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 use our feedback form or send a message to scifiweekly@scifi.com.
must agree with what Darren Simpson had to say concerning those whose willful ignorance leads them to burn Harry Potter books ("Potter Unfairly Picked for Burning"). Anyone who has been brainwashed into believing that God doesn't want them to read Harry Potter needs help. It doesn't matter one iota to these disgraceful, bigoted people that Potter is not anti-religion. Or even that he promotes much that normal, tolerant Christians have no problem agreeing with. To the hypnotized, Potter is evil, and no amount of reality can change that.
Clearly, Harry Potter is picked upon by the willfully ignorant branch of Christianity because it's successful, and is selling a lot more copies than their favorite book. Why are people turning away from Christianity; because it's increasingly being hijacked and grossly misrepresented by fundamentalist idiots. It seems to me that if Jesus (who let's remember was not a Christian), was around today, he'd be willing to read a book before judging it as the work of the Devil. I'm also sure that he'd easily be able to tell the difference between a fable and manual. Most importantly, Jesus would understand that regardless of what Harry Potter believes, he displays qualities such as courage, honesty and loyalty, while risking his life to fight evil.
Who is to say that what Christians call the Holy Spirit, is not the same force as what Harry Potter calls magic. Surely, it is how this power is used which determines whether the use—and user—is good or evil? God, it is said, moves in mysterious ways. Could it be that He is moving through Harry Potter, and the Fundamentalists can't see it?
Nathan Brazil
nathanbrazil@freeuk.com
n issue #306, a letter writer, Trina Neu, makes a case for the SCI FI Channel picking up Witchblade ("Witchblade Should Live Again"). I could use almost every one of her arguments to make the same case for Birds of Prey, a half-season WB show which, despite good writing and strong characters, was abandoned by that network.
I have read an interview with Jordan Levin, entertainment president of The WB, where he says they had problems with "finding someone who could write the show." It didn't appear that way in the final product. What I saw wasn't exactly like the comic book (which I have read off and on for a while now), but then not all comic book adaptations can be like the Spider-Man movie either. When you start out with a lesser-known book, there will be more differences in the conversion to TV. Birds of Prey was a good series in its own regard, taking elements that the average viewer would be more likely to be familiar with (e.g., the "Batman and Catwoman have a daughter" origin for the Huntress rather than "young daughter of Italian-American family witnesses slaying of entire family by the mob" or something version in recent years. Much as I love Helena Bertinelli—and I love her enough to have made a Halloween costume based on her outfit in Birds of Prey: Manhunt—I think most people would have had trouble understanding that version of the character). And then those elements were combined with the flavor of the comic book, with its strong female "girlfriend superhero" characters, an interesting twist on Harley Quinn, and a love interest for Helena whose background needed more exploring—and a hint in the last episode of Batman making a guest appearance in the future. We're talking about a show with seriously squandered potential here.
I also understand that Rachel Skarsten was not happy during the filming and has basically said "good riddance." I'm sorry to hear that, but if the other actors can be talked into coming back on board, this would be a great show for SCI FI to pick up, if only to give us a full first season. Maybe Carolyn Lance could show up alive and join the cast on a permanent basis. After all, it was Black Canary that was a member of Birds of Prey in the book (now that would be an interesting dynamic! And in fact it was done to good effect in the aforementioned story Manhunt in the comics). A friend and I used to joke that the only person who stays dead in comics is Ben Parker, because his death is the primary motivation for Peter Parker to become Spider-Man.
For the record, I would love to see more Witchblade as well. I could never understand TNT's reasoning for canceling the show—they wanted to cancel it when it was doing well, and as it was concluding a storyline? That's what I heard. If that's true, it would seem that for all the hype they gave it as "TNT's first drama," they were never serious about the show. I thought you canceled a show when it was doing poorly, not when it was doing well. And there was at least one loose end they could have explored in a third season (the "mark" of Kenneth Irons on Gabriel's hand at the end of the second season).
There's an audience for both of these shows, one which seems to be largely ignored. My husband, for instance, would watch Birds of Prey and Witchblade, by and large, but none of the other shows I was interested in, like Buffy or Smallville, with the exception of Stargate SG-1—we have both been big fans of that show since the beginning (or as soon as we could see it, since we didn't have Showtime when it first aired). As Trina said, properly marketed, I feel Birds of Prey as well as Witchblade would do very well in SCI FI's lineup.
