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 send a message to scifiweekly@scifi.com.
ecently, I had written regarding the absence of Charisma Carpenter from the newest season of Angel. I see now that Joss Whedon is talking of having her back in some fashion at midseason ("Cordy To Return To Angel?"). Apparently, the producers have heard the words of the fans who have been clamoring for her return. It has been reported that initially she has been understandably reluctant to do so. Angel fans are aware of how sadly the actress was treated, but continue to hope that she will return as a regular or semi-regular character. Her abrupt release may have some impact on whether other Buffy the Vampire Slayer characters choose to guest as well. Hopefully, Whedon and Carpenter can put their differences behind them and work together again.
It is interesting how someone such as Mr. Whedon, widely regarded as a "genius," could so badly misread her popularity. Mr. Whedon indicates that he wants to bring some closure to her character. I believe that the fans have been clear that they want closure for the character as well, but only as regards last season's plotline. One or two episodes for the purpose of tying things up is not what the fans are requesting and such an end to Cordelia will not please many people.
The first three episodes of the new season have been interesting. Visually, the show is very compelling as compared to the dark (and much-loved) hotel set of the past. It is apparent, however, that the characters themselves have lost the cohesion and sense of family that had evolved in the early episodes and been damaged by the horrible storyline of last year. The addition of Harmony has been surprisingly positive. Spike's contribution, however, is too early to call. The character of Eve looks like Buffy on crack and is utterly repellent. Cutting to the chase, this show needs Cordelia soon and as a regular.
Doug Dale
ddale(at)coda-continuum.com
hank you so much for this wonderful review. I have been waiting for a publication such as this to discuss the ARMA since I first joined. As a study group leader, I personally invite anyone who wants some more hands-on experience to find the closest ARMA members and make a trip to see them. The ARMA is an open community, and we are all willing to talk about swords and swordsmanship, as well as all other aspects of historical fencing until we are blue in the face. Again, thank you for such a wonderful spotlight.
Stewart Feil
fyout2k(at)yahoo.com
e thankful you're living. Always trust your luck. And march to your front like a soldier." —Tom Baker, Dr. Who & the Face of Evil (1977)
This is what the fourth Doctor once said to Leela (Louise Jameson). It was just after a scene where they were both on an examination table about to be dissected by a laser beam. The Doctor, by convenient coincidence as usual, had a small mirror up his sleeve which deflected the laser beam back on its projector. It is curious that the Doctor always seems to have exactly what he needs from somewhere in his pockets at crucial moments. One must wonder if the Doctor's pockets are larger inside than outside, like the TARDIS.
The mystique of Doctor Who has always been arguably the franchise's most attractive attribute. When Sylvester McCoy became the seventh actor to assume the classic TV role, his incarnation helped to revitalize the mystery that made the show so popular during the 1960s. It was fitting that they chose to end the longest-running science-fiction serial in 1989 when it finally won back some of its original appeal in integral adventures from "Remembrance of the Daleks" to "The Curse of Fenric."
It will certainly be intriguing to see how Doctor Who regenerated in 2005 will be faithful to the mystique of its 20th-century predecessor. British television is maintaining its foundation for good science fiction with the new serial Strange starring Richard Coyle, which my mother has become a fan of since its very recent debut. With successes such as The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, Blake's 7, Red Dwarf and Gormenghast, the BBC will always retain its foothold in the science fiction universe. The ambitious return (after a lengthy stream of rumors) of Doctor Who is proof enough.
Michael Anthony Basil
mike.basil(at)sympatico.ca
n your notification about Flesh for the Beast, you say that Clark Beasley Jr. "succumbs to a succubus." "Succumbs" is the right word for that. And the title is very apt with a theme like that. Lending a succubus to a man for the purposes of the Beast would indeed be what the title describes. Succubi are that bad! I think that title is the perfect description of them.
I don't know what martial arts has to do with fantasy or SF, seeing that a martial arts site is the "Site of the Week." Martian arts, maybe, but the Japanese who dominate these theme movies are obviously not Martians.
