Slashdot Mirror
Benioff and Weiss To Write Ender's Game Script
nighthawk127127 writes "According to the Fresco Pictures website, David Benioff (writer of the screenplay for Troy) has been signed on by Warner Brothers to write the script for the movie adaptation of Ender's Game. Rumors of the Ender's Game movie have been circulating for a long time now, but this is the first time in a while we've gotten some definite information. The movie will be a combination of Ender's Game and Ender's Shadow by Orson Scott Card." Well, gosh, with Troy under his belt, all my concerns about the movie sucking are straight out! *cough*
In what way did Troy suck any less than your favourite movie of all time? What makes your favourite movie your favourite movie? What have you done to encourage a discussion here by posting such a flamebait comment?
Troy was not bad but it also was not good. I cannot imagine a movie will do those stories the justice they deserve. I've read through the entire series 3 times and Enders Game itself probably 8-10. Id prefer no movie, but if they do I beg DO NOT FUCK IT UP PLEASE!!!!
Home of the midwest loser - www.say-10.net
According to the web site, apparently this movie will have significant "special effects". That was definitely noteworthy, because most viewers of this film probably would never have known that going in.
Sometimes, it's better NOT to read the friggin' article. The summary sufficed.
Now accepting PayPal donations!
I get this feeling it will turn out like Dune; in other words, there will be a big Hollywood production, and it will suck. Then fifteen years later, the SciFi channel will do it right.
A lot of people in the 'geek community' that gave this book rave reviews and SF awards also had childhood experiences similar to Ender's, where they were used for various selfish purposes by the adults in their life. If you didn't go through something like that, the book will resonate less with you.
I've got to admit, I'm a little torn about this myself. It tears me up a bit to think that my patronage of this man's works (I've bought a lot of his books) has enriched someone who uses his money and fame to soapbox out his (IMO) detestable position.
You can argue that the movie itself is not directly associated with his position, but that seems like a bit of a cop-out. It'd be like buying cookies when the proceeds go to benefit the Klan -- even if what you're doing is innocent, the cause it supports isn't any less vile.
Anyhow, I figure that this won't be a big deal since it sounds like the movie's going to suck.
Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
honestly, i couldn't care less about his politics. his books are good and that's all i care about concerning whether or not i read his books.
...changed after it leaves the writer's hands.
"Well, gosh, with Troy under his belt, all my concerns about the movie sucking are straight out! *cough*"
- Rather a stupid thing to say when you realize that the director has far more influence on a movie than the script itself.
Loading...
The appeal to most readers (if I can generalize my own reactions to the book) is the deeper psychological impact that the circumstances surrounding the "zero G training tactics" have on Ender, and those around him. The psychological destruction of a young boy in order to save humankind, the deconstruction of the brutalities of military life combined with a "Lord of the Flies" environment, the mental games Ender plays with his enemy in order to love them and destroy them at the same time. I think those are the overarching themes of the book, not the "zero G training tactics." But, I guess that goes to show you that writing a novel is a two party process, which involves both the writer (encoder of the story) and the reader (decoder of the story) in order to create the intended effect, and that's why there's really more than one interpretation of any given text...
David Benioff also wrote 25th Hour, which was an interesting movie. I guess all the geniuses here on Slashdot are too smart to bother spending 30 seconds on IMDB for more comprehensive information.
- Rather a stupid thing to say when you realize that the director has far more influence on a movie than the script itself.
You have a point, but the script is also important. Terrible directing can turn a great script into a crappy movie, but without a good script, even the best director's hands are tied.
I'm not good in groups. It's difficult to work in a group when you're omnipotent. - Q
Don't forget, BTW, that while Bean had awesome deductive powers, he could also get off on wildly incorrect tangents precisely because he was too self-reliant. Unwilling to really trust any source outside of his own head, he lacked any real "reality check," and that too would have likely proven fatal had he been the child chosen.
(don't take this as uncritical praise of Card, BTW. He seems to have a long history of taking a good idea and then running it deep into the ground. I was disappointed in Shadow Puppets and, while I haven't read Shadow of the Giant yet, I have a sinking feeling that he'll end up torpedoing the series by the end, just as he did the "Ender Saga")
Bush: He's Liberal in all the wrong ways.
