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?
David Benioff?
My heart soars like a brick.
Cloned foods give the statement "We had that last week!" a whole new meaning.
gee... i can't remember the last time a good book was looking like it was going to be made into a not so good movie.
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!
What the fuck is wrong with people? Honestly, did they even read Ender's Game? It's not just some action movie with kids, you know. Well, at least I can get disappointed early.
Discworld.
Well hopefully Uncle Orson will come on here and give his perspective on it.
I heard OSC talking about this years ago... at the time, I believe he had written a script, was circulating it, wanted Jake Lloyd (Anakin) to play Ender, (he assured us that Jake was actually a very bright kid and a good actor despite what we might think from having seen Episode I) but at that point nothing was really definite. He just sounded optimistic about finally getting it done.
My how times haven't changed.
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate.
the rather shocked expression on the face by the posting.
he has also been hired to write the script for the sequel (Eating the Dead), and has an option for a third film if the first two don't flop too badly.
Not a flame/troll, but this is the first I've heard of this and am interested. Any links to back up your claim?
I had the idea of the movie filed away with Duke Nukem Forever and the like.
The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
Or into the pocket of the mormon church, which is where 10% of Card's income goes as a member.
I don't understand the fascination with this book. I found it very dry and poorly written. Most of the text seemed to revolve around "zero G" training tactics. I could not truly fathom why this would be an interesting primary subject. Does the interest come from the fact that the main character was a juvenile, and that is the target readership? I read the book when I was in my twenties, on the sole basis of the rave reviews I have heard and the fact that it won so many SF awards. Maybe that is why I disliked the book so much, although I can see how other books targeted at this audience could be compelling (Harry Potter, et all). I am interested in hearing comments from anyone who has read the book.
Was anyone else disappointed by Ender's Shadow? Mostly I'm trying to forget about it. I truly enjoyed Ender's game, and thought the sequels were... medicore (except for Children of the mind, which was simply appalling). Then I went and read Ender's Shadow and it was Card quietly destroying Ender's Game for me. It was the whole "Well actually there's this other kid, and he's even smarter and better than Ender! He could have done the whole thing singlehanded without getting tired like Ender!". There seemed to be a need to "go one better" and hence make Bean "much better than Ender" which, at the same time, required a lot of Ender's speeches and actions (from the original book) to be recast as stupid and poor. Ender had enough flaws and issues in Ender's Game without making him semi-incompetent as well.
Jedidiah.
Craft Beer Programming T-shirts
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.
Now all of you OSC geeks will suffer for endlessly bugging us to read your sacred texts! *cackle*
All kings is mostly rapscallions. -Mark Twain, The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn
at least with it being commisioned by Warner Bros there's a chance it might actually be made. It took poor Douglas Adams 20 odd years, and I don't know how many script rewrites to get to a point where they actually made it (and only once he popped the can).
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Wow.
l
1 .html
http://www.nauvoo.com/library/card-hypocrites.htm
http://www.ornery.org/essays/warwatch/2004-02-15-
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.
The Hypocrites Of Homosexuality"
He can do for Ender what he did for the Illiad. It was nice to see someone get the whole Achilles-switching-sides-and-joining-the-Trojans thing right for a change.
Troy was actually pretty good. Let's see how people would like it if the story was followed letter for letter.
Same applies to LoTR. How many people would have fawned all over the three films if all the characters spoke like they did in the books and all the dialogue was left in.
As adaptations go, they were satisfactory. Heck, Troy was actually pretty good compared to a lot of the dreck people shell out money for.
As for how you adapt Ender's Game to a screen play, lots of luck. I have high hopes for lots of revered novels, but realize too many of them would require significant change to fit. Can't have people standing around all the time doing soliloquies all the time so you know what's on their minds.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Another perfectly good book falling to illiterate heretics. I'll probably watch it anyway and hope I get pleasantly suprised, but I'll be going into it assuming the movie has little to do with the book.
Read The Hypocrites of Homosexuality. Post back if you have any questions.
Excerpts for the lazy:
Continues:I have the following concerns/predictions:
1. The ages of the characters will be upped by 5 or so years because the film execs won't think that people would find 5 year olds killing each other kosher. Ender will be 10+ years old in the beginning, almost guaranteed.
2. The actor. There are few actors that could pull off the role of Ender. Haley Joel Osmont is the closest I can think of, but he's been getting older ("I see dead kittens") and would probably have a beard by the time this films.
3. Peter.
4. Conglomeration of enemies. Will Achille be combined with other baddies? This might not be bad, but if Bean and Ender both come from the same elementary school, that might be a little too pat. I understand that the story must be pruned to fit in 16:9, but I worry...
The final worry: The ending. So many people have read the book, will they use the same ending? I've seen other movies from books where, to get a new emotional response or 'gotcha', the ending was changed from what you expect. The original ending is powerful and chilling (namely, the disposition of the final simulations), who knows what screenwriters the caliber of those who wrote Troy will produce?
Here's my nightmare:
MAZER: Ender, the bugger fighters are almost on me!
ENDER: No! They've taken away the woman I love, they won't take away my teacher too!
MAZER: Ender, (blasting noises in the background, static) there's something I haven't told you. I am.... your father.
ENDER: Noooooooooooo!
MAZER: Tell Valentine and Peter I loved them!
(scene of Mazer's snub fighter being destroyed while doing the trench run on the Formic mothership that is approaching Earth)
ENDER: NOOOOOOOOOO!
(A Formic fighter pulls up behind Ender, whos ship has been damaged. Just as he is about to die, the fighter explodes and the shuttle that brought him to the Battle school descends into the picture)
(radio): Hey Ender, thought you could use some help.
ENDER: Valentine? Is that you?
VALENTINE: It's me, and I brought some help.
PETER: Hey Andrew, you were right. Let's blow this thing and go home.
ENDER: Ayeeeeee! (fires D.R. Device)
I mean, what's the struggle for equal treatment under the law when there's a possible mediocre Sci Fi movie in the offing?
Ender's War (the short story) was a much better story than the novel Card expanded it into. Plus, it'd be easier to fit into 2 hours on the screen. Pity they didn't pick it instead.
The ambuiguity at the end over just who the Enemy was is wonderful - see, there's no aliens in there, and the one reference in the short story to the planet Ender's living on implies that it's noth Earth, so it COULD be a rebellious colony... which would make the Enemy planet Earth.
Whoops.
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...
There's a reason Ender's Game and Ender's Shadow were separate books. It's a lot more pleasing to read Ender's Game before Ender's Shadow. It would be especially hard in a movie setting to combine the two, since the two movies cover mostly the same events. I'd guess the way they'd do it is leaving the middle mostly the same, and having two beginnings and two endings: one for Ender, and one for Bean.
Before you walk a mile in someone's shoes, you should insult them so you know how they are and what they're doing.
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.
I'd get to decide what projects Peter Jackson takes next
Nothing great was ever achieved without enthusiasm
Well, Card's never tried to hide his Mormonism, so I guess no one should be surprised. I enjoy some his books, but on a few occasions I've had the feeling I was being preached at. Card is allowed his predictable opinion, of course.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
- 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
Now, now, let's be nice and proper. That's the "Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints", not 'mormon church'. And really, don't millions of Hollywood dollars already find their way into the Church of Scientology? (there are some big names in this list). I don't see how that could possibly be considered any less deplorable...
The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
Not to mention the actors...
Before you walk a mile in someone's shoes, you should insult them so you know how they are and what they're doing.
...for the Guns 'n' Roses "Chinese Democracy" CD ;-)
...they'll make a really crappy movie out of a sort-of-crappy video game and... oh yeah. Wing Commander.
And with that went any idea I ever had for any adaptation of Larry Niven's Kzinti works. It would either look like that or some furry fan's fantasy. Either way, a total clusterfark.
I am of course fearing the worst with the Narnia project.
Litmus test: if you can't translate something as simple as a video game or anime into a live action motion picture that doesn't suck like a Dyson, then you have no business taking on cherished SF or Fantasy classics. Think of it as learning to crawl before you do the Boston Marathon.
Of course, since everything not forbidden is compulsory, adaptations of Anthony's Xanth must be coming soon. Thank G-d that some corners are humongous. Ringworld is supposed to be right around one. For the last five years or so.
Am I the only one who wishes they could get tickets to a Vogon Poetry jam?
If my grammar and spelling are off, I am [distracted/tired/careless] (take your pick)
I can't wait.
