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.
noted with interest your mention of the fact that a new live-action version of C.S. Lewis' The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe is being planned ("Adamson Helming Lion"). The series has long been a favorite of mine, and I look forward to seeing a new film version of it.
One question though: Since when is TLTWATW the second book in the series? Back in the dark ages, when I was first given my own boxed set of the books (circa 1980 or so), Wardrobe was the first book—numbered on the spine and everything. I have noticed in recent years that boxed sets of the series now place The Magician's Nephew first. Does anyone know when this became common practice?
I realize that the new version places the books in chronological order, but personally I think Wardrobe works better as the first book—the pine trees and snow and the lamppost shining in the dark are somehow a more magical and memorable first glimpse of Narnia than being in on it from the creation. I could be wrong, but I think readers are tolerant enough to read the books as originally written without being confused by having two books out of chronological sequence. Of course it's also possible that I'm just an old fuddy-duddy who thinks things were better in his childhood....
Seriously, I am curious as to when and why this renumbering of the Narnia books started if anyone happens to know.
Stewart Tame
sbt@ans.net
he purpose of science fiction is twofold. First we use science fiction to build the imagination of youth, getting them to dream and turning those dreams into reality. The second is to sequester yourself into another universe where earthly matters are of no importance. The latter can be summarized in one word: escape.
Science fiction provides millions of people with an escape from the toils of daily life. I, myself, use it quite often. Once in a while there are mediums created to help us escape that are truly thought-provoking, entertaining and all-consuming. Babylon 5 is such a jewel. And a rare and
precious one indeed. To all Babylon 5 fans (fanatics like myself or fair-weather fans alike)
please unite to keep the Babylon project going. This " ... dream given form ... " takes the level of sci-fi quality to the next level. Did not your mouth drop open as each piece of the puzzle was revealed? Were you not crushed as the fourth season came to an end and only the SCI FI Channel, in
all its reverence and glory, made it possible for [J. Michael Straczynski] to finish the series?
There are so few relics found in any form of entertainment these days with a few notable exceptions (Farscape, Stargate SG-1). So when that rare artifact
in unearthed we humans should unite behind the discovery and hold on to it as if it were more precious than a telepath aboard your Whitestar in battle against Shadows.
Scott Chavin
xcelsior_ningjes@hotmail.com
oger Long's recent letter ("B5 is SCI FI's Last, Best Hope") detailing why Babylon 5, Legend of the Rangers and/or Crusade would make an excellent series to fill the SCI FI Channel's hunt for "new" series is excellent. We who think that not Farscape (which has jumped the shark) but the original B5 was the best science fiction on television hunger for more of an entertaining, intelligent, multilayered storylines that build and don't dumb down explanations or plots for inattentive viewers.
Legend of the Rangers would allow the stories to literally span the galaxy. Let's have more, more, more!
Jim Roberts
wi.maverick@usa.net
t gladdens my heart to see letters promoting Babylon 5 ("B5 is SCI FI's Last, Best Hope"). What out-of-touch executive killed the best sci-fi series other than Deep Space 9? It's nice to have continuity. Even this season of Farscape is losing its continuity and getting weirder instead of better (hint, hint). Storylines are what keep me interested and B5 ranks No. 1 in that category.
On another note, it's nice to see good book series such as Dune and Lord of the Rings come to the movie screen, but when is someone going to have the expertise, foresight, not to mention guts, to do Isaac Asimov's Foundation series?
Michael Guay
MysteryTch@hotmail.com
ow can anybody like Spider-Man? A "little" liberties taken in this film such as organic webshooters? Organic webshooters were the most stupid idea for this film. First of all, if he has organics, the webbing would come out of his ass, not his wrists. It's a total betrayal to the spirit of the comics and not a faithful Spider-Man adaptation. Might as well not have Uncle Ben die while your at it, or might as well have Peter grow eight arms. The organics were as stupid of an idea as those would be.
[Warning: Spoilers ahead.]
That part in the lunchroom was so idiotic, the script writing looked like the work of a 10-year-old. Everybody in the world would have figured out he was Spider-Man after that, especially after they saw him accidentally shoot his webbing out of his wrists at Flash. And when he did that flip 10 feet high
over everybody's heads, and punched Flash like that ... that would for sure have given away his identity.
