that should have been filmed: the first time Peter got into his costume and hung from the ceiling of his room proclaiming, "OK, world ... better hang onto your hat! Here comes the Spider-Man!"
With a huge publicity campaign boosted by 40 years of comics, all of America already knew. Forty years ago, I didn't have a clue, but I couldn't wait to find out.
The 100 million dollar Hollywood blockbuster premiered with great power indeed. It had to. With that 12 cent 1962 comic book had come great responsibility.
I know. You had to be there.
Kevin Ahearn
KEVTOMA@aol.com
pider-Man shows us the person that we would each like to be. A "doer"
who refuses to be powerless in any circumstance by striving to achieve the possibility of victory through effective action using talents that come from within or without ourselves.
Julian Gift
lira-b@tstt.net.tt
n his recent letter, entitled "Information is a Valuable Commodity," Dave argues that all of the major television news outlets are "in league" with each other because GE owns NBC, GE polluted the Hudson River, and no one seems to be covering it at all.
What Dave doesn't realize is that news organizations model their actions after packs of famished jackals—they're hungry. The only difference is, they'll go after anything that will boost ratings or sales.
The major news organizations don't cover GE's pollution of the Hudson River because the people to
whom it would matter—people living in New York City and the surrounding areas—already know the Hudson is polluted, and aren't interested in rehashing the obvious.
The simple fact is, no one would watch if they did report it. And so they don't.
In a world where truth is sacrificed on the altar of profit, information is a valuable commodity—if it's interesting or engaging. If it catches a consumer's attention and makes them tune in. If it makes people buy.
It's not a conspiracy, Dave. The news organizations just all have a common goal. They all want to boost ratings and make money. If you keep seeing conspiracies where there's only greed, you'll just wind up spinning your wheels.
Randa Wright
randagirl@hotmail.com
z is best known as the voice and puppeteer of Yoda in the Star Wars movies" ("Oz Liked CGI Yoda").
I don't think so! You are doing a grave disservice to several generations of Miss Piggy fans by limiting Frank Oz to a genre character, however popular and well-known.
My favorite (and possibly apocryphal) story about the making of The Empire Strikes Back is the one where a scene in which Yoda is exhorting Luke to control his feelings erupted into Muppetland when Miss Piggy popped up out of Frank Oz's below-stage level trench and began singing "Feelings" to Luke.
Diane Catanzaro
catanz@mail.com
mmm, the idea that the SCI FI Channel is going to redo Battlestar Galactica is annoying you? Afraid Richard Hatch isn't going to get to play Apollo and Dirk Benedict will have to survive only on his residuals from The A-Team? You're upset that there will be no Deep Space Nine movie? Planet Of The Apes and The Time Machine suck because they don't match your idea of the director's vision? Suicidal because Roswell and The X-Files have been canceled? Hopping mad because 'N Sync is going to make a cameo appearance in your favorite sci-fi franchise movie?
Well ... start the legal battles now and create your own TV series where you can call the shots! Hmmm, let's see, how about two lead characters, one male and one female ... Yeah! We'll give them chemistry, uhm, sexual tension, but we'll never let them kiss—yeah, that will work. Next, we'll give them either the power, or a car or a ship or something like that (we'll work that out at he next executive level meeting) so they can move from one dimension to another!
Yeah! Groovy! That way, our heroes can move around from universe to universe correcting the mistakes other series creators made! (Let's get Legal moving on the problems concerning copyrights now so we can invade existing series.) This way, we can prevent Mulder's sister from ever being kidnapped, destroy Voyager so it never gets to the Delta Quadrant and legally prevent Tim Burton so he is never able to see any Charlton Heston movies, so there is never a chance he can remake Planet of the Apes.
Next, we make sure Dr. Zachary Smith dies in the Jupiter 2 while he's still an adversarial character and not an insane man, doing everything he can to get back to Earth.
What else could we do? OK, we'll intervene and make sure that Col. Straker defeats the aliens so Martin Landau can take over Moonbase Alpha in 1999. ... oops! That already happened.
Hmmm ... who could be our aggressive ... what would be the politically correct term? Ah! Morally deficient characters, yes! The Time Lords? Ah, rats! Doctor Who is a Time Lord ... but we could go there and interfere as well, couldn't we? Check out the International Copyright laws. ...
OK, so I'm ranting. We all have our ideas about how things could have been, but directors and creators of series live in another universe all their own. Sometimes we are going to love what they create and where they take us and other times we won't. Oh, and sorry, Tim Burton, I don't mean
to be picking on you personally.
Still, just picture the starships Enterprise, Defiant, Voyager, Battlestar Galactica and the Millennium Falcon all facing a fleet of Emperial Dreadnoughts and Cylon Basestars. ...
Keith Kitchen
BoyoKlaatu@aol.com
ver since Enterprise premiered on UPN, Trekkies have had (on average) one
complaint about the show: the theme song sucks! When people try to ask why they don't like it, they can't quite put their finger on it. They say, "I don't know, I just don't like it."
I think I know why.
The reason why they think the theme is so bad (me included) is because it goes completely against Gene Roddenberry's vision in one very important respect: It's about faith.
For those who may not know, Gene Roddenberry was a secular humanist, which is another way of saying he was an atheist. A song about "Faith of the Heart" (in other words, "the soul") is the last thing Gene would have wanted associated with any Trek show, because in his future, almost everyone on Earth is an atheist.
As a matter of fact, in one of the DS9 "alternate universe" episodes, Capt. Sisko says that about 95% of all people on Earth no longer worship a god and that only the very old still practice religion.
