Discussion in 'SciFi & Fantasy' started by Magical Realist, Oct 4, 2013.
Do you know what thread you're in? lol You should be wary to support Ender's Game. :itold:
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
Well, I wanted to see Insidous 2, but if it annoys a bunch of atheists, well then I guess I'll have to go see Ender's Game. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
The author's bigotry should "annoy" religious people, as well. It's one of those things, do you pretend to not care so you can be mildly entertained for a few hours? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
It was a good movie, if you don't mind the excursion from physics. I think planetary bombardment with asteroids is the way a real interstellar war would play out.
Can't you care and watch the movie?
One thing to be aware of is that Card purposefully uses sexual situations as a way to add tension and therefore draw the reader into the story. While the sexual tension in the story is homosexual in nature, it did not have to be. It has been a very long time since I read the book but the tension is similar to what was in The Shawshank Redemption. Nobody that I know of boycotted that movie. So what is in question there is not the plot of the movie, but the attitudes of the author. If a person was to examine the personal attitudes of every author, a large number of great works would not pass muster. Seems a non-issue to me.
On the other hand, Ender's Game is not that compelling of a plot. The only thing it has going for it is the surprise. A plot feature that can be explained in a couple sentences. Card tried to capitalize on this plot with several add-on books that in my estimation all failed. Card is not a bad author but he realized early on that he had limited talent. His main focus has been teaching the art of writing rather than doing it himself.
People should pass judgement on the film according to the films merits. I don't plan to see the film because the merits are all technical and not artistic. I assume the film is mostly zero-G tactics. Fun for kids, but probably boring for adults. There are a lot of great Sci-Fi classics that should be made into feature films, and more that I hope never are. The best works should remain as written works.
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Show you care by not watching the movie.
You have to be careful with that approach Wegs, Like I've stated people with that sort of view can be just as extreme and bigoted as those they claim to boycott (I'm not suggesting that of you, just identifying what can happen).
I know this is a Godwins law in play, however it's like saying "Boycott Germans/Germany because of Hitler." There should be a way to make a statement without potentially stereotyping an entire group of people with one persons view/problem (In this particular case that's everybody that works in the entertainment industry)
I agree in the sense that one shouldn't generalize, when it comes to cases such as these. But, like I stated in my initial post within this thread, purchasing the work of someone as outspoken as Card about his bigotry and disdain towards a certain sect of the population would make me feel like I was inadvertently funding that agenda. I don't think we should compromise our beliefs as to not make others uncomfortable. Just how I feel about it.
I'm not familiar with Insidious 2.
Ender's Game on the other hand is based on a novel that I've read several times and continue to like very much. That opinion is widely shared and when it came out, the book won both the Hugo and Nebula awards, a big deal in the science-fiction world. It's a very good book, on multiple levels.
The story is a classic space-opera on one level. It's more obviously a coming-of-age story as well, set in an elaborate boarding school environment like Harry Potter. It's a topical and psychologically astute story about bullying, as well as a story about how people respond to it. It's a story about the ethics of self defense and ultimately about revenge, both personal and cosmic. And it's an extended investigation into the qualities and ethics, both ruthlessness and empathy, that are necessary in different ways in both military command and in life. That's just part of what it touches on. It's about the isolation that truly unique people feel, it's about manipulating other people and using them without their knowledge as unwitting tools.
Ender doesn't just play video games, he's trapped inside one. In other circumstances he might have been an artist or a philosopher, but he's given no choice but to fight and defeat everything that his "teachers" place in front of him. He's extraordinarily good at doing that. In the book, human beings are bred to fight the intelligent social insects with whom the human race is trapped in an existential struggle, and tests have shown that Ender's the most promising kid on earth. Eventually, towards the end of the book, he becomes a demi-god who, unseen by (almost) everyone else, has had his heart crushed in the worst imaginable way. (His headmaster Graaf sees and bitterly regrets having had to orchestrate it.) In a way, it's a story about raping somebody else's innermost soul for the greater good.
It's about the willingness to commit acts that are simultaneously both salvation and damnation...
It's about desperation and it's about war.
It's a very psychological book, which is why I wondered how well it would adapt to the screen.
The movie certainly has a strong cast of supporting actors (Harrison Ford as Graaf, Ben Kingsley as Mazor Rakham...). The special effects are said to be good, convincing and not too intrusive.