I could go on and on with the flaws of this film, such as the Green Goblin costume was so stupid looking since it looked closer to a Power Ranger outfit or an alien from outer space than a goblin, but I won't. I'll just say this was about the worst comic-book movie ever produced because of how many stupid flaws it has.
These two alone makes this a really stupid movie. After the spider bites Peter, it walks away and appears to be just fine and still alive as ever, well, looks like we're going to have more Spider-Men running around and some Spider-Women also, since that spider would go out and bite more people. And the last part where Mary Jane grabs a hold of the railing on the cable car when falling 100 stories down—give me a freaking break. Not even Arnold Schwarzenegger in his prime could have done that. Like I said, those two moments alone, makes this a crap, stupid, unbelievable movie only worthy of a one-star rating (even worse than Batman which totally sucked because Michael Keaton, has a pudgy gut, he's out of shape and has a receding hairline.) That movie at least got two stars from me because of the hot looking Kim Basinger. [Spider-Man] doesn't even get two stars.
Once again, Hollywood has not made a good comic-book movie since Superman, with the exception of Dick Tracy, of course.
Steve Parker
spidermanatthedailybuglenkc@hotmail.com
n response to John A.M. Darnell's letter ("Enterprise's Directive Isn't Prime") about the Enterprise episode in which we are introduced to the beginnings of the Prime Directive:
Mr. Darnell is upset that Archer and Phlox allow a whole race of beings continue to die out from a viral infection. He feels that they should have intervened and saved the people and not allow "evolutionary forces" to hold sway. I think Mr. Darnell is missing the point of the Prime Directive. It isn't meant to make choices easier, it's meant to give clear guidelines so that difficult choices can be avoided. To give an example closer to home—how would Mr. Darnell feel if some alien race was floating around Earth 65 million years ago and spotted a large asteroid approaching. Would he be happy if the aliens decided to not let the asteroid hit the Earth, saving the dinosaurs but wiping out humans chances of evolving?
No one can predict the future, so meddling in the natural events of any planet (factual or fictional) can be disastrous.
Bob Williams
robalan@mindspring.com
am in complete agreement with all previous letters [pertaining] to Dark Angel ("Angelic Alba Must Return"). Fox's fall line-up is a joke, and canceling this show to try to get the same viewers is not going to work. It will backfire in their face. From what I have seen, it should be a mid-season replacement and could [be placed in one of] several [available] timeslots.
Nelson Rehberg
nelsonrehberg@email.com
hope you or your readers can help me. Many years ago one of the first science-fiction books I read was about a guy running away from aliens in Texas. The aliens disguised themselves as the tire tread you see on the side of the road. It also involved a cave in Texas called "a cave without a name."
It had to be 15 years ago [that I read this] but I hope someone can help me find it again.
Michelle Smith
lbrdel@aol.com
had no idea that Unbreakable was a bust to most moviegoers ("Shyamalan Mulls Unbreakable 2")! This is probably really lame of me, but it was Unbreakable that really got me hooked on M. Night Shyamalan's films! The Sixth Sense was really good, with a real mix of mystery, intrigue and ghosts. However, [in Unbreakable] it was the chemistry between Samuel Jackson and Bruce Willis that had my blood going! The balance of family, Mr. Glass' personal history, and David Dunn's unimaginable quest to find his identity was simply amazing. The musical score as well as the brilliant directing made for a really taut and unforgettable film. Plus, the ending was what made Dunn and Glass such an incredible combination.
I don't know how I, as a fan, could feel about the possibility of a sequel to an unforgettable film like this. However, the thought of M. Night, Willis and Samuel Jackson in another storyline within the same world as the original almost seems too good to be true!
D.C. Jeanes
djeanes@stinsonmoheck.com
obert A. Black chose to write an entire article ("Buffy Finale Is a Tough Deal") excoriating me for lack of sensitivity to the gay and lesbian communities in my criticism ("Buffy Criticism Is Baffling") of the response of certain segments of that community to a certain character's death in Buffy the Vampire Slayer. [Warning: Spoilers ahead.] I will not reply to most of his article—which had many valid points, even though I still feel that they apply poorly in Buffy, where no relationship has been safe—save to say this:
You crafted your response, Mr. Black, based upon the assumption that I represent "the country's heterosexual majority." Upon what basis did you reach this conclusion?
James Ellis
beowulf.bolt@shaw.ca
Back to the top.