The theme to Enterprise should be about man's never-ending desire to evolve beyond his primitive past and himself, not to promote some out-dated, religious right, clap-trap, jibber-jabber, that no longer works. Gene deserves better than that, and so do the fans.
Adam Boudreaux
TrekAdamG@webtv.net
've been a fan of Stargate SG-1 since the beginning, and it was the interaction between Jack and Daniel, and to a lesser extent, theirs with Sam and Teal'c, that kept me watching. Seeing how they reacted to each new world, watching how all their different talents combined together made each mission a success.
Daniel Jackson is the heart and soul of Stargate SG-1. The show has already shifted focus and changed a lot over the past year or two from what it was initially intended to be. The loss of Daniel Jackson is merely the latest and most severe blow to the show.
I fully support Michael Shanks in his departure from the show. The role of his character in the last few seasons has deteriorated, and he hasn't been given the plots or screen time he deserves. I believe Mr. Shanks shows great courage and responsibility towards the interests and ethics of his character. As much as I mourn for the loss of Daniel Jackson and the show that Stargate SG-1 used to be, I fully understand and support his reasons for leaving.
Both Daniel Jackson and Michael Shanks deserve so much more than the treatment they have received. Michael Shanks is a fantastic actor and brought sensitivity and realism to his character, which is what ultimately made me fall in love with both the show and Daniel Jackson. He can never be replaced, and the show will simply never be what is once was without him. I wish to see Michael Shanks/Daniel Jackson in his rightful place on the show once again. To me, Daniel Jackson has always been Stargate SG-1. Without him, it is a mere shadow of what it was. No other character or actor can replace him.
I'm baffled, angry and hurt. And I know for a fact that I'm not a lone voice or a part of a loud contingent. How can you ignore the cries of the fans? I want the whole show to succeed. I want all the actors to feel they are contributing to the success of the show and growing as people by doing the
show. I would like to see the The Powers That Be a bit more humble in their attitude to the real concerns of fans like me. I would like to see MGM and the SCI FI Channel make a real effort to address our concerns.
I just want Stargate SG-1 to end on a happy note for everyone, fans, cast, etc. I would hate for the show to end with hurt feelings and people saying what a waste for a show that started out great was ruined in it last year!
Pam Vandyke
pvandyke3@hotmail.com
might of already missed the debate I'm about to open again, but I thought I'd open it again as this is what I frequently like to talk about. [Warning: Spoilers ahead.]
Has anyone seen Highlander: Endgame? I was disappointed at Connor's death.
That's my first moan, surely there was another way? On second thought I don't think there was.
I thought the actor who played Jacob Kell portrayed his character brilliantly. I'd give him top marks for representing evil. Some of the lines he came out with were pure gold dust ... the script guy
deserves applause for Kell's lines like, Kell to Connor, "What's wrong? Don't you want to be inside me?"
You can't get better than that kind of thing. Though for me it was slightly odd that neither Connor, Duncan nor Kell had met again and fought, even through all those years after the death of Connor's mother in Scotland and Kell's change to become immortal. ... come on, scriptwriters and plot people.
Sorry if I'm getting die-hard Highlander fans angry, but hey, I'm a die-hard fan, too. Fans should concentrate on both the positive and negative aspects of their chosen show. And why hadn't Kell gone after Methos, try and answer that one? And where was Amanda in Endgame? I haven't seen The Raven TV series (sorry) but from what I know she is still alive. Also, what happened to Connor's adopted son last seen in Highlander 3: The Sorcerer? Plus, Methos gets Duncan's sword back for him and all Methos says is "I liberated this from their lost and found." Couldn't they have introduced a Methos "liberating" the sword scene and putting Kell's immortal henchmen to the sword?
I don't seek to find holes in the Highlander: Endgame plot, but these things just couldn't escape me. They were clearly loose threads, that's what it looked like to me anyway.
I am, however, hoping to watch the next Highlander film at the cinema and not on straight-to-video or DVD. I was really hoping to see Endgame at my local cinema, then I found it'd gone to video and DVD. Maybe a new TV Series should be created?
Adrian Paul is the right choice to carry on the films. He really knows what he's about and knows that he can do excellent fight sequences.
But I'd like to point out that it's sad to see Connor go. It's a slap in the face for fans, as we were led to think he'd be The One and then this happens. Crossing the paths of Duncan and Connor
was good, but getting rid of Connor ... I don't agree. I heard Christopher Lambert maybe wanted it that way, but even so Connor had survived Kurgan, Katana and Kane. So was Kell really so tough? Yeah, I know he had 600 kills. I think bringing in Kell was just an excuse for a plot re-jiggle so Connor had to sacrifice himself. That's a point, how come all Highlander villains name's start with K's?
And all the villains in films 1, 2 and 3 ended up driving cars recklessly?
I'd encourage any and all after-thoughts to my e-mail, as I haven't [before] exchanged my thoughts
on these films on the Internet.
I guess the big question is: Are there enough of us Highlander fans out there to ask for,
and get, another film? I've heard about Highlander: The Source, maybe having Amanda in it and Connor, maybe a resurrection or flashback-mentor sequence for Connor helping Duncan? Though I haven't heard anything concrete. In my view, Endgame is entertaining and compliments the [other] films well, yet it has a lot of holes in its plot. Let's get a solid plot next time.
Stuart Howson
hk462272@stmail.staffs.ac.uk
Back to the top.
