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
Why Soldier Is Stupid
ixty million dollars and Kurt Russell should be capable of producing a good science fiction film. Soldier proves how easy it is to waste that money, particularly when the filmmakers have no respect whatsoever for the audience. Soldier leaps from one illogical plot point to the next, and at each step you are slapped on the side of the head to remind you you're watching a cheesy movie instead of being absorbed in a compelling story.
But a few examples:
- Why set this story so closely in the near future--there is no realistic chance that faster-than-light space travel would be invented in 20 years, and if we do we'd have way cooler weapons than gunpowder-based pistols.
- Why would you dump garbage on another planet, much less a habitable one? If for some stupid reason you go to the expense of lifting garbage from a planet, why not send it on an orbit spiraling into a local sun? Or at least dump it on a useless planet? And if you are going to dump garbage on a habitable planet, why go all the way down into the atmosphere (with all the bother and cost of going down and back up again) instead of dumping it from orbit (recall Skylab)? Did the writers really think we'd believe that this was just in case someday they had a soldier in the garbage they think is dead but really isn't and he has to survive the fall or the movie is over a little too soon?
- If you're going to test some elite new troops on some mission, why have them do it on a garbage dump with utterly no training value whatsoever?
- Why would a massacre of unarmed civilians be any kind of test of military prowess, unless you are the Serbian Army or the Ohio National Guard?
- If you're going to discreetly dispose of embarrassing bodies, why (a) keep them intact; (b) not check that they are really dead; and (c) simply put them in the garbage? Surely there's some 21st century gasoline around somewhere.
- Why does Sgt. Todd, who has just wasted a dozen or more bad guys with half a dozen high-tech weapons he has pilfered, decide to fight the last bad guy (who, lucky for Todd, happens to be unarmed) with his bare hands?
Now I know the authors of this oeuvre had this vision of soldiers fighting in a planet-sized garbage dump, but the least they could do is come up with a more plausible reason for the dump being there and the soldiers choosing to fight there. James Cameron could think up answers to these questions without breaking stride. (E.g., in Abyss--why don't they get help from above? Cameron writes in a hurricane.) Any science fiction writer who crawls out of the slush pile can think up a dozen ways to implement this vision without insulting the intelligence of the audience.
The people who made this film think that you and I are idiots, and they spent most of their $60 million trying to find new ways to tell us so. They could have accomplished the same result, and saved $59,750,000, by sending a million post cards with "You're Stupid!" printed on them.
Philip Carey
philipcarey@usa.net
Worried About Brimstone
our glowing and enthusiastic review of Brimstone in this issue makes me wonder if the critic in the Fall Preview issue ever even saw it? I have been waiting for this show since I saw a small snippet of thirty seconds in the summer. The grainy photography and interesting relationships had me eager and I have been salivating for the season premiere, but I was afraid the sound trashing and bashing it received before being shown was a death knell.
I was particularly worried because the promos stopped, until two weeks
ago. Well I'm glad to see it in your review now, and just tell me why they
are so very different?
Dot Snowden
bsnowden@swbell.net
Editor: They are different for two reasons: 1) They were written by two different people. 2) Our preview critic did not have the luxury of seeing a completed pilot or episode, as neither was available from Fox at the time.
Open-Minded About Seven Days
egarding Seven Days, I realize I haven't seen the entire season yet but I am still open-minded if they can somehow explain what happens to the hero and his craft after a time jump. Are there now multiple copies of this guy (and his time machine--a real savings for the budget people!)? Is the one replaced somehow kicked out of reality or is he murdered by his own people to prevent a paradox? For that matter, did our hero actually "save the day" or just one possible day out of nearly infinite days?
I understand that this is just a TV show made by people just out to make a buck, but the difference between a good show and a great show lies in how much everyone involved cares about what is going on. Also questions like these are the bones writers use to make compelling and interesting stories.
David C. Chapman
Chapman@GT-Corp.Com
What's Wrong With Mercy Point
just read your notice that Mercy Point had been canceled after two weeks. I'm not surprised, although sorry to hear it. Two things wrong with the series though: 1) Too much "soap opera" atmosphere, and 2) If you put ER, Chicago Hope, and DS9 together, it still wouldn't fly.
It's a shame the writers and producers obviously never read any of James White's Sector General stories. He has some terrific stories about a hospital in space and a medical staff that makes those on ER and Chicago Hope seem like first-year medical students. Even the station itself is too "20th century."
Just like Voyager, Mercy Point had no one on the staff with any imagination, no producers willing to see beyond the money potential of ER, and writers that never learned how to write and it came from Paramount.