Maybe they can get that kid who played young Anakin to star as Ender, that would be wonderful!
sarcasm
Make in a mini-series. Sci-Fi did ok with Dune (Kept to the story line but the acting and visuals sucked). BattleStar Galactica is working out better than I had hoped. Eathsea sucked but maybe they could pull off Enders's Game.
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
Read the fucking Iliad.
Achilles sits around for 9 books, while Diomedes (not even IN the movie) and Ajax (killed in the FIRST battle) and Menelaos (same) beat the crap out of people.
Most of the action is dominated by the Gods, not the mortals.
Achilles DIES before he gets to Troy, but that *isn't* in the Iliad.
The Trojan horse bit is really written down in Vergil, but he was *never credited*.
When Achilles and Hector fight, Hector *runs* first. The reason they fight is because Hector is trapped outside the city walls, not because he comes down to fight Achilles. Gods interfere with the fight.
Aeneas isn't some random guy in the end, but he is a rather minor trojan prince who's the best fighter outside of Hector on the Trojan side. Read the Aeneid for more info.
The movie Troy was a huge cinematic blunder ruining one of the greatest stories of all time.
The whole original point of copyright is to make sure the author is able to make a living from his or her work. Once the author is dead, then sure, copyright should end, but until then, I don't understand your point. Particularly when in old age, earning new income can become harder to do.
The time between the writing of a book and the author's death is often shorter than fifty years anyway.
-FL
This is likely to suck just as badly.
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
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.
LOL, let's not even go there... I can only imagine how good movies ever actually get made ("Good movies? Are there any?")
Loading...
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.
LOTR was a great series of movies, and a pretty honest retelling of the books. I think that is why people earlier mentioned Jackson as a hopeful name to connect with this The issue with bad renditions of books is exemplified in some of Chrichton's movies - Timeline changes the relationship between key characters, drops characters, re-interprets the science involved in the sci-fi, adds an unnecessary love plot, etc. If they have Ender macking out with Petra, I'd be pissed (and disgusted. They are supposed to be pre-pubescent!!) MOnkyboy
I agree entirely.
OSCard also wrote a nice howto book, "How to Write SF/F" in which he says that one of the most important things is to know when to END a story. Well, he certainly fails to take his own advice. Ender's Game properly ended at the point where we killed off the Buggers. It went wrong from the moment the next section started (where Ender goes off and rescues the Bugger queen). It took the book from a heart-squeezing and memorable high to a "WTF? why??", and the sequels went downhill from there. (I don't even remember which one had us largely trapped on the planet of the Piggies, but I have seldom been so bored with any book.)
As to Ender's Shadow, while the book isn't bad in itself, and explains a lot, I still agree that it dilutes Ender's Game to the point of insignificance.
And over the course of the series, I really wasn't thrilled to learn that Bean and Peter had never outgrown the sociopathy that is to some degree normal in very small children; in fact, they had become really extreme examples of it as adults.
Now, as to TROY -- it's a *wonderful* movie. If you expect to see a slavish re-creation of The Iliad, you're doomed to disappointment. But as a character-driven tale of how normal, honest people interact and react when confronted by a younger brother's stupidity, a ruler's arrogance, an overdose of hero worship -- it's absolutely believable, and very well done (and moves so well that it didn't seem like it was 3 hours long, either). Troy was the best film I've seen since Pirates of the Caribbean.
If the film of Ender's Game gets the same attention to character development and interaction as Troy got, it will be GOOD.
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
It Can't run out on a living author if the author still owns it.
It's Life +95 years, or 120 years for a work for hire/psuedonomous/anonymous work.
It's only been this way for a short time, but the U.S. had to bring their copyright terms in line with that of Europe after oining the Berne Convention, otherwise U.S. works would receive less protection in the other countries.
Indeed, but maybe the script for Troy was fantastic... We'll probably never know. Of course, the idea of squishing 10+ years of war into a 2 hour movie is, by default, ludicrous.
Loading...
And he makes no secret of it. Heck, I've been told that the Homecoming"saga is based off the Book of Mormon.
The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
Nah, his books might seem good at first. I've read the entire Ender Series so far, and the Bean saga has been written at a level that should embarass Card. Especially the latest book, Shadow of the Hegemon or whatever the latest one is called. It was just awful, with people running around (for the entire book) to save unborn disgarded fetus's, which were stolen. The entire premise of the Bean character is that he was genetically engineered, and how terrible it is to do this because unforseen effects caused him to be a freakshow. So don't make it out to seem like his politics doesn't effect his writing, it certainly does. And the Achillies plot if fucking stupid as hell.
Mazer: "Get up!"
Ender: "I just got to sleep."
Mazer: "Get up NOW! You're on!"
Cut to battle room. Other kids are there. All are tired. Lots of lights (two colours) are on the display.
Ender rattles off some coordinates. Other kids rattle off coordinates. Lights blink out. All kids rattle off more coordinates. Finally, only one colour lights are left.
Mazer: "Congratulations. You've won again."
Other kids look at Ender with a mix of sympathy and admiration.
Cut to Ender's sleeping quarters.
Mazer: "Get up!"
Ender: "Those weren't games. I was killing the Buggers! Nooooooooooooo!"
Ender slaps both hands to his face
I'm predicting maximum suckage.
Card writes a column for our local Conservative Weekly that is the most bland thing I've ever seen (except when he's justifying his hatred of homos).
The first year or two of it's publication, I thought for sure it was an ironic bit of humor that was going over my head, as he wrote endlessly about his latest great snack cracker find, or how wonderfully written the latest Sandra Bullock vehicle was...but it has become painfully clear in recent years that he just sucks. I just can't even pull his books off of the shelf anymore.
David Benioff?
My heart soars like a brick.
Take heart: it could be David Hasselhoff.
I want to drag this out as long as possible. Bring me my protractor.
Does anyone want to sum up Ender's Game for those who have absolutely zero idea what it is about? I've never even heard of it.
One man's Funny is another man's Offtopic.
Battlefield Earth
Please don't make Ender 6 Years Old. You aren't going to be able to pull it off with a real 6 yo kid, and casting a 13 yo kid to play a 6 yo isn't going to help. Just make Ender 22 and find some guy with actual acting talent play him.
And if Hayden Christiansen so much as drives by the set, I'm going to hurt someone. Badly.
There are 01 kinds of cars in the world. The General Lee, and everything else.
Because writing novels and writing screenplays are worlds apart. One quick example: In a novel, the author describes actions and character's thoughts. The screenplay writer cannot do that. Instead he or she has to create everything through dialogue. It's like the difference between a book and a play. On the stage, it's dialogue all the way through. On the page, it's authorial voice much of the time.
It's one thing to know this difference, and another to be able to be competent in a totally different format. Therefore it is typical for a movie to hire experienced screenwriters to adapt a book rather than have the original writer, inexperienced at screenwriting, try to learn a new art form.
... 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
This is extremely relevant - Card's a pretty screwed up guy. I don't think it should be modded troll - this is a conversation many people here are interested in having.
I think people go overboard with this. While I certainly don't agree with his position, it's not as if he's all that vile about it. He simply has some strong religious beliefs. He doesn't advocate violence or mistreatment in any way.
Rather than wanting to hurt homosexuals, which is what a homophobe does, he wants to "help" them. I think both points of view are wrong, in their own way, but there's a hell of a big difference between them.
honestly i don't care if his politics affect his writing - i enjoy his books. what, should he not be allowed to write books because of his politics?
Obviously I have not seen Card's script, and might have different opinions if I could read it. But speaking as one who has read a lot of Card, including all the Ender books:
Card sometimes does not understand what is most important inside his own books. In fact, IMO Ender's Game is the most prominent example of that. (See my other post where I rant about how it goes wrong the moment we go off to rescue the Bugger queen.) So I find it perfectly plausible that to someone who had read and loved the original book, Card's idea of how to *script* it might well be a poor treatment, because (as the sequels amply demonstrate) he's lost sight of what really made the book have such drive, and may have concentrated on stuff that really relates to the sequels (all of which grate by comparison).
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
Many times I've been shocked about how little some people know or understand about the Internet, especially considering that it surrounds so many aspects of their everyday lives. And yet, since this is the same with film, a much older medium, I suppose it shouldn't be a surprise at all.
I'll constantly read commentaries blaming the suck-factor (in their opinion) of a film on this particular actor or that particular director, or on the quality of the writing. Let me offer only that it isn't that simple.
