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. If you would like to submit a letter, please use our feedback form or send a message to scifiweekly@scifi.com.
-- Craig E. Engler, Editor
The Truman Show was sheer brilliance
have been reading science fiction and watching SF movies ever since I was old enough to enjoy those activities, and I'd have to say that The Truman Show, while not "hard" SF, certainly tops my list so far in this decade. I was amazed that such an imaginative writer found his way onto the big screen, and even more amazed that Jim Carrey pulled it off in the fashion he did. I knew he was a genius, but I didn't realize it went in quite that direction!
The aspect of this movie I found most engaging was the depth of philosophical insight that went into it; I couldn't help thinking the whole time that Truman was trapped in the pop-culture version of the Hindu/Buddhist Maya (illusion) and that he was, at every turn of the plot, tumbling toward his own awakening experience. I can promise you the story will work for you if you just leave your ideas of who Jim Carrey is behind you. Can you imagine it? Being raised to believe the world was round, just to find out one day that yours is flat! Not an original idea in SF (one is reminded of Piers Anthony's "Race Against Time"), but definitely fresh in the cinematic world. I've been dying to see such a yarn played out on the screen and I've been rewarded with sheer brilliance. Don't wait to see such a big story on your small screen, just see it now, and you'll thank me.
Ike Davis
freejack@cybermax.net
Disappointed with Broderick
read with interest the viewers' responses to Godzilla. Having grown up with the indestructible lizard, I looked forward to the '90s version of the story. I wasn't too disappointed. It had all the sentimental parts of the originals (although, I must say I missed Mothra) and a rather clever twist at the end.
I was, however, very disappointed at the choice of the lead, Matthew Broderick. Now, I have no doubt that Mr. Broderick is a fine actor, however, there was just something missing from his performance as the scientist with all the answers.
I sat through the movie thinking "Where is Will Smith when you need him?" or "I wonder who else could have played this role?" I wanted the character to be outrageous, demanding, stand up for what you know was right, but always felt that a board meeting would have made him more comfortable. Isn't a hero in SF bigger than that? Sort of superhuman in a lot of ways?
Did I enjoy Godzilla? A big yes, he was everything I expected from the Lizard King and more. And besides, New York City could use a little urban renewal.
Mary Puls
menoly@email.msn.com
Kudos to the makers of Godzilla
was very impressed with this new movie [Godzilla]. I did not go into the movie with any preconceived notions. I actually found myself cheering Godzilla on throughout the entire movie as he smashed New York. I actually felt very bad at the end when they killed him. The writers of the movie should be commended for their imagination. They did not make Godzilla out to be just another dumb lizard. This reptile was intelligent, and very agile. I always felt as though Godzilla was always a step ahead of the military and the law enforcement of New York throughout the entire movie. The movie was action packed all the way through, and the movie had one heck of an ending too.
So, I know that I will be adding this video to my collection once it is released. I'm also looking forward to the sequel, because I can feel the tremors. I hope the sequel can match the intensity of this movie. Kudos, to all of the people that were responsible for giving Godzilla a new lease of life at the movies.
Virgil Yancey
vgyancey@swbell.net
Just another bad flick
aving read your review of the original Godzilla, seen the movie on TV and re-read your review all I can say is...you must have seen a different version! Without trying to attach significance to The Big G's dualistic nature, all I saw was one poorly filmed, cheesy special effects monster flick that had been further butchered by inserting clips of Raymond Burr. (The insert film doesn't come close to matching the original film tones.) I was amused by the inability of the dubbing actor's to correctly pronounce "phenomenon" again and again.
Let's call it just another bad flick that has aged like a baloney sandwich
with mayo.
Dick Powers
dick.powers@hok.com
Who cares about cost?
t seems that at the moment there is a lot of flack about the huge amounts of cash that some films are costing.
I say, who cares if the cost of a film is over a hundred million! If the film makes a profit (as most big budget films do, such as ID4) and I enjoy it, then it's a success. Simple as that.
There is nothing holy about a low-budget movie. It just means they spent less money.
When I leave from seeing a film I think one thing. Not was it worth X amount of millions, but was it worth the £4.50 it cost me to see it? And in most cases I say, "Yes it was."
So bring on those huge mega movies. I want to see them. The public wants to see them. So why not make them?
Donnacha Brophy
donnbro@hotmail.com
