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.
arry Potter's fourth installment on the silver screen is further proof that the darker this science-fantasy film series becomes, the more successful. The casting of great actors, the unrecognizable but as-talented-as-ever Ralph Fiennes in this case as Harry's lingering nemesis, is also enduring as proof of its success. I like the fact that as the audience, we are never prepared for what climactic twists, including the ending, naturally, will be thrust onto our consciousness.
Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint and Emma Watson are continuing to evolve gracefully with each new year at Hogwarts, and I hope that they are never recast before Harry's, Ron's and Hermione's last film epic together. J.K. Rowling's brainchild is already doing for this century what Star Trek did for the cinema in the last. I will not be surprised if it endures for at least three more sequels.
Michael Anthony Basil
mike.basil(at)sympatico.ca
'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore.
Why, oh why, do networks feel the need to cancel our favorite stories in the middle of a storyline? Or not give us what they promised? If you're going to cancel Night Stalker because of its supposedly piss-poor ratings, why not at least wait until after the second part of the big two-part story we started watching last week?
Carl had just been arrested for withholding the name of a source that he didn't actually know the name of. You had the undercover operative who was holed up in Koreatown and had just called his boss for extraction—the same boss whose bloody body we saw the previous night on a barroom floor. A mysterious voice on a cell phone was calling Carl, giving him tips—at least until Carl got fed up and smashed the phone, but then the guy did say he wasn't calling anymore. How in the world can anyone leave us dangling like this?
Oh wait, the same mentality that canceled Space: Above and Beyond with three of the characters missing. And let's not forget that out of the—whoo hoo—six whole episodes we were promised for the second season of Tru Calling, we only got five. I still haven't bought the DVD set for season two. What, am I supposed to get excited about this after getting shafted by the network?
Screw them. Screw them all. They obviously don't care about us. Let's boycott TV and go back to reading books. There's plenty of stuff out there, between books, magazines, comic books, and for those who are allergic to the printed word, there's always the Internet. Why should we care about their stupid shows when they don't care about us?!
Louise Pare-Lobinske
LLobinske(at)aol.com
egarding the incorporation of deleted scenes into the main feature for DVD releases ("Let's Integrate Deleted Scenes"), there are some cases where the deleted scenes are best left out. You mentioned Star Wars as an example—the scenes cut from Episodes I and II actually altered the story in some places or reiterated plot elements already covered by the scenes that replaced them, and dragged down the pace of the storytelling in others. They weren't cut by the studio—they were cut by the director, included in the DVD to give you some insight into the process of making the movie rather than to show you something the studios didn't want you to see. And there was a "deleted scene" that was reincorporated into Episode I with the DVD release (ah, that George—never lets the paint dry before grabbing the brushes yet again!).
And as for the Lord of the Rings trilogy, Peter Jackson always intended the movies to have those extra scenes in the first place—he shortened them for the initial theatrical release to appeal to the broadest possible audience, then added the extra material for the "Platinum Edition" DVDs to appeal to the true-blue fans who like more "meat" on the story's bones. (If you recall, there was even a DVD release of the theatrical version of each film before the Platinum Edition—again, going for the broad appeal.)
In the end, whoever makes the DVD (usually the person making the movie) gets to decide what goes where. Just as I wouldn't ask an artist to include his pencil lines in his finished painting unless he intended them to be there, I wouldn't ask a director to slip her deleted scenes into a movie unless she wanted them there in the first place. Moviemaking is art by committee, but it's still art, with the director generally having the strongest say in what direction the final product will take.
Don Boyer
scifi(at)tatooine.org
umbing things down for Americans? You bet they are! I've been saying for years now. But I find it most blatant in anime and other Japanese imports, from Godzilla, Ultraman and Power Rangers to Gigantor, Tekkaman (Techno Man) and Gatchaman (Battle of the Planets). Man, I used to despise Fred Ladd! It's bad enough when you can understand Japanese and read these ridiculously translated subtitles, but to have the entire show changed when it's done with English audio is just plain insulting. Granted, there is a lot of cursing in anime, but that can be diluted with simple substitute words like dang, blasted, shoot, shucks, whatever—even frilling or fraking.