Many, many, many people touch a film and can have the power to change it significantly before any public audience views it. By the time a studio movie is publicly released, the script has gone through, oh, ten, twelve, twenty major revisions, producers have had their say, the director his, and the editor his (all masculine pronouns used for the sake of convenience, now lost completely due to this note). During that time each major player in the production of the film has been presented with choices -- choices, mind you, not creations from their own brains, but choices based on the quality of the people who've been hired, and who may have been hired for any number of experience, quality, or political reasons -- about costuming, production design, sound design and mixing, and even photography which, although affected by directorial input is almost always actually executed by a director of photography who, like the others, makes *strong* suggestions and provides choices.
Given how collaborative and varied film is, it's almost a miracle that any good movies get made at all. And yet, there are still many times I'll hear comments like the one above, as if the writer had any real input at all on the quality, good or bad, of Troy. Believe me, they were fucking given 10,000 notes, and expected to make changes quickly. And they did so, with a smile, even when they were faced with the problem of taking a fucking stupid note and trying to figure out how to incorporate it into the script without having to rewrite the entire story to justify it. And it was a *they*. I don't care if only one (living) writer is listed, there were more who didn't get credited. That is the way it works.
Keep in mind that this is the industry that employs Harvey Weinstein, the man who, when he owned the Lord of the Rings rights, wrote to Peter Jackson asking, "Why does there have to be so many hobbits?"
I realize that the above quote doesn't exclude the possibility that the film sucked, in that opinion, due to the efforts of others. But it would be nice if, sometimes, people could keep an open mind and realize that when a film sucks, there may be no direct reason. Sometimes they just suck. Same for the reverse, sometimes they're just great and all of the elements came together. But it's not useful to assign blanket blame or congratulations to anyone in film, unless they've got an established track record and what you're doing is evaluating a body of work.
I rescind my comments in the case of Joel Schumacher, whom I still blame for Batman's nipples. I hate you with the white-hot intensity of a thousand suns, you bastard.
Chr0m0Dr0m!C
Why wouldn't you want to see it? If troy's anything to go by I personally I can't wait to see it.
What exactly is Ender's Game anyway? A game of some sort I presume?
You seem to forget about the change in copyright law where he can file for an extension of his copyright. Then when he's dead his family can do the same again.
Specks
Batteries not included
I would think that the condition should be easily detectable. --A medical professional should be hired to follow the process of making a screen play proposal along its natural path. Each time somebody says, "No, No! The public doesn't want a screen play written in close parallel to an amazingly popular book which was practically written in movie format to begin with! No! Listen to my small ego! Listen to MEEEE! We have to completely change things around!"
Then simply have the brain-damaged individual put all of his desk things into a cardboard box and walk him kindly to the exit.
Repeat the process until all the brain damage has been detected and burned away, (fired).
The practice of medicine and film making ought to naturally go hand in hand, I think.
-FL
And he also denounced DRM in his 27 Feb 2005 Review, stating that he is himself boycotting Virgin Records for their abuse of copyright fair use.
So maybe his position isn't all black-and-white.
The hypocrites of homosexuality are, of course, already preparing to answer these statements by accusing me of homophobia, gay-bashing, bigotry, intolerance; but nothing that I have said here -- and nothing that has been said by any of the prophets or any of the Church leaders who have dealt with this issue -- can be construed as advocating, encouraging, or even allowing harsh personal treatment of individuals who are unable to resist the temptation to have sexual relations with persons of the same sex.
After reading everything in the Ender universe I could find (Yes, I DID like Speaker for the Dead and Xenocide, so sue me), I said "Hey, this Homecoming series looks pretty cool", and the first book or two was (with all the mind control and crazy foreign culture and what not), but boy did it go downhill after that. Once they're in space it sucks, and once they get back to Earth and discover the super-evolved moles and bats, it's really sucks. The books just went on and on and on with nothing substantial happening. Just my 2c.
With the first link, the chain is forged.
Personally, I believe that my predilection for Baskin Robbins Black Walnut Ice Cream is genetic. I also feel oppressed because this flavor is not always available. I would like the US Congress to pass a law prohibiting me from being discriminated against and force Baskin Robbins to make this flavor available at all times.
I also will no longer read posts from, oh, an Anonymous Coward, how appropriate.
Give us all a break and take your agenda back home where it belongs.
Anyone else think that his "wiping out all the buggers" plotline is just a little too obvious?
I'll turn into a supernova and burn up everything. Well I'll turn into a black little hole and you'll turn into string.
I've got my fingers crossed!!
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?
Actually, you can be homosexual and be a member of the Mormon church, no problems. It's if you practice sex outside of marriage that gets you excommunicated. I suppose you could argue that this means that you can't be homosexual without being excommunicated, but I know a fair number of homosexual people who are happy with the Church and active members.
Consider that the figureheads in the Open Source and FSF world are also intelligent, fundmentalists in their own right, and often voice their beliefs without worrying about what other people think, why do people single out OSC?
When it comes to the potential impact on other people of actually carrying out those beliefs, what is the difference between Mormon fundamentalism, purist Libertarian philosophy, and the idea that there should be no commercial software at all?
There is way too much of a double-standard at Slashdot. The people iconized at Slashdot are "eccentric" or "admirably consistent", but in other disciplines it is okay to cast people in a spectrum of black and white judgements?
-- Microsoft is the most expensive commodity operating system and office suite vendor in the marketplace.
Agreed. Troy was *great*. (See my previous rants on this page :)
... See, we're at interstellar-war with the Buggers, and it's not going well. We need a fresh approach. Ender was, um, a fresh approach. :) You've really got to read the book, tho -- and for ghu's sake DON'T read any spoilers first.
Ender's Game is a book by Orson Scott Card
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
By your statements, I'm guessing you think being gay is somehow subhuman, disgusting, or at the very least, not something you want going on in your town. All I can say is that we know very little about human nature, but one thing is clear: you can't legislate it away. All you can do is drive it underground, and strip dignity from your fellow human beings.
Sometimes seventeen/Syllables aren't enough to/Express a complete
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
OSC wrote my favorite reference for hacking the Commodore 64 back in the day. He may be a loon, but he's at least a geek loon and we should probably cut him some slack. :)
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
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?
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 took a quick glance at http://affirmation.org/, a site about 'gay and lesbian Mormons' and some questions in their FAQ seem to indicate some issues that some members sometimes have regarding excommunication. Sometimes. Hence "the worst".
The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
You know, when someone obsesses over homosexuality that much, it's pretty obvious what's going on. :)
Uncle Orson talked about this movie at a signing a week ago. Here is the gist of his comments:
About the movie, cant say it will be good, bad, or whatever at least before it is done. It could be even better than the book, or give a complementary look if not very faithful to the letter. After at least watching a review or a rating cant say i will be willing to see it. For now, well, just hope it will be well done.
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.
We are talking about the guy who wrote books that had a race of super beings that were recognised by their blue eyes? If the aryan ubermench undertones didn't bother you so much, why are you so upset over the pink triangles?
You can't take the sky from me...
Violence isn't required for someone to be a homophobe.
From Wikipedia: The term homophobia means fear or hatred of, aversion to, or prejudice or discrimination against, people who are homosexual.
Card had actually written several drafts of the speaker for the dead before he began writting the novel of ender's game. The end of the book, and its odd wtf portions were designed to serve as a back drop to the next, partially completed, book.
You have little to fear. In his own words,
The most religiously-active part of the novel which I can recall is when he describes how Ender's parents were closet Catholics who were dissatisfied with the state's birth/population-control policies.
The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
In what way did Troy suck any less than your favourite movie of all time?
In no way whatsoever. None at all.
Think about it.
You can't take the sky from me...
In other words, psychological abuse.
We'll keep this hammer behind our backs and we'll tell you we're not going to use it and most of the time we'll let you be, but every once in a while we're going to smack you down with this hammer, because you've crossed some invisible line that we've conveniently chosen not to define.
when did Wikipedia become the undisputed source of all knowledge? That definition right there seems pretty broad and doesn't really allow one one to describe someone who is opposed to homsexuality but does not hate homosexuals (which is what Card seems to be conveying in his essay). Of course, if your personal political agenda includes homosexuality, it would be in your best interest to make everyone opposed to it seem to be hateful and dangerous.
Troy was not bad but it also was not good.
Half of that sentence was true: Troy wasn't good.
You can't take the sky from me...