I also enjoyed seeing the events of enders Game from a new viewpoint.
And I agree that "Children of the Mind" was not that good. "Speaker for the Dead" was very good, Xenocide was ok.
Anarchists never rule
Besides, with millions of Hollywood dollars already funding cults like the Church of Scientology, how can any major film these days be considered "clean"?
The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
Well.... that one took me by surprise.
I've read both Enders Game and Ender's Shadow in the past, and I for one don't think merging the stories will exactly do them any good.
They're both good books, but it's the different perspectives that differentiate them and make them two separate books, even though they share the same story, and still keep it interesting. Taking both accounts of the story and putting it into one script might ruin some of what makes the story so appealing.
~You laugh because I'm different, I laugh because I'm insane~
The original Ender's Game book has more than enough material in it to support a movie. (as someone else commented, the original Ender's War short story alone could make for a movie) I don't know why they're roping Ender's Shadow into this UNLESS someone in the studio doesn't trust them to be able to adapt the book and make it work. Perhaps they realize a writer accustomed to writing spectacles is probably not going to be that good with detailed character work. Or perhaps they fear that they won't find an actor who'll be able to capture Ender and make his story, alone, compelling enough. Either way, I see the inclusion of Shadow as a way for them to be lazy. Instead of focusing on the character of Ender, they can have a half-dozen running subplots and keep the audience "entertained" that way. My hopes for this project have definitely sunk a couple notches.
Bush: He's Liberal in all the wrong ways.
... that this will be a good movie. I heard OSC give a talk where he refered to the movie, about two years back. It sounded as though he was going to great lengths to ensure Holywood doesn't ruin it.
:-)
:-). As long as he keeps his word, getting a professional *cough* script writer involved is actually a good thing; books and movies are very different mediums, so being a book good writer doesn't automatically make one a good script writer.
It seems he once (almost) sold the movie rights, and as soon as the ink was on paper the studio started making changes like raising the age of the actors to teenagers, adding romantic interest, changing the plot to add a final confrontation between Peter and Ender, and so on. When he protested, they pointed out that the contract gives them the final say on the script. If you want an idea of how bad it would have been, think "Starship Troopers".
That deal fell through for various reasons, and he swore that next time he'll make sure he has the final say. That's one of the reasons it took so long for the movie to get started - he absolutely insisted that the children be played by, well, children, that the script will not be butchered, etc.
Another reason is that he wanted to wait until special effects caught up with people's expectations - specifically, getting the battle room scenes right. If you give it a moment's thought, you'll see that this is very, very hard. A *lot* of people at arbitrary orientations very energetically trying to shoot each other out of the sky, creating formations, hiding and launching from the "stars", all in believable zero-G... I can't wait for "the making of" DVD
At any rate, OSC made it clear he'll have the final word on the movie, otherwise there would be no movie (it isn't as though he needs the money
Also, and I'm reaching a bit further here, Ender's Game first came out JUST as computer networks starting coming to the fore. I would suggest that, at least as much as Neuromancer, it influenced the way people, especially younger readers, thought about the potential power of networks. At the time I read it (early 90s) I was heavily involved in online bulletin boards myself, and even more than Ender's story, the Val\Peter subplot rang true with everything I was doing online. I was not, of course, actually influencing the course of governments - but I was influential in a smaller circle none the less. I've often wondered how many people who would later turn into internet demagogues got their inspiration from Ender's Game.
Bush: He's Liberal in all the wrong ways.
At least we have Battlestar Galactica. It just feels like a Wing Commander series done right. Even without Kilrathi =)
Don't think of it as a flame---it's more like an argument that does 3d6 fire damage
"I'm a leaf on the wind. Watch how I soar."
-Hoban Washburn
You misspelled "Mormon".
:)
I don't really care what nonsense he believes, so long as he doesn't push it on ME. Just as I don't care what nonsense *you* believe, so long as it doesn't impact ME.
Cripes, one of the best places to check out hot new SF/F authors is the "L.Ron Hubbard's Writers of the Future Contest" series. The fact that L.Ron was a flaming nutcase, and that the Co$ is the biggest baddest scam around, doesn't detract from the quality of these young writers.
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
At some point, when you are going to differentiate SO MUCH from the original story - that's when you should just create your own fucking story with a new title.