I read several reviews here in the San Francisco basy area press that were very positive about the film. They said that it stays fairly true to the book, though a couple of subplots were eliminated (Ender's brother Peter?). His sister Valentine has a smaller part than in the book. His classmate Petra has a bigger part. But all in all, reviewers who were fans of the book liked the screenplay. The reviewers say that the young actor who plays Ender is good and that the weightless Battle School "games" are very well done.
I'm probably going to see Ender's Game sometime this week.
See Gravity instead. It's really good and it's not selling a militant homophobic author any more books.
hear hear :thumbsup:
I've heard JRR Tolkien was a notorious South African racist, yet I don't hear any calls for boycotting The Lord of the Rings. Of course he doesn't get any money from book and movie sales, but I don't think good ideas should be boycotted just because the author had some bad ideas as well, unless his agenda is somehow being boosted by sales.
I wouldn't quite call him militant on that issue anymore. He's admitted defeat.
I saw Gravity. It was pretty good, but not great.
Card appears to be back-pedaling, and *cough* offended, that people are attacking his views. lol I guess we all have taken his deplorable homophobic comments...um...out of context? :huh:
Doing a quick look on wikipedia, Orson Card is over 60 years old and belongs to the Mormon, Christian faith. It's really not a wonder that he's against homosexuality. However, despite this and his views, he doesn't seem to be evil incarnate. This is a problem I find with political movements like this; they aren't addressing Card's argument, but trying to poison his character. Card doesn't wield any great influence, he isn't a politician, and he isn't a religious leader. So I don't really see why they're going after his book's movie, unless said book or movie had anti-gay messages sprinkled in or part of the main story.
I'm not defending the man's views, but the LGBT community is crazy if they expect an older, strongly aligned religious man to support homosexuality. This is just something that his generation can't and won't accept. They need to focus on the more open and more willing younger generations like the 20-40 year age range. They need to just let it go.
Of course, all things said and done, I am rather shocked that someone who seems to be more in the middle between the Republican and Democrat parties and a love for science fiction is very much rooted in such anti-gay beliefs. And some of his statements are just plain offensive. And contrary to the writer of this article, Card is correct that homosexuality is likely to be a genetic/naturally developed misfire--though I have no idea where he's getting the concept of sexual abuse from--since there is no evolutionary use for homosexuality. The purpose of reproduction is to spread one's genetic materials. Homosexuals as they are, cannot reproduce. Therefore, it's a sort of dead-end for their genetic person.
Of course, that's no reason to treat homosexuals like monsters, denying them marriage rights (I actually view homosexuality laws in a slightly different way, but the effect is the same), and pretending we can "fix" them is a tragic holdover from earlier human history when we understood the condition less. You cannot fix a gay man; he is basically hardwired to be attracted to men. Refusing that to him is like trying to keep a bird from flying; it feels right, so they're going to do it. Unless you clip his wings, there is nothing you can do to fix a gay man--and then you're not really fixing him, you're breaking him. This isn't the dark ages anymore; a person's contribution to society isn't just toiling fields and having babies. A gay man can give us art, science, engineering, religious ideas, and so much more. Well, all gays, not just men, but you get my idea.
So on the one hand, yes, we need to evolve our society. On the second hand, people need to remember that our older generation grew up differently than us. And before we condemn them for all their faults, we should remember that they themselves probably changed a great deal of social ills from their parent generation and of course, that parent generation corrected ills to their parent generation--and so on and so forth. We aren't perfect and neither were they. There will come a day when many of us will be called evil, foul, and bitter fools who do nothing but complain about the downturn of our evolved culture. No one likes to see the world change, especially people whose prime has come and gone.
That said, I probably won't see the movie since I haven't read the book. And it surely wouldn't be the most offensive book I've ever read either (if I do).
Technically it's not necessary to boycott Ender's Game as long as you yell really loud at the movies, "I hate homophobes!"
But, the irony of what you say, is ...apparently, Card isn't seeing any money from the film, but he still sees profits from his book. So, to boycott the film isn't directly going to affect anything. But, on principle, I don't want anything to do with supporting Card in any way. I don't believe he admitted defeat--he is back pedaling and acting like people have misjudged his bigoted statements...
It's not about the money, it's about controlling the direction of cultural norms. That's what the tug-o-war between the Christians and the gay/lesbian/transgenders is all about.
Separate names with a comma.