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 send a message to scifiweekly@scifi.com.
ny discussion of a book called The Necessary Beggar should at least nod at Tom Stoppard. In his play India Ink, a western character expresses dismay at all the beggars around him. He is told (essentially) that such a reaction is as foolish as complaining about the restaurants you pass or the clothing stores.
One should merely ask oneself, "Do I need a beggar today?"
Do you need a beggar today?
Alan S. Kornheiser
alan(at)sophisticatedmarketresearch.com
espite being a fan of his work (including Alien Resurrection), I have vilified Joss Whedon repeatedly in this section for destroying his creation, and my favorite show, Angel, in its last season.
I have also praised him for for giving us Firefly.
And now Serenity. Serenity is ... well ... perfect. Owning the DVDs, I did not think that it was possible to create a 110-minute movie that would provide sufficient texture to the universe of the series such that an individual not familiar with the TV show could appreciate the depth of the story. Most sci-fi or comic-based movies suffer in their first attempts because of the requisite origin story. This usually results in plodding scripts and shortened plotlines for the balance of the stories being told.
Whedon evaded all the pitfalls and produced a film that answers the questions left open by the series and just tells enough of the origins so that the a first-timer in this film universe can follow along neatly. It seems to interweave between existing TV episodes in a way that series fans can get a sense of deja vu, yet not depend on them for the story. An extraordinary effort.
Whedon has been called a genius for years for his writing abilities, and now those accolades have to be extended to this directorial effort as well. I believe that this is his first movie, but it looks like a Ridley Scott film. I guess all those episodes of Buffy were quite a forge for his talents.
I do not want forget the actors. They were great, as they were on the small screen, and they deserve some recognition for bringing the crew to life. Adam Baldwin is always good and proof that the best Baldwin is not one of those Baldwins. Simply stated, Nathan Fillion should become a star from this movie. Someday people may ask, "Who's the best captain, Kirk or Mal?" Morena Baccarin probably will become a star even with a smaller role than one would have expected, because she is such a screen goddess. All of them performed at their best. I was saddened that some appear to be gone, but in Whedon's world you can never be certain.
To this fan, Serenity constitutes the most tightly written, beautifully shot and well-paced sci-fi movie of the last 15 years. I hope, no, pray, that it is the first of a trilogy (or more) and the anchor for the return of a series. Serenity's universe is too rich a place not to mine for more gold in every sense of the word.
Wonder Woman is up next for Whedon, and if he casts it properly, maybe we bitter Angel fans can finally get the bad taste out of our mouths.
Doug Dale
ddale(at)coda.cc
hen Firefly first ran on Fox, I knew it was doomed to a very short
run, and so it was. It was more than simply entertaining, but the flavors it carried were great distractions. One, it was a western. Two, count the number of other science-fiction and fantasy "oaters" and you'll still have one hand free. The Beast of Hollow Mountain, Billy the Kid Meets Dracula, Tremors 4, The Valley of Gwangi and maybe The Black Scorpion. Westworld and Space Cowboys do not quite fit.
Three, there were no "other races," and we learned from its creator that this was purposeful. The line "Hundreds of new Earths were terraformed and colonized" becomes fraught with meaning, therefore. There may have been xenomorphs, but they obviously were overcome and eliminated by that very terraforming and colonization, much as the Native Americans systematically were exterminated in the Euroforming of the "New World" on the original Earth. In their new solar system, it readily is apparent that these transplanted humans have learned nothing from the old solar system.
Those three fragilities above still would plague Serenity, and so they do. The exclusion of actual horses from the concept's motion picture version did little else than to remove a rather obvious distraction present in the television series.
This is not to say that Serenity is an unworthy film. It certainly holds the promise of more worthy sequels and perhaps its own franchise. Still, Serenity very much is less character-driven than the series, which may not have been the best choice. The most fascinating
characteristics of the series were the ship's people, and, for most of the movie, we do not see them much at all. And the film fairly resounds with teeth-rattling sound effects, whereas the series ran its music, dialogue and audio FX through the same equalizer levels.
The titles Firefly and Serenity work well as antithetical descriptions of their creative content. What is needed now is some well-thought-out and well-applied amelioration.
Russell Bates
writerfella(at)iwon.com
would like to make two short comments.
In defense of Mr. McCarthy ("Worlds of Serenity"). He's an actual NASA scientist, people! The man happens to be an expert in these fields. I'm an architect, and I get the "what do you know" syndrome all the time. Clients tend to think they know more about buildings than an architect does until they are faced with the many decisions we have to make on their behalf. Sorry for the sidebar, but I do have a point. If you've read Mr. McCarthy's articles, then you should recognize a few things about his style. Sometimes his writing is straightforward, and other times it's tongue-in-cheek. He also makes a point to reference his sources. His writing, and therefore his opinions, are usually very well supported.
My second comment is about the recent political correctness issue. I'm an American, and I don't want anyone to get the wrong ideas about us. I can only speak for myself, but I don't believe that most us have a problem with race. I don't see people differently than anyone else, regardless of their skin color. Maybe because I was raised in a home where it was never an issue? I have to admit, though, I'm not quite following the path these comments are coming from. Don Dees' ("Political Correctness Is Correct") comment about political correctness was vague. I didn't get the same feeling from it that Lulli Doppler ("Political Correctness Is Nonsense") did.
Maybe I'm naive, but I don't understand what getting along with each other has to do with being PC. I couldn't find the definition of political correctness in my dictionary, so I Googled it. One of the definitions expresses what I thought being PC means. In my own words, being PC is candy-coating words to make them non-offensive to all people. Personally, I think political correctness has gone way too far in this country. I agree that certain words, phrases or actions shouldn't be tolerated (so much for all-inclusive tolerance). But by the same token, we should all get a little more thick-skinned. Sticks and stones.