No, Card should keep his politics out of his writing because when he tries to mix them, the results suck.
Why is it that the proponents of "one nation under God" are so eager to get rid of "liberty and justice for all"?
They didn't call it "THE ILIAD". They called it "TROY".
As I've said every time the Troy film comes up, if you expect a slavish retelling of The Iliad, you'll hate it, because it deviates considerably, and the Greek gods are entirely absent. But if you view it afresh, and IF you like character-driven stories, you'll love it -- because it focuses most strongly on character interaction, and does a stellar job of it.
Fundamentally, the film is about "How my testosterone-poisoned little brother caused an international incident", "why kings shouldn't be so damned stiff-necked", and "what happens when a talented but insecure athlete gets WAY too much hero worship".
TROY could have built the characters and the setting from scratch without changing ANYTHING in the script. But instead they chose to use familiar settings and characters, and to retell The Iliad not as a series of *events*, but as a tangle of *character interactions* -- which I believe was Homer's intent anyway, AND precisely what made The Iliad an enduring work. It was about the *people*, not about the *events*.
And that is what made Troy a really GOOD film, regardless of what it was based on or what changes it made along the way.
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
In case you haven't seen Troy (or even if you have), go here and read Troy in 15 minutes
There is also a Van Helsing in 15 minutes as well, if you like this sort of thing.
I should warn you though, don't drink anything that will burn your nose while you read these...
--
my monitor is still dirty
That has the smell of retroactive history to me. Or perhaps of retrofitting an existing partial manuscript (that just wasn't working and wasn't good enough to sell on its own) to make it fit around Ender's Game.
And that would explain why the two parts are so jarringly dissonant.
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
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.
I sympathize with the sentiment. It did indeed start out much better than it ended. But you say that you read everything of his you could get your hands on? Dude, Card has some pretty crazy stuff, like Wyrms , A Planet Called Treason , Lost Boys , Lovelock... heck, even Enchantment was rather odd, and Treasure Box was downright freaky.
The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
Yep. In fact, I think Card's best work is LOST BOYS (his only book besides Ender's Game [up to the Bugger Queen] that I read all in one sitting) -- which is set right in a Morman community, with strong Mormon values and even normal Mormon events, like "Family Home Evening". It *works* because the Mormon community is used only to create a strong sense of setting and personalities, not to proselytize.
:)
I picked up a signed preview copy of LOST BOYS off a freebie table. Good find, eh?
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
I saw OSC at a book signing last Tuesday (Mar 15, 2005), and he had a few things to say in regards to the movie:
1. He was pleased with the selection of Benioff and Weiss due to their past performance on pictures such as Troy and 25th Hour.
2. The actors to play both Ender and Bean have, in his words "probably been born", but as of this moment are not old enough to really be on the radar.
3. Currently Wolfgang Peterson is slated to direct, and is happy and supportive of the project.
4. There is a specific clause in the contract to not change the ages of the characters, as this would shift the dynamic of the story in a direction that it should not go.
5. The main reason for combining Ender's Game and Ender's Shadow is so that a good deal of Ender's emotions (which, for those who have read Ender's Game, is a good deal of the book) will be able to be externalized, or become available to the the viewer.
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.
All your beliefs are wrong. Please adjust your worldview accordingly.
Sincerly,
Geekdom.
You can't take the sky from me...
Ender's Game is a good read, nothing fantastic. The ending is a neat bit of a twist, but certainly nothing that I would consider a GREAT book. I think one could make a reasonable adaptation. Thus far no one has been able to get Dune right, and my personal feelings are that the very nature of the book defies easy translation to the big screen.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
I saw OSC speak in Boston about a week ago. He spent the first
/dev/null, please.
few minutes discussing the movie and the tremendous problems of making such a work. The breakthrough came when a friend's wife told OSC that the story could be better told by combining these two books, otherwise, Ender's Game could only be told by Ender's inner dialog. The majority of the book is in Ender's head!
OSC has done all he can to find people to make the movie who will hold true to its roots. It will become a "buddy movie", as he put it, because that's a form that works well for movies. It will not become a romantic chick flick or romantic comedy(!). Everybody signed up to do the work understands that. (Whether they remember it at all the key moments in the development is yet to be seen).
OSC said, "I think I can now safely say that the actor who will play Ender has been born. Until recently, I couldn't say that."
OSC responded specifically to some of the criticisms seen here, too. Will Ender be older? Yes, probably. Why can't this just be an instantiation of the book's story? Because as earnest as we all appear, we wouldn't sit through a 6 hour movie with voice-over dialog like, "I wonder what Valentine is doing?"
OSC wants to see the movie made but didn't want to just "sell out" to the first offer that came along. This offer, the current stuff on the table, is the best he's seen and, he thought, the best he's going to see--so he took it, and the money. And, like he said, "Once you take the money, you lose control."
Thoughtful comments welcomed. Flames to
-- Scott
I wish you'd posted as a non-AC. This would get modded right up.
I found Ender's Game to be obvious, manipulative and pandering. I don't find him fit to edit DFW's footnotes.
If you want to read a highly literate writer, try Pynchon.
That being said, I've been bitten too many times of late by SF/Fantasy adaptations. I didn't like LotR, and that horrific Costner reworking of the Postman (which is one of my favorite SF novels) approaches Battlefield Earth in the crappiness factor (especially the oh so cliched "bad guy can't rape 'cause he can't get it up big" bit). But we'll see how this turns out.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Peter Jackson is no different than most other directors with their egos thinking that they could do the original story better and not leaving well enough alone, he made a visually stunning movie, but story wise it's just good enough to keep him in the graces of Tolkien fans.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
In Ender's shadow you can see how been is a cold blooded killer and atheist in the begining but change totally during the course of the novel and start quoting stuff from the bible. It doesn't even mention in the book when he actually read the bible or converted. With the exeption of that not very subtle message, the rest of the book is good.
Slashdot anagrams to "Sad Sloth"
Hear, hear!
Well said blammanj
...I'm picturing some unholy union halfway between Spy-Kids 3D and Starship Troopers. I can feel my philotic connection to Ender being dimished already.
Lots of authors mix their politics, philosophies and religious beliefs into their books. Herbert, an ecologist, mixed his scientific experience and his philosophies into his books all the time. However, he embeds them into the works themselves. The world of Arrakis is an embodiment of Herbert's ecological opinions and experience, and books like The Godmakers and Destination: Void are as much expositions on his philosophical views as SF novels. He does this without being preachy by making these organic elements of the story. Card simply isn't that good a writer, and thus should really stay away from it.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
The first time I read through the intro I read "writer of the screenplay for Tron." And I was happy for a few nanoseconds, until harsh reality set in after the reread.
You figured it out!
ARRRRRGH PIGGY SLAUGHTER.
Since LotR,it seems like every time some one doesn't like the writer/producer/director/pet monkey assigned to a film Peter Jackson's name comes up as person/monkey they should have used instead. Get over it. tLotR are some of my favorite films of all time, but there are other directors out there.
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.
As for this tide of history stuff -- a key word in your post is "preserve". Truly vigorous societies aren't worried about preservation. They are too busy creating anew.
Another interesting phrase is "positives for the state". I was not aware that people lived to please the State; in free societies it's the other way round.
The Romans were fully aware of their decline as it happened; and there were many who ran around talking about how they would go the way of the Greeks unless, etc. Very shortly after that, Rome lurched into tyranny in an attempt to keep the State alive at all costs.
Sometimes seventeen/Syllables aren't enough to/Express a complete
I just don't financially support those holding views with which I disagree. That's one of my own political strategies. There's nothing hypocritical in it.
In the case of someone whose views I support in part, and disagree with in part - I try to simply support the idea and not the person.
I really hope that the game includes the computer game that Ender experiences. The evolving simulation that explores his psyche, and constantly improves itself to challenge him more.
I'd provide quotes, but I haven't been able to track it down on the net (and the books are at home). Very innovative stuff, that I'd love to see come to market.
You quitting proves that the karma kap worked. The most annoying of the whores shut up. --CmdrTaco
Starship Troopers is a good movie.
It is NOT, however, a faithfull adaptation of the book. It didn't even start as such. It started as a "hey, let's make a movie about soldiers shooting up giant bugs!" project, someone mentioned that there was a really good Heinlein book on that theme, and they got the gang from Robocop to make it into a movie.
So, you have pretty much the same story: A future where humanity lives united under a single government run by the military. A young rich kid enrolls into the mobile infantry to earn the right to vote, since in that world citizen and veteran means the same thing.