We are being sold out/insulted by our own nationalists on this issue, not by those abroad. Even these video games like Grand Theft Auto. Do we find that kind of behavior and language more acceptable for our children than having our children shout "Illuminus" while holding a twig? When it comes to words, I want my child to ask me what "wanker" means if it comes out of a character's mouth, so I can tell him not to use it and why. But in order for me to correct it, I have to know about it, too. I don't want executives and committees deciding what I can hear. I'm a GFM.
It took me almost half a lifetime to find the original Japanese version of Gojira (Godzilla without Raymond Burr). Maybe if we'd left these films alone there would be a bigger market for Godzilla movies and such. But hey, I understand—on one hand Toho could say, "No, if we sell it to you, you have to leave it alone and translate it word for word" and not make a sale, or they could take the money and not care that a hacked-up, rewritten film makes you look like an idiot instead of a cinematic genius. In Godzilla's case, the original was great either way; so was the original Ultraman. Thank goodness for Ebay on that front, I guess. But what was done to the Power Rangers and Ultraman Tiga was/is disgusting. Or perhaps it is a plot to ensure that pure Japanese television is never accepted here in the states. Is it dumbing-down or censorship? I know I couldn't get through the first Tiga show because of the voice actors that sounded like pre-teens with idiotic, smart-mouthed dialogue from what is supposed to be a paramilitary organization with state-of-the-art equipment. Even the kaiju action (translation: monster violence) had been edited down. The whole reason for the show was diluted. I'll stick to raw Japanese and suffer the misspelled subtitles.
I remember the first time I heard "bloody" used as a curse word on Prisoners (or Women) of Cell Block C. I was more curious as to why the guard was more upset at the use of the word bloody than being called a bitch in the same sentence. It caused me to do some "research" into international slang, and I was in junior high at that time, I think. I can remember having to translate certain phrases from various British comedies and dramas for my girlfriends at the time. Even some things said in Rome on HBO for my wife now.
We should be encouraging people to seek out knowledge about other language nuances, not ignoring them, hiding them or labeling them "Ebonics." If not to better ourselves, then to at least know when someone is insulting us or complimenting us. Wouldn't that bring all closer together?
Sash Scott
Cptsscott(at)aol.com
he Wire ratings show Smallville to be doing poorly relative to earlier seasons, and last season was surely a stinker to warrant it.
But Smallville seems to have found itself again this season. The
consumation of Clarke and Lana's relationship notwithstanding, the show has
wisely returned to its comic-book roots. Clark now has his Fortress of
Solitude, and James Marsters as Braniac is a great first nemesis for Clark
to overcome. The circling planet on top of the Daily Planet is
nostalgically befitting, although they're all younger than in the comics to
have connections to it.
Lex's growing romantic interest in Lana finally gives a clue as to how he
and Clark will end their relationship once and for all, something to do with
her.
Further, after a couple seasons of stagnation in Clark's evolution to
Superman, we are finally seeing movement, behaviors that are Superman-like:
a mentality that he should be on alert for "disasters" he can help with,
helping strangers and saving the whole town from the second meteor shower.
I'm enjoying this season.
Barbara Goldstein
psifidoll(at)comcast.net
or those of us who have been loyal fans of
Smallville for the past four years, it looks as if our
patience has paid. This teenage view of the life of
Superman has been at times as frustrating
as my own teen years. Most of the show and Clark's
time has been spent pining over an on-again off-again relationship with the girl next door.
This season, however, has turned into everything that
was promised for the last four years ... and more.
Both comic-book fans' and a romance fan's dreams come
true. Including a Fortress of Solitude straight out
of the movies. Future Justice League members making
guest appearances. Enough action to satisfy all, from
super-powered Bounty Hunters from Krypton to sexy
teenage sorority-girl vampires in miniskirts and black
leather. Even Lex Luthor has finally gone over to the
dark side. He captured and tortured a young Aquaman.
(Of course, like all supervillians, Lex leaves Aquaman
alone and unguarded so that Clark can come save the
day. I guess some lessons are never learned.)