Welcome to my world, but on a tiny scale for you. I'm a conservative and almost every cool geeky work, whether it be music, movies, art, or anything else, is of the opposite beliefs as mine. Its hard to reconcile.
For instance, every band I go to see usually gives some sort of political speech and I have to wait through it before I hear the music. A lot of movie stars that I enjoy seeing hate my beliefs too. As a matter of fact, its almost always more likely the opposite.
So quit whining, one good sci-fi writer doesn't agree with you in the ballot box. So freakin' what? does that make his art any less good?
Reason, free market capitalism, and individualism
I think the point is that we are discussing making a movie based on a book (Ender's Game). The guys they are hiring to script it just finished doing something similar, and weren't very good as sticking close to the source.
The concern then, since you seem to have missed it, is that they will not stick close to the book (Ender's Game) when they do this movie, and it will not, by extension, be as good as the original (since his point is that the movie's aren't as good as the original--whether or not you agree).
So the point is this: did the changes they make enhance the story, give it more depth and help it along, or did the changes merely dumb it down for the masses?
Related to this point is this: since Card is alive (and well) at this time, how much say does he get in these movies? After all, if he is directly involved, they are much more likely to, if nothing else, stay close to what he intended. Which is what I want to see. I don't care if there are minor changes (even in the dialog), but I DO care if the intent is changed.
That's why I like the LOTR movies--they make it about telling a story--not some political mumbo-jumbo. I think Tolkien would have been moderately pleased with the movies, had he been around for them.
I think that if they screw with the plot on this one, Card will be ticked. Keep it close to the original (in this case), and the movie will be good. Otherwise, no show.
"We don't know what we are doing, but we are doing it very carefully,..." Wherry, R.J. Personnel Psychology (1995)
You do realize what you are advocating here, right? You're advocating a boycott of an Author's work, not based on the work itself, but based on the Author's religious views.
Since you support this action, I can only assume that you think it is entirely appropriate for religious individuals to boycott the work of homosexual authors, not based on the authors work, but based on their homosexual views.
You sure you're cool with this?
At some point, when you are going to differentiate SO MUCH from the original story - that's when you should just create your own f'ing story with a new title.
Umm, you mean like calling it "Troy," instead of calling it "The Illiad?"
I have known for a while that OSC was LDS, and have wondered what his opinions on homosexuality were.
I think that he is pretty fair and rational in these articles, except for the obvious, his casting of unrepressed homosexuals as sinners.
But really, if you're homosexual, why would you ever want acceptance by the Mormon community? It irritates me that people want equal status wherever they find themselves, without giving into their society's accepted codes. Give people the right to discriminate, because they'll do it anyway, and there's no practical way to use the arm of the law to stop them.
I don't care what people think the definition of marriage is; definitions, especially culturally loaded ones, are constantly changing. OSC shouldn't be upset about the Massachusetts supreme court deciding to make marriage legal between gays, but I do agree with him that social legislation is bad. The only good solution I see is to stop the government from recognising ALL marriage between anyone.
-------
Incite and flee.
i wouldnt care if he hated asparagus or republicans or gays (which he doesnt hate anyway), i just want to see a good movie. religions are crazy, everything they believe is crazy. so what. i read ender's game and liked it, so i will see the movie, accused homophobe or not.
Right on -- sometimes I want to smack Card upside the head for not knowing when to leave well enough alone!
You're exactly right about Ender vs Bean and Peter. And that is why I have good hopes that if Ender's Game is scripted akin to Troy, it will be about the people -- about how personality traits and flaws interact to create the mess we're in (and maybe how we get out of it, or don't as the case may be). Because that's precisely what Troy focused on -- character interactions.
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
Yea right on!
Since the hollywood industry isn't the least bit liberal, it's a shame to see some obviously right-winged movie such as Ender's Game getting made.
I may buy this one instead of going to see it in the theatre, I'll file it in my alphabetical collection right between Dead Man Walking and Farenheight 911.
The gay marriage issue is about the seperation of Church and State, pure and simple. You have one group of people who want to use the power of government impose THEIR ideology on everyone else, and you have another group who are sick and fucking tired of having someone else's religion forced down their throat every time they turn around.