A giant asteroid destroys the boy's home town, the government declares war on the space bugs, things explode, people die, and we learn that the common soldier is a brave and resourcefull man of honour and discipline.
None of the things I've heard as negatives about the movie made any sense. I've heard people say that it's a bad thing that everyone at the school and in the barracks is young and pretty. But the movie explains that there is a program of selective breeding enforced by the military government: It's easier to get a baby liscence if you go through the mortally dangerous basic training and do your term of service. Have you SEEN their training?
I've heard that it's a bad thing that they changed things from the book. The book is from the FIFTIES! Its politics are outdated. You can't have a movie where it says that in the future women won't be allowed in the military. You could get away with that kind of thing before Star Trek, but not since.
Starship Trooper was a good action movie based off a good sci-fi book. With good SFX, pretty people, impressive explosions, the works. It had clever little propaganda movies mixed up with news shows, it had lots of cool futuristic details. It also happened to have an ironic message about fascism, a lot of people missed that, unortunatly.
You can't take the sky from me...
Quite frankly I don't think any church has any business telling non-members what they can or cannot do, or how they should practice it. If a homosexual is a Mormon, then the church can do what it pleases as far as throwing the individual out. But suggesting that it's healthy that religiously-motivated laws in a secular country where Church and State are separated is somehow a good thing is pretty hypocritical. If Mormons don't like homosexuals, then bully for the Mormons. I found, as an atheist, a goodly number of Mormon teachings to be questionable, if not outright laughable, but it's none of my business.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
hating gays is not political. hating gays is inhumane, ignorant, and - well - homophobic. i don't care what your politics are - if you're are against the right of an entire culture to marry one another then you're unamerican (if you're in the US of course). it might not make the movie less good. and i might still see it. but if there's any sort of anti-gay sentiment in it you can bet i'll walk right out.
nature loves variety::society hates it get your variety at http://www.monkeypantz.net
Having read Card's articles on the subject, I would argue that describing him as a "homophobe" is not only inaccurate, but it also waters down the term to the point of meaninglessness. I'm a conversative, so does that make me a "liberalphobe?" You can't go around branding everybody who disagrees with you as a whatever-phobe. Otherwise, you'll be at a loss for words when you need to describe an individual who really hates something. Everyone will assume that you're just overreacting to another differing opinion.
And just where does this policy of boycotting people of different beliefs end? Are you going to boycott anything produced by someone who voted for the other guy? That's about half the country.
Are you also boycotting products made in China? I'm sure that the Chinese government has a far worse human rights record than Orson Scott Card.
He does, however, advocate keeping various anti-homosexual laws (by this I presume he means sodomy laws) on the books. This sort of thing has already been tossed out as unconstitutional, so is this either an example of a poorly thought-out knee-jerk objection or a more comprehensive statement about how he feels about the basic law of the land.
What I don't understand is why he should care one way or the other. This is, of course, one end of the spectrum, the tolerant individual who doesn't hate homosexuals, but rather feels them to be of some lesser moral position. He's allowed his opinion, but when you compare it to the desire that anti-homosexual laws be kept on the books, I think we can see that he isn't nearly as tolerant as he puts forward (or likely as he believes himself to be). This sort of pseudo-enlightenment that the "tolerant" social conservatives is simply just a form of rationalization.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
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"?
Yeah, I didn't see "the worst," or if I did, I took as "it's routine." I have a few gay Mormon friends, none of whom have been treated in the way most of the Affirmation folks have, and I just wanted to get it on the record that excommunication is not the standard way of dealing with homosexuality in the Mormon Church.
Let's not forget, Ficarra & Requa wrote Cats & Dogs, Cats & Dogs 2 - Tinkle's Revenge, and Bad(der) Santa. It's a living non-sequitur.
Just because you know how to put food on the table doesn't mean you're a complete hack.
I suspect most Big Hollywood writers have a script like Bad Santa squirreled away somewhere but piercing the veil of Hollywood isn't easy. Most writers aren't drawn to writing to churn out schlock but they'll take what they can get, because they make about as much as, well, screenwriters.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
are we talking, Zone of the Enders here? that is the only Enders (except EastEnders) that I know off..
/. is good for you.
Wow - he's really insane:
" Any homosexual man who can persuade a woman to take him as her husband can avail himself of all the rights of husbandhood under the law. And, in fact, many homosexual men have done precisely that, without any legal prejudice at all.
Ditto with lesbian women. Many have married men and borne children. And while a fair number of such marriages in recent years have ended in divorce, there are many that have not.
So it is a flat lie to say that homosexuals are deprived of any civil right pertaining to marriage. To get those civil rights, all homosexuals have to do is find someone of the opposite sex willing to join them in marriage."
He thinks so much of marriage that he recommends sham gay "cover" marriages. That's what's keeping our civilization
--
make install -not war
"Most", by population or by number of countries? ;)
Ah, the U.S... The world watches the U.S., while the U.S. watches the boob tube.
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.
Presently, I fail to see marriage having any benefit beyond the monetary. Help me out here.
Spelling, grammar, punctuation? We need something that checks logic.
David Benioff is a fantastic writer. Sure, Troy wasn't the Orgasmotron you were conditioned by the hype to believe it would be, but it was a thoroughly decent flick.
However, Benioff earned his credits with THE 25th HOUR, a perfect screenplay adapted from his own book. It became Spike Lee's greatest movie in years. Judging by that book and script I have the utmost confidence in whatever he writes. He's a writer to look out for.
Ah, I did miss that, and I apologize.
So, wait why are you a conservative?
Anyone who whines about being modded down should be.
Peronally, I think there's really only one front we need to keep an eye on in the war to protect the sanctity of marriage, and that's Mormons.
Look, I know you're all going to jump all over me about intolerance and bigotry and all that liberal claptrap, but let's examine the facts for a minute.
One, Mormons are supportive of Bigamy. I know you're going to throw that old 'The official church doctrine is against it, and the vast majority of Mormons are against it' stuff, but we've all seen the tv specials here. Just because most Mormons are afraid of the law, doesn't mean they aren't pushing their bigamist agenda. Mormons marrying is the thin edge of the wedge that will break marriage wide open. Once we let people marry twice because of their nutty religion, we'll be driving thought the Vegas strip past the church of the horse marriers.
Two, preservation of culture. You may think that culture is passed through discussion and media, but we all know that it's inculcated into you as a child and that's the end of it. The problem with Mormons is that they use children to spread their ideology. Many Mormons go on to become teachers in schools that teach the children of non-Mormons. Maybe you're okay with the pledge of allegiance including a thank you to the angel Moroni, but that's not my America.
I urge you to write your congresspeople and support legislation banning Mormon marriage. Because we want the America our forefathers dreamt of.
Disclaimer: MINAA (Mummy! I'm Not An Animal!)
civilized ?
Like the Spaniards 'helped' the Incans to save their immortal souls?
I'm not implying anyone is bad due to their religious believes. Just to remembers that:
The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
Well you are right, but as I see it Card still doesn't fit within that description either.
Mainly because his problem is not with the people, but with the act.
Gays not getting married will cure this right? I mean two people who aren't going to act as brood mares for the state couldn't possbly raise a right thinking child. In Denmark they've had gay marriage since 1989, and they're fortunate to find a week without famine or drought or viking invasion!
All sarcasm aside, an uninformed position defended adamently is a poor mask for ignorace. Be open about it, say that you just don't much like the gays and be out with it. ahhh, doesn't that feel better?
"An ye harm none, do what ye will."
Wasn't the 13th colony Georgia?
to book length it go slightly worse. The second book went downhill, the third book sucked.
If they try and do the book, it will suck, it's a great short story, as it was originally written.
The following sites say that Harris and Dougherty (they wrote X-Men 2) were signed on a while back to write the screenplay...
a rt icle&articleID=VR1117899849&cs=1
e m_ id=3357902
e m_ id=3557285
http://www.variety.com/index.asp?layout=upsell_
http://www.countingdown.com/movies/1500/news?it
http://www.countingdown.com/movies/1500/news?it
I wonder if that was all just rumor put into news or if they decided not to do it because they felt superman was more important...
Bradford L.
http://www.modemhelp.net
I believe R.K. Milholland, who writes Something Positive, has been addressing that issue in some recent comic strips. I'd mod him insightful, but mod points don't seem to work off slashdot for some reason....