Louise Pare-Lobinske
LLobinske@aol.com
ith all due respect to Gary Roelli ("Star Trek Films Need New Faces"),
I don't think that Paramount is too interested in doing a Star Trek: Deep Space Nine film anytime soon. To do it, the producers would have to overcome more than a few obstacles. I'm afraid that the task of assembling the entire cast of DS9 would be very difficult at this point. As the seventh season of Star Trek: The Next Generation was winding down, Paramount signed the Next Generation cast up right away for the films that
were to commence as soon as the series finale was wrapped up. The "suits" at Paramount bent over backwards to show TNG's cast that they were not only wanted but that they were needed as well. Plus, they were willing to back it up with some serious money.
DS9's cast were never presented with any movie deals and the powers that be seemed to go out of their way to rub DS9's collective noses in it via various press releases which stated that there no plans to do a DS9 movie or to use any of the DS9 characters in any of the other films. In other words, Paramount basically treated DS9's cast and crew like crap.
Getting the cast back together at this point (provided they were so inclined) will prove to be a chore. Does anyone happen to remember all the problems Gene Roddenberry had trying get the original cast back together for what eventually morphed from the ST II TV series into Star Trek: The Motion Picture? Apparently, at one point Paramount was toying with the idea of casting other actors in the roles. Cooler heads prevailed.
And then there's the problem of DS9's cast. Unlike Star Trek's original series and
Star Trek: The Next Generation there hasn't been a "breakout" star from either DS9 or for
that matter Voyager or Enterprise. Say what you will about Bill Shatner, he's widely known to the general public, as is Leonard Nimoy. Thanks in part to the X-Men movie franchise, Patrick Stewart is well on his way to becoming a star "icon" whether he likes it or not. On the other hand, as much as I like Avery Brooks, he's probably an unknown quantity to most people. Truth to tell, he's probably more well-known for playing Hawk on Spencer for Hire than he is for playing Sisko. And unfortunately, what the studios want when they pour millions of dollars into a movie is star power! And Brooks and company probably lack any in their eyes. Personally, I would go to a DS9 movie at the drop of a hat. I always enjoyed the series and was kind of disappointed in the way it ended, but I'm a realist and I know the chances of it happening are long indeed.
J. Randy Barrett
jrbarrett101@yahoo.com
ary Roelli ("Star Trek Films Need New Faces") has a good point. As many readers have mentioned before, Star Trek's movies need a new crew. The Star Trek: The Next Generation crew is getting too old and predictable.
While the Deep Space Nine crew would be a welcome break, I have another idea
in mind for the Star Trek movies franchise. Instead of having a familiar crew from any of the episodes, take just a few characters from DS9 or Voyager and put them onto an alien ship with an alien crew and set the story going from there. Star Trek does not have to revolve around Federation Starfleet. Indeed, having a human presence on Star Trek is essential for its theme of human progress. But it doesn't have to be in a human environment.
A particularly good idea would be for two human characters to join up with the Klingons to go to war with the Borg or Romulans. This situation would make a great opportunity for human characters (or better, one or two humans and some other beings) to learn more deeply about Klingon culture. For a long time now we have seen alien beings on our starships trying to conform to our lifestyles. It would make a refreshing change to have it the other way round, and to see a story revolving around a conflict that dosn't involve the Federation. It would also have more potential for laughs, without undermining Star Trek's serious side. Can you imagine a Vulcan trying to conform to Klingon ways?
I think this is the key for change. It could also create great potential for TV episodes in the future.
Darren Simpson
darrensimpson10@hotmail.com
ne year ago, on April 1st, a show that you can really sink your teeth into returned to SCI FI. It gained new fans and viewers and made the older ones happy. However, it has been staked once again.
I am truly disappointed to see Forever Knight removed from the SCI FI Channel once again. It is an immortal show, with superb acting and storylines, that deserves to be on the air. Even after being canceled since 1996, fans are still fighting for a return movie and more merchandise. The interest in this show is still alive and stronger than ever, and the fans still love watching the reruns over and over again on SCI FI.
SCI FI, thank you for airing Forever Knight as long as you did. It was nice seeing all 70 episodes again. I hope [the SCI FI Channel] will consider adding it back to the lineup in the near future.
Kristin Harris
kris1228@earthlink.net
remember how much I enjoyed watching the film Tremors several years ago in cinema. One character who captivated the audience was Michael Gross as survivalist "Burt Gummer." We remembered him as the understanding father in the television show Family Ties and seeing him play a gung-ho hero is the perfect argument against type-casting an actor. Well, "Burt Gummer" and some members of the original gang are back in the SCI FI original series Tremors: The Series. Here is one viewer who is willing to give the "can-do crew" of monster fighters of Perfection, Nev., a chance. I must say using the mixmaster plot to create other creatures beyond the "graboids" and their genetic offspring is a smart move as to avoid repetition of having the fine folk of Perfection, Nev., face the same old adversaries again and again.
