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
Landlock actor defends anime films
have just finished reading your reviews of Landlock, parts one and two. I am sorry that you didn't enjoy it more. It is, after all, entertainment meant to take your mind and attention away from the everyday and transport you, to some degree, to a different level. I am surprised that such a layered, mystical adventure, that is beautifully animated and well-acted, didn't warrant at least a little praise.
When I played Agahali, I felt that I understood the conflict she was feeling between loyalty and decency. She was also young and just coming into her strength and self-awareness. At least, I felt that was what the character was about. I didn't feel a desire to overplay the character, as strength, restraint and courage are better displayed quietly.
I think that is one of the interesting aspects about this film, that the actors made the characters seem like real people. I am very proud of the other actors in this film and of my association with it. Sometimes a many-faceted plot makes for more interesting reviewing as well, perhaps you could give it another watching or two and see if it gives you a bit of escapism. That's what it's all about, right?
Ally Coyote
Ally.Coyote@Sympatico.ca
P.S. We actually got quite a few good ones as well, but thanks for the honesty. I hope you like the next one better. I hope to have you review one I've written as well as done some voice work in!
Editor: We did have some positive things to say about Landlock, and in fact we rated the first volume a B+. But we have to tell our readers when we think something doesn't quite measure up, otherwise they won't be able to trust us when we tell them something is good.
Forgive Armageddon's bad science
egarding all of the previous letters about Armageddon being bad/impure science fiction: I notice that one reader conjures Jules Verne, saying that Verne knew that "to be true to the format (of science fiction), it must contain real science." Now, it seems to me that Verne surely must have known that the giant cannon he used to propel men to the moon in From the Earth to the Moon would have killed live astronauts.
If anything, the popularity of this film will increase public awareness of the necessity of an asteroid mapping/tracking program. For that reason, I am willing to forgive the notion that an asteroid "the size of Texas" goes unnoticed until it is a mere 18 days from Earth, as well as the other blatant scientific and technical implausibilities in the film.
Chris Overstreet
chris@coverstreet.com
Didn't like Armageddon or Deep Impact
ith all of the hoopla surrounding the coming turn of the century, I admit that the subject of how the world might end is somewhat interesting. Because of this, I paid to see both Deep Impact and Armageddon in the theatre. Deep Impact was extremely disappointing. Special effects didn't really kick in until late in the movie, and I never really saw Tea Leoni's character as any sort of hero. In fact, in the scene when the president (played by the usually great Morgan Freeman) talks to Nora about "E.L.E.," I felt that he told her the truth rather quickly. My impression of the White House and its inhabitants is that they will question people a little more intensely. Why did they not just ask Nora what she knew about "Ellie"? It would have quickly become apparent that she thought she was investigating a woman. The beginning was so predictable, I wanted to walk out right then. The scientist discovers the horrible situation the Earth is in, and dies before he can report it. Who didn't see that coming? None of the characters of this film really became important to me, even the boy and his childhood sweetheart. The best part of this film, for me, was seeing Tea's character swept away by the tidal wave.
I had higher hopes for Armageddon. An excellent cast, and good character development were evident early on. There was a lot of rich humor in this film that helped to offset the emotionally tense scenes. Special effects were introduced fairly quickly as well, and they were well done. Since this film is still relatively new, I won't go into a lot of detail. By the end of the film, though, I was very annoyed. I felt it had been ruined by the fact that everything that could possibly go wrong went wrong. Where the film might have been believable, it reached the point of being ridiculous. Why? So that Bruce Willis could become the ultimate hero. Am I the only one who sat there watching, thinking "Enough already!"?
Disturbing Behavior--I have not seen this movie, nor do I plan to. I, too, noticed that Disturbing Behavior seems to be a rip-off of the Stepford films. I would like to mention that there was a TV movie made many years ago called The Stepford Children. And I have the feeling that even that movie was better than the film being promoted now, despite the surprising casting of the talented Canadian Bruce Greenwood.
Elaine
raven2dove@aol.com
Science fact is for college
had to comment on the comments I just read about the quality of science fiction coming from Hollywood. First off, let's bring this back into focus by saying that if you think science fiction has to be scientifically accurate you need to wake up and read more science fiction. After all, it is science fiction not science fact (that's what colleges are for). Since we are here, NASA rates Armageddon an eight of 10 on a scale of accuracy. Is that accurate enough for you? Science fiction does not have to be accurate to be good. Look at Star Trek. Good is believable, not necessarily factual. If you insist on science fact stick to textbooks and Mister Wizard.
Greg Walton
gregw@mpinet.net
Editor: Unfortunately, Jerry Bruckheimer made a point of touting Armageddon's scientific accuracy, which begs reviewers and moviegoers to take the movie to task for its scientific slip-ups (and there certainly were plenty, despite NASA's rating).