[I am] always happy to hear about Elizabeth Moon's roles, she is one of the best of the sci-fi [authors]. Trading in Danger action, the rescue of a scrapped starship, reminds me of Jack McDevitt's Infinity Beach, which had that sustained situation all the way through it, an abandoned starship which a lady was trying to find and reclaim. I suppose an important concept is going to be reiterated in many books and movies. I hope the Moon view of this comes on TV—I'll be watching it if it does.
Keep us informed of these science-fiction events.
John Thiel
thiel(at)dcwi.com
orry, Julian ("SFW Must Do More Than the Impossible"), and all those who wish to continue to believe, but The Texas Chainsaw Massacre never happened!
The character of Leatherface is loosely based on the real life serial killer, Ed Gein. Ed Gein robbed graveyards and murdered two women, both of whom reminded him of his late mother. He made stuff out of his two victims and from the parts he stole from graves. He made bowls, lamps, masks, a sort of people suit, and ate some of his victims.
There is no real Texas Chainsaw Massacre.
Jim Mann
sol463(at)hotmail.com
am a fan of Tremors: The Series, [a show] that was canceled a few months ago. I, along with lots of other people, feel that it was not given a fair chance. Tremors has a worldwide fanbase that spreads to countries such as Japan, the Netherlands, Italy, Sweden, the U.K., Australia and Russia. Tremors: The Series was one of my favorite shows and I never missed an episode. Tremors has become one of my favorites because of the cool monsters in it and how the directors mix horror, action and comedy together, and [how it] blends family values with ethics, [showing] that, in time of danger, people should stick together.
[From the] financial view, Tremors never got the same promotion as Farscape and Stargate SG-1. Tremors also doesn't cost as much as the other series that is hosted on the SCI FI Channel. The Tremors series has definite DVD possibilities. The movies have always done well in the video market and there's no reason to think the series won't do the same. The worldwide popularity of Tremors almost guarantees DVD sales will be successful. I have also heard that the SCI FI Channel is looking to show that it is more than just sci-fi shows and movies. Tremors, not actually being of the sci-fi genre but more of a comedy/fantasy/family show, [fits this]. What other show features guns and bombs and you can say that it is a family show?
Edward Finan
edward_finan(at)yahoo.com
've been reading letter after letter for the past number of weeks written about how bad Enterprise, or should I say Star Trek: Enterprise, is. If it's not somebody crying about the sexism or soft porn the show is peddling, then someone is screaming about how the viewers are being insulted and how the timeline of Trek is being ruined ("Star Trek Needs New Producers", "Enterprise Is In Alternate Reality", "Enterprise's T'Pol Wasn't Raped", "Enterprise Sex Basher Is Silly", "Star Trek Has Lost Touch With Fans").
Are we watching the same show?
Admittedly, Enterprise has stumbled a number of times over its first two years, but the Trek universe was left fluid for just such a series as Enterprise. There is nothing wrong with the uniforms, the "submarine" look of the ship's interior and for God's sake, let's leave the harping over the theme song behind us.
With the final episode of the second season, "Expanse," Enterprise entered a new plane of writing and gained the new direction everyone had been crying for. As I watched the episode, my jaw dropped and I thought to myself, "They've finally got it right!" While I liked the majority of the first two seasons, they were no better than The Next Generation's first two seasons, and to be truthful, not a whole lot worse. Still, I agree there was something missing.
With the new season now airing, I'm finally able to watch the shows as they air, instead of waiting six weeks for a tape. Yes, the producers stumbled with the episode dealing with Archer contracting a virus which changed him into an extinct species ... I tuned into that episode late and perhaps I took the show out of context, but it was poor, to be polite.
Yet, that was the only episode of the new season I've seen that didn't make the grade. With that sole exception, the writing is far better, the production excellent and with Archer and Trip dealing with their hate for the Xindi and the devastation caused on Earth (not to mention the death of Trip's sister ... oops! I just mentioned it!) the acting has been excellent. If (and I emphasize "if") the series continues on its current path, it will stand tall in the annals of Trekdom.