But my major concern, and something that has concerned
many true believers, is the relationship between Clark
and Lana. For fifty years Lana has been a Cliffs Note
in the "LL" file of Clark Kent's life. But now after
Smallville, she will never be a footnote again. The
love Clark and Lana have in Smallville far outshadows
any of the other versions of Superman and his
relationship with Lois. Lana truly loves Clark Kent,
not Superman. I have to admit that I have always felt
a bit of resentment toward Lois for only falling for
Clark after giving up on Superman. But this is not
the case with Lana. She loves Clark Kent (along
with thousands of other teenage young women in America).
As we all know, when teenagers fall in love, nature
takes over and eventually sex enters the picture.
Unmarried teenagers having sex. And Clark and Lana
are no exception. Sure, many of you may say, "Whoop di
do da day! That happens every day in the real world." And of course you would be correct.
But Smallville is not the real world. Supervillians
don't tie up their nemeses and create an elaborate
plan to kill them. (Sharks with frickin' lasers on
their head!) If I can suspend my disbelief that a
man can fly, I can suspend my disbelief that Superman
can be a virgin when he gets married (to Lois, I might
add).
I remember watching Lois and Clark and Clark telling
Lois he had never been with anyone until they got
married. OK, realistically a beautiful man that is
Clark Kent would have a very difficult time keeping
his virtue today with the likes of Paris Hilton
influencing so many teenage girls. "It just wouldn't
be realistic to have them not sleep together." But last
time I checked, men can't fly.
Just remember that we are viewing a show about a man
who considers a pair of glasses to be a effective
disguise. "Glasses on, glasses off."
Don't get me wrong. I am torn on this issue. As I
watch this show, I can't tell how often I find myself
shouting at the screen, "That's just silly!" But
Superman as always been our idealized man. Maybe this
time the producers have made him just a little too
human. Anyway, it's something to think about.
Regardless of this, Smallville has definitely taken
off and is becoming a show where things are actually
happening every week. Now could someone tell the
creators of Lost that they might want to take note
and do the same ... ?
Darnell Davis
qqdonq(at)yahoo.com
n response to "Paper Has Become Too Precious," baloney. Too precious for whom? E-towels aren't cleaning up spills and messes around the house. E-bags aren't containing the dirt sucked up by the average vacuum cleaner. You don't download e-paper for toilet tissue. So don't preach that a book is expendable. To those of us who inhabit spaces on the planet that are not "grid-dependent," a book is a sacred thing.
A book needs no batteries or electricity to read it; water may dampen and warp it but it will dry out. A book can be held in the hand; it is solid, comforting. The smell of a bookstore or a library calms the nerves. It is fun and relaxing to go to a place of books, sit on the floor, look through the books, scan the covers, hold them, study them. You can let your child gnaw on a book (though I don't recommend it, some books are made to be teething tools). Try letting your child teethe on an iPod or e-reader. Not good, is it?
Be brave. Find your inner pioneer. Instead of taping a screen, you can do some real exercise and turn a page. A tree sacrificed, or paper recycled, can be honored no better than to become a book that you love. Better a book to praise the tree than something routinely flushed down a toilet.
Marie Cooley
robertbennett111(at)yahoo.com
ablo del Moral ("SFX Helped Kill Thoughtful Films") is among a group that thinks that you cannot have good SF and good SFX. The thinking is that too much time is spent on the SFX and none on the story. While that is true of the Matrix trilogy—OK first movie, but the last two were over-hyped, badly done SFX martial-arts battles with little to no story at all—I do not see that in either the Star Wars saga (and, yes, I mean all of them) or I, Robot.
The whole Star Wars saga is one big space opera set in a galaxy far, far away. In the prequels, the SFX were used to make the settings that could never been done here on Earth. Plus there were the big battles (Clone Wars) that are part of the Star Wars saga. SF stories do not have to be based on Earth all the time. With SFX you can do stories that take place out among the stars, on other worlds. But there was also a story as well. It centered around the events that would lead to Episodes 4-6. But those who do not care for SFX in their SF movies saw only the SFX and missed the story altogether.
Same seems to be the case with I, Robot. In this case, the story was set on Earth in the year 2035. The SFX was used mostly to set the look of the city in the year 2035. The movie did a great job of hitting the main points of Asimov's Robot books. But that was lost on Pablo and those like-minded. All they saw was the SFX and forgot that there was a story.
