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*

Comments

Hemos:

[Tim_F]

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?

special fx

[mattspammail]

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.

Shades of Dune?

[nixman99]

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.

Re:Enders Game (the book)

[kin_korn_karn]

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.

Re:Wouldn't go, anyhow.

[Skyshadow]

I assume he's referring to Card's rantings against gay marriage, which aren't hard to find if you go hit Google.

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.

Yeah, cause we all know that the script is never..

[Assmasher]

...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.

25th Hour as well

[GunFodder]

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.

Re:Disappointed by Ender's Shadow?

[JayBlalock]

Since the Shadow books are told from Bean's point of view, of course he'll be critical of Ender's actions. I thought the entire point of Shadow was that, while Bean was technically smarter and more competent, he utterly lacked the people skills necessary to get the job done. Ender succeeded for the reason he was selected in the first place - his combination of Peter's ruthlessness AND Val's empathy. He had to be *balanced* in these things to win, and Bean would have failed in the end just as Val or Peter would have. What I took away from the book was that it emphasized even more Ender's flawed humanity and how, ultimately, those flaws were needed instead of simple machine-like perfection.

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")

Re:Wouldn't go, anyhow.

[FooAtWFU]

It is, of course, unfair to compare the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints to the Ku Klux Klan. The Mormons don't have tendencies to go out and murder homosexuals; the worst they do is excommunicate them if they're members.

Besides, with millions of Hollywood dollars already funding cults like the Church of Scientology, how can any major film these days be considered "clean"?

There is still a chance...

[oren]

... 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.

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 :-). 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.

Re:Just another movie to not see

[Reziac]

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.

Re:Basic Plot Inaccuracies?

[DarkFencer]

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.

Re:Wouldn't go, anyhow.

[Richthofen80]

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?

Re:Basic Plot Inaccuracies?

[DarkSarin]

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.

Re:Basic Plot Inaccuracies?

[Anonymous Coward]

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?"

Re:Wouldn't go, anyhow.

[Happy Monkey]

How would you like a constitutional ammendment that prohibits ice cream stores from carrying that flavor?

Re:Wouldn't go, anyhow.

[Jim_Callahan]

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.

Re:Wouldn't go, anyhow.

[jafac]

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.