Oh, and Trip is not gay! ("Burning Questions for Inquiring Minds") T'Pol is simply not interested in him. Have you ever made a successful move on a woman who just isn't interested in you? Hmmm ...
Keith M. Kitchen
boyoklaatu1(at)aol.com
've been following the Enterprise discussion in these letters for a few weeks now ("Star Trek Needs New Producers", "Enterprise Is In Alternate Reality", "Enterprise's T'Pol Wasn't Raped", "Enterprise Sex Basher Is Silly", "Star Trek Has Lost Touch With Fans"), but the question that I keep thinking of is: What is the point of Enterprise?
If the point is to keep all hardcore Star Trek fans happy by reproducing the same plots with a different cast, then please, kill it now. Similarly, if the point is to be a positive moral role model with thinly veiled sermons on the evils of bigotry and sexism, then kill me now. Don't get me wrong, I generally agree with the point of each of those episodes/sermons (and that's not all the other shows were about, I know), it's just been done to death.
If you want to learn why tolerance is good as taught by Star Trek, purchase or rent the other four series where those sermons are presented many times over. I love the old episode where Kirk destroys a virtual war setup so that X planet will realize that war is hell and maybe they should stop. But that episode only needed to be done once. Star Trek is all preached out. Maybe they should try something new. Besides, if Star Trek is the last bastion of moral clarity, then we're all screwed anyway. This season is promising, because maybe the producers may have remembered that the point is to tell a good story with interesting science/locations/creatures. However, should it degenerate into the same old Trek (Oh no! counselor Troi's mother is visiting and the Borg are attacking and Vulcans are still uptight!), my vote is either kill it or bring someone entirely different to the helm of the series.
Granted, SF pickings are slim on TV right now, but if push comes to shove, I'd rather just watch Smallville and Angel, rather than a very-special-episode of Enterprise where we learn that slavery is wrong. Again.
Hauss James Reinbold
joedonbakeris(at)hotmail.com
fter giving Enterprise the last several years to improve, the last few episodes have convinced me that the producers have become bored with their own show. Long-running shows like Doctor Who changed production teams every few years; I think that should happen with Enterprise.
Or at the very least, couldn't the producers hire competent writers who know how to tell a story? I don't mind swearing or sexual content, as long as they are relevant to the story line, but in recent months it has become obvious that they are being thrown in to appeal to certain segments of the audience.
There are a lot of great science-fiction writers available who might be able to steer Enterprise back on course—but that would mean intelligent writing, geared toward a literate audience, which I am starting to suspect is not the target audience for this bloated tragedy.
Richard S. Drake
Drake70(at)msn.com
n a recent edition [of Science Fiction Weekly], Sash Scott wrote: "The Trek history has been slaughtered—but that's OK ... one thing that saved the show from permanently being erased from my viewing schedule was an earlier letter. It was a letter that mentioned that time travel could be the cause of these differences and that what we are watching is an alternate Trek reality ... that's what I tell myself now—it lessens the sting." ("Enterprise Is In Alternate Reality")
I understand why some people don't like Enterprise. That's fine. Take it or leave it. However, I've asked this question several times in different forums and never get a good answer—"How, exactly, has Enterprise slaughtered canon history?"
I've watched the episodes with the Ferengi, the Borg, the Romulans, and I don't have a problem with their presence. I've found no major continuity problems.
I think most people have a problem with the fact that Enterprise looks better than the original series. Let's face it, the original series was created with the kind of sets and special effects of the day. They looked bad and decidedly "low tech." I couldn't see them ever going back to those horrible uniforms.
The Deep Space Nine episode where the crew went back in time and participated in the Tribble episode was classic, but seeing Sisko & Co. in those awful old uniforms was nothing short of high camp.
Fanboys and Trekkers out there can go ahead and consider Enterprise a "reboot" or an alternative reality, but I think most of us fans of Trek see this as just another chapter of the story, and a darn good one at that!
Cheers!
Dan Ware
djpw1(at)yahoo.com
Back to the top.