To me, the best use of SFX is when it is used to create the world the story is set in. In both Star Wars and I, Robot this was done well. You can have a great SF story and have great SFX. It has been done.
I can only think of what Pablo would do if books like the Saga of the Seven Suns series and the Honor Harrington series were made into TV miniseries. Most likely turn their noses at them because of the heavy use of SFX that would have to be done to make them fit what was in the books.
Timothy Morgan
zanlong(at)cox.net
ci-Fi / Fantasy fans have been bombarded with big-budget films as of
late, and many have flocked to the theaters thrilled that our genre has
been so catered to as of late.
Unfortunately, Hollywood continues to insult our intelligence with
massive explosions, state-of-the-art CGI, brilliant costuming and
pretty faces. They have neglected to add things like substance,
character development and even really a storyline. You can't seem to
make yourself care about much of what is going on as you are an
outsider watching a scene played out as it was envisioned in someone
else's mind. The characters aren't so much warm and identifiable and
tend to come across as too black and white, too predictable, too pretty
and too detached.
I was delighted to discover Serenity. For the unfamiliar, Serenity is
the culmination of the efforts of a devoted fan base, an amazing cast
and the persistence of a director who firmly believed he had a good
thing and wouldn't just let it fade quietly into the night. It is,
quite frankly, the movie that, by all rights and reason in modern day
Hollywood, never should have been.
But what a movie it is! Your characters feel very real, good people
occasionally doing bad things for the greater good. You find yourself
actually caring enough to consider "Are they really bad or just
opposed to a corrupt and bad situation?" As history has shown, it is
always the winners who write the textbooks, right or wrong.
The dialogue is quick and witty, and humor is used effectively. There
aren't aliens to deal with, and you can draw on actual human experience
to identify with all of the characters and their situations. It's Star
Trek meets the Wild American West.
It is really unfortunate that this movie didn't get more media attention.
Most of the work was done by the incredible fan base; in fact, it was
one of them who introduced the series and film to me. Until then I
hadn't really known a great deal about Firefly or Serenity. There was
no huge hype as there was with other summer releases, yet this film
managed to rate number 2 in the box office its opening weekend. It stands
on its own merits, not hype. I have yet to see Serenity cereal,
Serenity Happy Meal toys or Serenity coloring books compensating for
a lack of substance.
The DVD is due out Dec. 20, 2005, while the movie only opened
Sept. 30, 2005. For its incredibly short run, the film has done
exceptionally well, and you really should encourage all sci-fi fans to
catch it before it leaves the big screen. It was one of the few
summer films I saw that I left thinking that I had gotten my money's
worth.
Angela Speckman
xarhea(at)gmail.com
First, I would like to express my sincere disappointment about the news that SCIFI.COM is discontinuing SCI FICTION.
While I fully realize that SCI FICTION did not bring in any money, and so was funded from other sources within NBC-Universal, I do find it strange that no other business models were tried out before pulling the plug, such as:
1) Making SCI FICTION a subscription site: Charge—for instance—$20 for a one-year subscription, or $1 per story
2) Releasing a yearly "Best of SCI FICTION" anthology
Income generated from both these options would probably go a very long way toward making SCI FICTION financially viable. I am disturbed that neither of these options has been considered in order to keep this fantastic site running.
Other possibilities might have been a yearly fund drive such as the Web site Strange Horizons does, or the subscribe-or-watch-this-ad system that Salon.com uses.
Furthermore, I would like to point out the very major accomplishment of SCI FICTION: Namely, that it showed—beyond a doubt—that a webzine can be a fully professional alternative to printed fiction. This was not only evidenced by the high amount of traffic it generated, and the amount of prestigious awards SCI FICTION won, but also by the fact that it has converted numerous amounts of people who initially thought that they would never read fiction from a computer screen to online fiction enthusiasts.
I think it is very sad, highly disturbing and extremely disappointing to see such a fine magazine—which now stands as the benchmark for all online fiction magazines—to go.
Therefore I urge [SCIFI.COM] to consider the above-mentioned alternatives before definitely discontinuing SCI FICTION.
Yours sincerely,
Jetse de Vries
jetse(at)home.nl
Back to the top.