Joe Castleberry
ironwolf@inow.com
Phantom Menace Sounds Like Trek
agree with the disappointment on the title for the new Star Wars film. I love Star Wars but I think it sounds like the title of a single Star Trek episode. It doesn't nearly have the impact that the other three titles had.
Jake Soper
jasoper@students.wisc.edu
Phantom Menace Hearkens To Classics
beg to differ with Mr. Cahn about the subtitle for the next Star Wars movie. Apparently he's never run across the episode titles of the old movie serials of the '30s and '40s, which is where Lucas got some of his inspiration for the saga to begin with. In fact, if you think about it, the titles for the middle trilogy sound just like those old serials, too! I was highly amused when I heard the name, and although it sounds cheesy to modern ears, it hearkens back to its classic roots.
Linda Stoops
jassmoris@yahoo.com
Phantom Menace May Be A Phantom
t sounds as though some people are upset over the apparent cheesiness of the Star Wars prequel movie title, namely The Phantom Menace. I agree wholeheartedly.
Knowing Lucas has a penchant for the old cliffhanger serial format, it seems as though he really could be serious about the title. But it doesn't fit with the aesthetic of the other titles in the series. Besides, Lucas is a professional and it would seem entirely unlikely that he isn't absolutely aware of the impact of something so representative as the motion picture's name.
So perhaps he's up to his old tricks again. While the production company was doing location shoots for The Return of the Jedi, they used a ridiculous non-Star Warsian working title (help me here, I can't remember) on visible items such as signs and jackets to throw the media and the public off the trail.
What if this is a similar ploy? Lucasfilm might want to keep the film's true
title a mystery for as long as possible in order to preserve its impact
closer to the actual release date. I'm betting this is the case.
Then again, we may all come to revere The Phantom Menace as an instant film classic this May!
Ron Giles
rgiles@direct.ca
Don't Judge A Movie By Its Title
ranted, when I first read the title to the upcoming Star Wars
Episode 1 movie I had mixed feelings. Honestly I've had mixed feelings all along concerning the prequel movies. I'm a Star Wars fan since day one and I haven't stopped yet nor do I intend to. I have faith in Mr. Lucas that whatever this Phantom Menace is, it will be exciting and fun to watch and experience.
Remember, Lucas incorporated a wide array of influences into the original movie that inspired all the hullabaloo, including such things
as WWII dogfights, samurai, and yes, even "classic" SF serials like Flash Gordon. So let's not be too hasty in damning Episode 1 yet, and just by its title at that.
Denver W Brubaker
checkeredman@hotmail.com
Thrilled About Legend
hat a thrill to read the letter in your October 19th issue about the novel Legend. I thought I was all alone. Actually, I wondered if I was the only person who'd ever even read the book. I'd certainly never encountered anyone else who had.
But when it comes to positive and ultimately inspiring SF, Legend may be as good as anything I've ever read. I remember the novel as perhaps rough in places but still an undiscovered gem. For years, I kept an eye out for anything else from Maher, but I never found anything. So this may be his only book. Which would make it even more of a terrible shame for a story like this to go out of print and be lost to the world.
Jeff O'Brien
jeffob@mailexcite.com
Saved Legend For Rereading
just read the letter in your current edition from Marti L. Jessup. Go girl!
A few years ago I was digging through a bookstore and I came across a strange-looking book with a blurb on the back about psychic science fiction, and about this being the first work in this particular series that was actually "written by a living author." Since I always like to encourage the living, I opened the book. Expecting less than very little.
The book was Legend by Barry Maher. Though as much as I read I don't save books, I saved this one and I've actually re-read it twice since the first reading. It's sitting in my bookcase in front of me right now.
If I had to list my four or five favorite books, Legend would be one of the first books that came to mind for that list. It would be ludicrous for a book like this to go completely out of print. Somebody somewhere should publish an edition. And they might actually try to put something on the cover to get a few people to buy a copy. The fact that it is by a living author (assuming he's still living) is obviously a strong selling point. But there are those who want to know even more than that before they put down their money for a book.
Sam Conners
sconners7@zdnet.com
There Is Upbeat SF
n response to reader Marti L. Jessup, I'd just like to say that there is upbeat science fiction in print, by current writers. Specifically, there is Spider Robinson (Callahan's Crosstime Saloon) and Lois McMaster Bujold (the Miles Vorkosigan books--over a dozen of them). And, of course, the late Roger Zelazny.
Upbeat SF is out there. You just have to look beyond the Big Name authors.
Jeffrey Kaplan
jkaplan@world.std.com