I just realized in writing this letter how often I use cliches. Wow, I have got to cut that out!
Tom Farley
architechtom(at)gmail.com
cannot tell you how disappointed I was with the premiere of Night Stalker.
Above all other shows, this was the one I was most excited about this season. I remember staying up late as a child being totally engrossed, sometimes laughing, but mostly being scared to death when I watched the original in the '70s. Don't get me wrong, I can accept change. I accepted the new Battlestar Galactica from day one, and I herald it every day as the best show on television.
But as I watched Clark Kent, Lois Lane and Jimmy Olsen solve a very boring X-Files case, I wanted someone to pay dearly for the hour of my life I had wasted.
Three major problems caused me to have a major dislike for this remake:
First: Kolchak. A stoic, tough-as-nails Superman who is just plain dull. I am going to have a hard time watching a show week after week where the main character not only does not make me laugh, but he didn't even make me crack a smile.
The second problem, a conspiracy. A conspiracy?! What the ... do all the vampires, werewolves and ghosts get together and decide to take over the world? (Actually, that's not a bad idea.) Anyway, I audibly groaned at the thought of a CSD Cigarette Smoking Daemon marking all victims.
The third disappointment was fear, or the lack thereof. It just was not scary at all. Not one little bit. Maybe I expected too much from the creators of the X-Files, but I craved a thrill that I just did not get. The episode of the X-Files "Home" is, in my mind, the scariest hour in the history of television. I was hoping for thrills like that on a regular basis. But it doesn't look like that is possible.
OK, I'm going to watch the show every week, because I am a sci-fi geek and maybe it will get better, but I doubt it. In actuality I hope that someone cancels Night Stalker just to put me out of my misery.
Darnell Davis
qqqdonq(at)yahoo.com
loved the old Night Stalker series from way back when. I was a little nervous when I heard it was coming back. Tonight my fears were allayed. The sense of horror, mystery and offbeat look on life were artfully captured in this era's version. It was an especially nice touch to carefully insert an image of the first Kolchak, Darren McGavin, into the premiere show. If you were a fan of the old Night Stalker and didn't hear that ABC brought it back, give it a shot, it's got a rough time period opposite C.S.I. on Thursday night.
Gary Roelli
gjwr(at)excite.com
love to read your news section. I love sci-fi, my wife hates it. SCIFI.com is a great Web site for fans of anything science fiction.
However ...
I'm noticing more and more non-sci-fi content. Here is the most recent example, found in the news section for the week of 10/2/05: "Demi Moore (Charlie's Angels: Full Throttle) and Ashton Kutcher (Dude, Where's My Car?) were married in the Los Angeles area on Sept. 24, Us Weekly and People magazines reported."
These two getting married has nothing to do with sci-fi. I really don't care that they get married. I'm sure there are a large number of your other readers who feel the same way. Information about them is rammed down our throats by every other news organization on radio and TV. I don't expect to see this information here on SCIFI.com, nor do I want to see it.
I'm curious to know the reasoning for adding this news, and others like it, to your news section. Maybe at some point in these particular stars' careers they appeared in a sci-fi film (Ashton Kutcher was in Butterfly Effect)? If so, the two mentioned with the stars are not what most would consider sci-fi movies. Is SCIFI.com simply trying to boost readership by including some mainstream news information that everyone else has already reported?
Don't get me wrong, I'm not going to lose sleep over this. I will still read the news section, and I will still visit the web site for other info. I just thought I add my $0.02 worth.
Thank you.
Walter James Linsley
wlinsley(at)amscan.com
SCI FI Wire news editor Patrick Lee responds:
Thanks for your thoughtful comments. SCI FI Wire tries to be the Web site of record for all news having to do with science fiction, fantasy and supernatural arts and entertainment, and that necessarily includes reportage of news involving celebrities connected with such projects. We're not trying to appeal to any particular audience, simply trying to be thorough. I understand that some readers may have a distaste for purely "celebrity news," but briefly noting a news item of general interest doesn't seem to us to be sullying our mission to report all the science fiction, fantasy and supernatural news that fits, as long as it falls in our bailiwick.
Hope that helps, and thanks for reading.
Best,
Patrick
must be getting old and concrete, but of the three new network "invasion" shows, I like Surface best, because we got to see the species humanity is up
against. I also find the characters likable and real. I do get weird flashes of other movies as I watch, from Close Encounters (the Louisiana wife not on board with her husband's new obsession) to Gargantua (the little boy having trouble finding what to feed the baby, plus the adult gobbling a boatload of people), but it's been fun.
Shaun Cassidy surely did Invasion no favor in a recent Wire blurb when he hedged as to whether there were really aliens, that the alien factor might be an allegory about divorced families. That's no way to build a fanbase for a show that has a science-fiction title. If the sheriff, his wife the doctor, the priest and the TV producer haven't been taken over by the glowing lights that swam away, he will quickly lose me. The amorphous nature of what's going on is not intriguing, but annoying. Cassidy needs to put some cards on the table. If the whole season is "are there or aren't there," I won't be following for long. It gives the "aliens" too much time to take over too many people.
Same problem with Threshold: The bioformed "humans" that got away could be altering others at a far greater rate than the Threshold team is dealing with it. While the team are dealing with clues to one bioformed human's shenanigans with a mental patient, the others who were bioformed could be creating hundreds more, the goal of any invading species. The show seems to carry the assumption that they are after a very finite number of bioformed people. Therefore the show lacks the urgency and broad-sweeping countermeasures I would think would be taken in such a situation.
I'll keep watching/taping them, all with the hope the latter two get meatier.
Barbara Goldstein
psifidoll(at)comcast.net
Back to the top.