Julian Gift
lira-b@tstt.net.tt
hile both of the SCI FI Channels miniseries versions of Dune were very entertaining movies and fair adaptations of the novels, they still were not accurate portraits of the books. I was especially disappointed in the Weirding Way, totally leaving out the Weirding modules which was one of the few things that abomination-of-a-movie portrayed correctly. It was sometime in the late '80s when I read all of the series one summer. They are richly detailed and very complex, definitely not a quick-and-easy reads. Maybe a bit heavy on politics for most people, but I thrive on that kind of stuff. If you find holes in the shows, then you need to read the books; TV/movies adaptations always leave out a lot of detail, do poor jobs of showing what the characters are thinking, their motivations, and so on. The latest miniseries is really a combination of two books; Dune Messiah and Children of Dune.
The order of the books is; Dune, Dune Messiah, Children of Dune, God Emperor of Dune, Heretics of Dune and Chapter House: Dune. They recently have been followed up with three prequel's by Frank Herbert's son, Brian, writing with Kevin J. Anderson; House Atreides, House Corrino and House Harkonnen. I've not had time to read them yet.
This is a quote from the forward of Heretics written by Frank Herbert:
...there was no room in my mind for concerns about the book's success or failure. I was concerned only with the writing. Six years of research had preceded the day I sat down to put the story together, and the interweaving of the many plot layers I had planned required a degree of concentration I had never before experienced.
It was to be a story exploring the myth of the Messiah.
It was to produce another view of a human-occupied planet as an energy machine.
It was to penetrate the interlocked workings of politics and economics.
It was to be an examination of absolute prediction and it's pitfalls.
It was to have an awareness drug in it and tell what could happen though dependence on such a substance.
Potable water was to be an analog for oil and for water itself, a substance whose supply diminishes each day.
It was to be an ecological novel, then, with many overtones, as well as a story about people and their human concerns with human values, and I had to monitor each of these levels at every stage in the book.
There wasn't room in my head to think about much else.
D. Scott Scheibe
dsscheibe@earthlink.net
n response to "Dune Has Slippery Plot Slopes", I would like to take a rather different tack. SCI FI did an excellent job of sticking to the books (at least as I recall them). I have been struck, again and again, with this as I have watched both of the Dune miniseries. Kudos to [them] for managing to bring three of Frank Herbert's novels to life for those of us who would not have read them.
Mr. Kroll, I recommend that you sit down with the novels, then see if you still wish to blame SCI FI for the "plot holes" that you said you saw. Any weaknesses, such as the ones you described, are the faults of the original author, and, as such, would have been all too easy to expunge, thereby ruining the original idea. I am very glad that they were retained.
I wonder if there are plans to finish the novels. Is SCI FI going to make miniseries out of God Emperor" and Chapterhouse? If so, I look forward to them. Even if you are less-than-thrilled by some of their other projects, SCI FI has managed to do Dune right.
Until another installment is released, I await the release of the Children of Dune DVDs. Please hurry them up, SCI FI!
Brendan Woodward
bwoodwar@twcnty.rr.com
would just like to take this opportunity to thank SCI FI for giving us four years of the most amazing science fiction available anywhere.
Farscape has stretched the boundaries of what we knew and believed. It taught us to look to the sky and view our universe in a whole new way. We were honored to travel the uncharted territories with John Crichton and the rest of Moya's crews. I, for one, will be forever grateful for the opportunity.
Thank you to SCI FI, Rockne O'Bannon and the cast and crew of Farscape for consistently bringing us the best you had to offer. I intend to hold you to the "To Be Continued" and will wait, hoping that someone, anyone, will bring you back to us.
Soon!
Rnee' O'Bannon
rnee@excite.com
rell you. That's how I felt when I watched the last five minutes of the last episode of Farscape.
Warning: SPOILERS ahead.
It's been a fantastic ride. Farscape was an extraordinary show with remarkable writing and a wonderfully alive cast. Many Farscape fans had emotionally invested themselves in the show, specifically in the main characters and their relationship [to one another]. For John and Aeryn to suffer such a completely meaningless and random death, with "To Be Continued" plastered on the screen after they were atomized, was a slap in the face to Farscape fans.
If there really were going to be a continuation of the show, then this would have been an appropriate cliffhanger. But to not renew the show, and end it in such an empty and hollow way, made it more than painful for many of us who wanted to watch the series a second time. There was simply no pleasure in watching the first episode over again (especially with John's father's talk about choosing the type of hero you want to be), knowing the main character's heartbreaking fate.
I know that I am not alone when I say that it was a profoundly disappointing ending to one of the greatest sci-fi shows of all time.
Peter Boghossian
pete@boghossian.com
Back to the top.