If Bob and Neil want to marry each other, how the FUCK does that "dilute" my marriage? It doesn't make me love my wife any less, or her love me any less, or interfere in any way with us raising our children.
Part of the problem that you narrow-minded nitwits can't get through your thick skulls is that the word "marriage" has two completely distinct meanings. There is the religious sacrement of marriage, which is whatever your religion of choice says it is; and there is the secular and legal institution of marriage which recognizes that a permenent bond exists between two people.
No one is saying that your CHURCH has to marry gay couples -- that would be an unconstitutional limit on your free practice of religion. If your church only wants to perform marriages between people of the same race and opposite genders, so be it. What happens behind the doors of your church is your business; what happens behind the doors of other peoples' bedrooms is theirs.
What they are saying is that ALL couples in binding relationships are entitled to equal protection under the law, as guaranteed by the Constitution, regardless of whether the gender of the participants. Get it?
Why is it that the proponents of "one nation under God" are so eager to get rid of "liberty and justice for all"?
How would you like a constitutional ammendment that prohibits ice cream stores from carrying that flavor?
__
Do ya feel happy-go-lucky, punk?
As to this "Romans" bit. What the hell does that mean? By the time the Empire finally crumbled, it was a Christian state, and had been since the Edict of Milan in 313 AD (the Western Empire fell in 476AD, so that's 163 years of Christianity). I'm assuming you're referring to the absurd revisionism about the collapse of the family unit leading to the collapse of the Empire, which is a oft-repeated bit of B.S. If you're not, then I'd love to hear why you refer to Rome as being relevant to the discussion.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Yeah, and along with the TOTAL PERVERSION OF HEINLEIN'S POINT, what else was different?
They got the philosophy totally wrong. They lampooned Heinlein's idea as being neo-Nazi fascism, and I found it pretty annoying.
Heinlein's argument was that people should serve in order to rule. I don't think that's fascism.
Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
Dude, speaking against gay marriage is not the same thing as funding persecution of gays. If speech was the same as action, slashdot would have been shut down a long time ago when 90% of its members were jailed for treason in various countries.
All you're funding by buying Cards works is free speech (oh, and his food and stuff, but i won't begrudge him that). If nothing else, every movement needs opposing voices to find any holes in a system before it's passed into law.
I probably won't see the movie, but that's because i share your premonition that it's going to suck, not because of any politics.
...it's really a sad day for America when we require a goddamn ACT OF CONGRESS to make our DVD players work properly. ~
I think that the reason we're seeing logical dissonance here, is that the words "Conservative" and "Liberal" have been so bent out of shape by the framing in public debate over the past 20 years, that they no longer share any relevant meaning.
A social conservative might be of the "god hates fags" ilk. But a fiscal conservative should not give a damn. In fact, a pure, pragmatic, fiscal conservative would promote the state getting out of the marriage business entirely, and make it a "civil union", and not discriminate based on gender, and of course, the "perks" and tax breaks would go away. (Ironically, this would also be the best course for social conservatives to pursue, because the reason why most of them HATE the idea of gay marriage, is because they feel threatened by gay's "mocking" their straight lifestyle. If the state did away with marriages, and made them purely a religious institution, then Gays would have all the rights the state could possibly have the ability to grant (within the limits set by the first amendment) - but the Churches would prevent them from getting "Married" - so both sides "win".
But Social Conservatives aren't about pragmatism.
These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
Uh, no.
Mistreating gays physically is inhumane.
Not knowing what homosexuality is is ignorant.
Fearing gays is homophobic.
And uniting on any issue, especially an irrelevant hotbutton one like gay marriage, is Unamerican.
Hating gays fills none of these. If he wants to hate gays, jews, martians, white people, nazis, words starting with the letter "I" he's perfectly free to, and in fact, more power to him. I'm all for promoting free speech. He just can't act on his hatred unless his target is white people or nazis (sorry, couldn't resist).
On a side note, i'm not sure your equating of hate and disapproval is entirely correct, either. My parents disapprove of me, but I'm pretty sure they don't hate me.
...it's really a sad day for America when we require a goddamn ACT OF CONGRESS to make our DVD players work properly. ~
--- SER
is if it's animated. That many child actors? Anyone know any good 6 year old stunt children?