As far as Card's stated views, he makes a better case than most religious zealots as for why gay marriage is a bad idea from a sociological standpoint. He's at least willing to argue from a sociology standpoint, which while not as rock solid a science as physics, are at least an improvement over "Thuh Bible saiyz so."
Not that his argument is convincing. I think several of his assertions in the (typical) article I noted are made with insuficient justification (EG: "Monogamous marriage is by far the most effective foundation for a civilization") or just plain wrong ("Calling a homosexual contract 'marriage' [...] will not make it contribute in any meaningful way to the propagation of civilization"). I think he is right to be concerned about the continued impact of some earlier social changes from the early to mid-20th century. The changes that have weakened "the family" over the last 50 years, that have led to the symptomatic high divorce rates and working single parents, have in turn caused major problem on a lot of levels, and that the present situation has Major Problems. Unfortunately, he sees allowing gays to marry as yet another step towards doom, instead of potentially increasing the number and variety of stable model family units for children to imprint off of, in the event that they are in a disfuntional family.
He also doesn't get that by prohibiting gays from marrying, it artificially and unjustly creates a legal discrimination of heterosexual non-reporoductive partnerships versus homosexual non-reproductive partnerships. Of course, his reference to Plessy versus Fergesson when condemning judicial activism in his followup shows he's closer to a legal idiot than a legal scholar-- that case upheld the law as legislated all the way.
His worry for society is well placed, but his fears have the wrong target. Frankly, most of this attention deficit generation seems to lack the long-term focus and the ability to compromise that seems necessary for maintaining a stable partnership. The problem is further compounded by the last several decades' economic strains on the family; now, two working parents seems all but required. The present situation is dangerous, but trying to force the clock back will trigger disaster; though it has risks, further change offers hope.
As for his wrtiting, Card isn't worth buying in hardcover (except perhaps Ender's Game itself), but I've still picked up some of his more recent books in paperback after checking them out from the local library. As for the movie... I'll wait for the reviews.
//Information does not want to be free; it wants to breed.
Aren't all laws based in morals? I mean, I'm no student of the Law, but at some point, Society determines which behaviors are acceptable and which are not. A lot of people talk about how we should get rid of all these "religiously-motivated laws," but I think that all our laws were founded in religion at some point. The Constitution doesn't say anything about not having religious laws, it just says "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;" meaning that there should be no state-sponsored religion like the Anglican Church many people fled to America to avoid.
Making stupid comments so you don't have to.
I'm just reading the books for the first time now (currently reading Xenocide), and the introduction to Speaker for the Dead tells the tale the grandparent poster spoke of: OSC discovered that Speaker needed far too much exposition to be workable, then hit upon "What if Ender were the Speaker?" (Ender's Game only existed as a novella at that point.) Hence, the novel-length rewrite of EG, to enable Speaker to be told.
Save Maine's economy: write stuff down. All comments are exclusively my own, not my employer.
This is, of course, one end of the spectrum, the tolerant individual who doesn't hate homosexuals, but rather feels them to be of some lesser moral position. He's allowed his opinion, but when you compare it to the desire that anti-homosexual laws be kept on the books, I think we can see that he isn't nearly as tolerant as he puts forward (or likely as he believes himself to be).
When you look at his reasons for wanting such laws (and his religious background pretty much fully explains his desire to keep the laws) it lessens the effect. He says he doesn't want it for punishment, and not even solely as a deterrent, but to keep it discreet. This is coming from a man who believes (again, largely because of his religion) that the homosexuality he sees everywhere is harming society in some way. While we may not agree, I can't fault him for having that opinion.
Of course, it is hard to understand about one the things they don't understand about themselves. As you imply, it's difficult to know what he belives when we can't even be sure that he knows. Such is the way of religious indoctrination.
Speaking of religious indoctrination, I have to wonder whether the people who say that they refuse to give him a dime are aware of the source of those beliefs. I really don't think indoctrination is too strong a word with some creeds, and Church of LDS is one of them, partially because it's not only such a major part of the people's lives but it also has a tendency to somewhat isolate people from non-Mormons in many cases. It's logically akin to punishing somebody for having a sub-standard education.
Yes. Like that. That's why I put "help" in "quotes."
You said it yourself -- good intentions. I think he's got good intentions and is misguided. (Whether those lead to hell isn't really all that relevant.) Now which of those things makes it worth punishing him by missing out on a good movie? (Since the OP said he wouldn't see it even if it was good, not that it definitely will be.)
Is that everyone just goes along with the original post that Troy was a crappy film. I liked it. It was entertaining. It wasn't anything great or spectacular but it was watchable. There have certainly been much worse films.
Knight37 - Once a Gamer, Always a Gamer
Who wrote Spike Lee's masterful The 25th Hour.
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.
Some of his religious motifs give me pause... but on the whole I like OSC. I'm not a religious person, but I am conservative and I'm glad that there are some fiction authors out there for me to support.
Just because some people think he's a loon doesn't mean he doesn't have an audience. And while you may consider me a loon as well, I would posit that we just have a difference of opinion on politics. I don't usually try to enter into political arguments by starting off with marginalization and name calling. But that's just me.
~foooo
The stated reason for recruiting children at a young age was that space combat was much more complex than what came before it - so much so that kids not only had to be recruited and trained almost from birth, you needed special selective breeding techniques to get likely candidates. But this is hogwash.
Think back to warfare at the turn of the last century - all combat was conducted at the surface of the earth, at relatively slow speeds. Within 50 years, we had fully developed air warfare, with ordinary mortals fighting 3d battles at hundreds of miles per hour... no genetic engineering or lifelong training required. And by the time the next 50 years went by, we were able to add long-range sensors & weapons, supersonic capabilities, multiple simultaneous engagement capabilities, etc, etc. Still no supermen required, and you could learn it with a few years of training.
I've read Ender's Game, and the battle Ender was ultimately asked to fight was no more complex than this. Given the same technology, a US Navy battlegroup staff could learn to fight a battle like Ender's within a few years at most! This problem was so jarring for me that I found it impossible to suspend my disbelief and enjoy the book.
Sean
P.S. for mods: just because the parent didn't like the book doesn't make him a troll. The level of groupthink around here is getting ridiculous.
How is this comment insightful? "i wouldnt care what he thinks, i just wanna be entertained." Your position is nothing more than uneducated apathy. If that is what passes for insight in this day and age, I'm truly saddened.
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. ~
in this thread:http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/01/15 /1432236&mode=thread
3 2
/. 2001, my favorite post about O.S.Card: Hitler comment
l ) ...and Hegemon. As it happens I was there to see it, and it was illuminating.
this comment: http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=9968&cid=5064
From
I *still* haven't found a copy of the article online. Any help?
A funny thing happened between Speaker... (Score:5)
by localroger (258128) on Monday January 15, @12:41PM (#506432)
( http://www.kuro5hin.org/prime-intellect/index.htm
A friend of mine hated Ender's game; she said it was the worst novel she'd ever read from its sappy tearjerking to its queasy morality to the blatant justification of genocide at the end. She refused to ever read another Card book. I didn't feel as strongly as she did, found the book readable, but I took her point.
At the time she was a SFWA member so she got a free copy of Speaker. Since she didn't want it, she gave it to me. When I read it I got back to her and said, "you're not going to believe this, he escapes to a planet copied from Brazil."
I gave her back the book, and next thing I know she is drawing up a tremendous list of coincidences, at least 75, between Ender's life and upbringing and that of one A. Hitler. This turned into a meticulously researched article -- I saw the doc package, which was an inch and a half thick -- which was published in the final issue of Science Fiction Review,. That article was titled Ender and Hitler: Sympathy for the Superman? by Elaine Radford.
SFR is no longer with us but the article and Card's rebuttal were republished by Literary Review, so it's probably there in your meatspace library if you're curious. I don't think the article is online anywhere.
While it was startling to see just how closely Ender parallels Hitler, even more startling was Card's reaction. He seemed to be completely unaware of many of the key passages in the book which Radford cited. This is clear from his rebuttal, which was amazingly lame and ignorant (several times stating bluntly that passages didn't exist which Radford had documented). It was obvious to me that he couldn't have written the book, at least not in anything finer than general outline.
At the time it was expected that Card would sweep the Hugos and Nebulas for a third time in a row with the sequel to Speaker. Instead it took him, what, four or five years to get around to writing it. I am convinced that Superman had a lot to do with it. He pulled a mammoth con job off on the SF community and almost got away with it. For the most part he still has, but he did blink.
Now, back to my copy of The Martians...
a lot of ender's game goes on in the minds of the charchters, how can they move that to the big screen?
My new blog
--- SER
maybe you gain utility from taking a brave stand against movies written by mormons. i dont care. i have long known that religions are jibberish, and religions make perfectly friendly people think all sort of loco ideas. they are brainwashed, i dont hold it against them. if michael moore or pat robertson made a movie i thought i would enjoy, i would watch it. i am not trying to protest or change the world, just kill an hour and a half at the movies.
lets say card does hate gays. i hate lots of things too. people can hate whatever they want, why should i mind? christians hate logic, thats just the way it is. most of them are very nice though. we are talking about a movie here, not a contest to see who can be the most indignant about something.
I think it is more that some feel betrayed I mean he writes a book (Ender's Game) where a lot of the book was recognizing others. With a strong thread of not hating just because one is told to hate. Then he writes Speaker for the Dead, which strongly pushes accepting people as they are.
Then he comes down hard on a side that is intolerant (NB there are times when it is fine to be intolerant, no judgement is used here) and that shook people. It would be like having Ghandi scream "Kill them all". Few people really have an issue with whatever you might believe (mostly because they really don't care to know), nor do they care what any long time conservative talking head feels, but OSC sudenly looked deceptive. There is a relationship between a reader and the author, and like any other relationship, deception is poison.
I'd do something interesting, but my server can't handle a slashdotting.
I thought it wasn't so much the complexity of war as it was the ability to come up with the best strategies. The way your thinking of things, using a Naval Battle group as an example is flawed. The US has the best weapon technology on the planet. So it basically uses brute strength to win. But what if the enemy had an exact same weapons as the US ? Then it boils down to who can come up with the better strategy. Hence the idea behind the book.
Punk kid grows up for trained only for war. He is rebelious, resourceful and ruthless as only children can be, and thus groomed for success. Only in the end he realises the grown ups haven't been telling the whole truth - he succeeds on their terms and yet is left with no moral compass.
A perfect counterpoint to The Lord of the flies; this time civilisation is the barbarity.
Go read the novella. You'll probably enjoy it far more than this film when it comes out. I hadn't heard of it before this evening either, but it's a nice way to spend a couple of hours. Of the other stories there Atlantis was interesting - the others I didn't really appreciate.
I truly don't mean this as a troll post, and I admit that I have not read the book, but I would have a hard time with suspension-of-disbelief that a bunch of children at age 5 or so could be great warriors. It would probably be much more believeable reading it (though I would still have a tough time), but I can't imagine it on the screen. Most children actors just can't pull it off, imho.
Why the **** dont they get O.S.C to write the script? Its not like he's a crap writer.
See my art -> http://herbevore.deviantart.com
I wasn't commenting on Card, I was commenting on the parent.
Its not an undisputed source of all knowledge. It just happens to be a convient reference.
Feel free to check Merriam-Webster or Dictionary. As you'll see both have similar definitions and neither list violence as a requisite.
Well it's good to know that social conservatives now think the KKK is bad, and have moved the meter up to "evil fags that are ruining my life and must be greedy money hungry bastards". Bravo to you for letting the colored folks on your side of the line.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
In this vein, Hollywood's standard saying is, "Film is a collaborative medium."
David Mamet amended this to summarize Hollywood's attitudes towards writers: "Film is a collaborative medium; bend over."
This is the best comment I heard on film writing.
I am a filmmaker (not from US), an award winning one, and I write my stories for the films I can make.
I dont let anyone touch my scripts. I have few very close friends who go through the script and look for mismatches and an important quality called "truth quotient".
I had serious problems with my actors (who are big name stars) who wanted their ideas to be incorporated on my scripts. Once I told the male lead I will take the necessary changes and later, one day before the shoot I told him I cannot. If I was going to make the changes, I would not make the film.
He got royally pissed. But he co-operated and we made the film. His performance is well regarded and got him a Special Jury Prize at an International Film Festival where the film won the Best Picture Prize.
My gut instincts were right - he is the best actor of his generation, but he has no concept of a script/screenplay. Ditto with your average studio executive, Producers and even your crew.
Why I say the above - I have read more than 100 good screenplays - when I see a good screenplay I understand.
Mike Leigh said he does not differentiate between Writing and Directing.
Now a days, average feature film you see has 3-4 writers - like 3-4 Directors on a single film.
Tat Tvam Asi
Actually, proposing that to them really pisses off religious reich types. As near as I can tell between the frothing at the mouth, they object because first they lose their "special status" that the state recognizes for their blessings (never mind that they can still get the secular part of the status and benefits under a different name), and second because they can't stop homosexuals from joining churches which have no problem blessing gay marriages (like the (l)unitarians) and then saying "Yay! We're married!"
Worst of both worlds as far as the extreme social right is concerned.
//Information does not want to be free; it wants to breed.
is if it's animated. That many child actors? Anyone know any good 6 year old stunt children?
That article, and its arguements against tolerating homosexuality are made within the context of a church (the LDS, in this case), and the laws to which he refers specifically church laws. Which is fine, so far as it goes. (He's not discussing it as part of my church, so it's not my problem.)
On the other hand, he has held his opposition in more secular contexts, too. Homophobia seems an inappropriate characterization, as he at least portrays the appearance of a rational arguement for his position, as opposed to unreasoning fear. It would seem fair, however, to characterize his position as discriminatory against practicing homosexuals.
//Information does not want to be free; it wants to breed.
I don't see how your quote applies to the quoted text. Could you explain?
Oh, is this a widespread problem among Mormons / the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints? I wasn't aware of that, but apparantly you know more about it than I do.
The other poster never mentioned Mormons or the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. You did. You were the one that compared them to the Klan. You were the one who stated that there *IS* a problem there, but that it's not so bad that they actually go out murdering people. Seems to be a sore spot for you. I honestly hadn't heard about it before, but thanks for the tip.
The other poster compared Orson Scott Card to the Klan. That Orson Scott Card is a ranting lunatic. I think I read one of Card's rants on the topic ages ago, and that it was pretty appaling. I sure hope that that sort of vile attidude isn't particularly common among Mormons.
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
Perhaps you should stick to movies starring Arnie and/or Bruce Willis and switch your music allegiance to Britney Spears.
Don't you realise that "every cool geeky work" that you take for granted today is the prodigy of groundbreaking works that were labelled "radical", "subversive", "destructive", "a bad influence", etc by conservatives of years gone by?
I mean, who bats an eyelid at the lyrics of Come On Baby Light My Fire?, Take A Walk On The Wild Side, Lady Marmalade, etc nowadays? But, in their days, all these songs were castigated by the establishment as negative (if not evil) influences.
Who do you respect more: Spears whose brilliant insight on the invasion of Iraq was "I trust the President" or someone like Chris Martin of Coldplay, a graduate of one of the finest universities in Europe, who's long been an advocate of issues such as Fair Trade? Which do you think knows what their talking about? And which do you think is totally clueless?
"Accept that some days you are the pigeon, and some days you are the statue." - David Brent, Wernham Hogg
Heay, I've got an idea? How about you try coming up with some agument that isn't just a rehash of the same old bullshit people were spouting when they were passsing laws against interracial marriage.
"I don't like interracial marriage! Waaaa! Waaaa! Interracial marriage devalues marriage! Waaaa! Waaaa! Interracial couples are just doing it for the sake of some filthy lucre in taxes and medical benefits. Waaaa! Waaaa! It's just an incrementalist interracial agenda of making the 'lifestyle choice' more acceptable to the masses! Waaaa! Waaaa! If we are to preserve our own culture we have to have more children - more WHITE children."
"The failure of mid 20th century social engineering projects has become manifest. This includes interracial marriage advocacy. We're going the way of the Romans unless we do something to stem the tide. Allowing interracial couples get married is just bullshit to make them feel better about themselves. Racial mixing has no positives for the state and a significant negative."
Yep, if you let an interracial couple... oops I mean a gay couple get married that somehow prevents straight couples from getting married. Ayup. By reducing the number of marriages we are somehow INCREASING the number of marriages. Ayup. By denying people the freedom to get married we are somehow causing fewer children to have two parents. Ayup.
You're just another bigoted moron who wants to deny other people equal rights. No one is forcing interracial marriage on you, and no one is forcing gay marriage on you. Don't like it? Don't do it.
The fundamental point is that there is no constitutional way you can write a valid law prohibiting gay marriage any more than you can write a valid law to prohibit interracial marriage. Any law attempting to discriminate between marriage applicants on the basis of religion or gender is just as invalid as a law attempting to discriminate between marriage applicants on the basis of race.
As far as drafting a law to do what you want, legally it is an identical to banning interracial marriage. Just substitute gender for race in the text of the law and it's identical. The reason you can't do it is identical. The reason you are wrong is identical.
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
But Bean is an utter sociopath, willing to use anyone or anything if he sees it as needful to his own survival. So if quoting the bible furthers this goal, Bean will quote from the bible. Which does not mean he converted, only that to him, the bible was a useful survival tool.
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
The Bern convention only requires life+50.
It's really funny the way we increased to the current term because we wanted to harmonize with Europe... which presumably then means our terms and European terms would be the *same*... but then somehow in Europe they suddenly need to change their terms to harmonize with us. I'm still scratching my head over that one.
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
Precisely. There are lots of other ways to phrase it, but that's the most succinct :)
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
Let that be a lesson to aspiring writers: if something HAS to be shoehorned into a plot to make it workable -- it doesn't work.
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
unless OSC writes the script, directs, AND plays Graff.
"For Great Justice."
The point is that he is not anymore at the end with no real explanation of how it happened exept with quotes from the Bible.
I'd describe more precise stuff but I don't want to give spoilers...
The first book however rocks and is without preaching (or at least I didn't noticed any).
Slashdot anagrams to "Sad Sloth"
Despite OSC's ravings, he hasn't written one good (dare I say, "decent") book since he started writing Ender's Shadow. He's full of himself.
And that's a meaningless distinction for any person who isn't celibate their entire life.
Not really. It makes quite a big difference in how a person treats others. I'm sure you have at least one friend who has done something you don't approve of, at some point in their life, but that hasn't kept you from being their friend. Your problem is with the act. Not with that person.
I agree with everything you said, but I have to point out that financial survivability is also an issue. The substantial tax breaks given to married couples have been around so long that our economy has adjusted to it. Today two unmarried people living together have a much harder time surviving than might the same two people as a married couple. So getting those tax breaks is important to most gay couples who live together.
However, the grandparent is wrong in thinking that the desire to get these particular tax breaks indicates some kind of greed. I don't mean wrong in the factual sense, I mean wrong in the way that should make them ashamed to say such things. If a convicted felon can get the tax break just by getting married, I think it's safe to say we give them out to more or less anyone, regardless of whether they "dilute" societal standards. Wanting to be on the same financial footing as everyone else is not "greed" - it's more like survival instinct.
A strain of paranoid prevention can be worse than the disease, whate'er the intention.
But still...did he write any other books that are nearly as good as Ender's Game?
"sweet dreams are made of this..."
Well, Barry Longyear was alive and well when they made the film "Enemy Mine." While I've only seen bits of the film and barely remember what I did see, I have this worry that I'm going to see Ender brandishing laser rifles Rambo-style and shooting animatronic roaches for the big finale.
he wants to "help" them
equals
those who torment us for our own good
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
-FL
REAL point being that Card often makes no sense! The Alvin Maker books are prime examples. (As far as I got, anyway. By which point I was mightily sick of lugging around a golden anvil.)
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
I am gay, and I still enjoy Card's books. I disagree with his stance on gay marriage. I also respect his right to hold an opinion and his willingness to speak up for his belief system, even if I disagree with it. This is America after all. I've never noticed, in any of his writing that I have read, that he's included those stances which people are offended by. Besides... Karma in action: The screenwriter of that stinker, Troy (I made the token effort of asking for my money back from the theater after that one), will be working on the movie adaptation of what are probably his best-known books. That will teach him! Coyote
Laser rifles Rambi-style? Sign me up.
Blessed are the pessimists, for they have made backups. -- 0 1 My two bits
The best Ender candidate I have ever seen is Thomas Sangster. He played the kid in Love actually - he's like 15 years old but he looks like he's 7. He has a big head too. Check him out:http://www.risingstar.to/tsangster.html
or else!
There's really a problem of terminology happening here. The fact that the situation is very complex means that the tactics involved are very complex... how do you conduct 1 v 1, 1 v 2, 2 v 1, 2 v 2 air/space battles? It also means that the "operational art" is somewhat more complex... how do you manage your entire fleet of air/space vehicles to win the battle? But the "strategy", as it's defined by military science, doesn't care very much about the technology involved... "Engage a portion of the enemy's force with all of your force" is still a valid principle. So is "maintain the unity of command". Even at the tactical level, nothing goes on in Ender's Game that ordinary humans couldn't master today, given a few years training. And operationally/strategically, we already do this stuff.
True today. But for most of the history of air combat, the US and its enemies were roughly equal in technology - in WWII, the US and Axis were about at the same level technologically speaking. Same deal during the Cold War - the Russians were not very far behind us technologically, and they made up for that with redundancy. Soviet airplanes not as good as the American ones? We'll throw more of them at you. But in neither case did it require any kind of superhuman capabilities to figure this stuff out.
Sean
If it was an excuse, I was never able to figure out what the real reason was.
Concur. But I couldn't ever suppress the thought that it was rather unbelievable that the child would be IN the situation postulated, which made it difficult to enjoy the book.
Sean
Incredible story, a golden novel, the best book of many, how I wish the movie will be as good as the book itself, if only it is possible.
Folks, this has everything to do with belief.
As I'll explain, this has nothing to do with belief. It has no impact on churches at all. It has everything to do with constitutionality and law. Belief neutral law.
IMO, it goes too far when marriage is brought up and performed in a religious institution as a religious ceremony.
No one's trying to force churches to do anything. If your church doesn't want to preform gay marriages, fine. You your church doesn't want to preform marriages on thursdays, fine. If there are people inside your church asking for gay marriages or marriages on thursdays, well that's an internal matter. Do it, don't do it, that's up to you guys. You have your religious freedom and I have mine.
If *my* church or synagog or mosque or chaple of the invisible pink elephant wants to preform gay marriages, or marriages on thursdays, well I don't think you have any right to complain about *my* religious ceremonies. And actually at this point it does not even matter whether gay marriages or marriages on thursdays are recognized by law. Hell, I can have a religious ceremony marrying my pet spider. The government may not recognize that as a legal marriage, but you have no right to complain about the ceremony if my religion wants to preform it. It would be a legally meaningless ceremony, but I have the freedom to go through the motions and say 'I Do' to my pet spider.
Either way, no church has to do anything it doesn't want to do. Either way, a church can preform any ceremony it likes. Either way this never has any effect on religions or churches at all. The question is solely about what the law recognizes a marriage. A marriage preformed either at city hall or at *my* religious instutution.
I think the whole use of the word "Marriage" for a homosexual union is what got alot of people really upset.
Well, interracial marriage got a lot of people upset. Obviously that is not itself an argument *for* gay marriage, and people certainly have a right to get upset about anything they want, I'm just pointing out that people being upset has no bearing on legality.
the right of a civil union
Well a heterosexual couples can go to city hall right now and get a "civil union". And by law *all civil unions are marriages*.
As for legally making gays into "civil unions", I think it's far more legally compex than it sounds. It would be no different than trying to make interracial couples into "civil unions". It would be absurd and pointless and I suspect side effects that no one on any side of the issue would like.
Ok, lets FINALLY get to the question of legality of gay marriage. Chuckle. Pretty straightforward really. This is pretty much the legal basis for the Massachusetts court's ruling on the issue: It is unconstututional for the law to discriminate between people on the basis of race or gender or religion. You cannot write a law that discriminates on the basis of race or gender or religion. If you attempt to do so, either the unconstitutional portion is struck down as invalid or the entire law is struck down as invalid.
You can no more have a VALID law that discriminates between marriage applicants on the basis of gender than you can have a law that discriminates between marriage applicants on the basis of race. You can no more write a VALID law to ban gay marriage than you can write a VALID law to ban interracial marriage. Either the unconstitutional disciminiatory portion is null and void and the remaining valid law grants marriages to ANY otherwise qualified applicants, or the ENTIRE law is null and void and NO ONE can obtain a marriage.
The law can discriminate between adults and 8 year old minor applicants, the law can discriminate humans and animal applicants, the law can disciminate between two applicants and three applicants, the law *cannot* discriminate between applicants based on race gender or religion. The law is-and-must-be colorblind and genderblind and religi
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.