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*

25 of 507 comments (clear)

  1. Hemos: by Tim_F · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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?

    1. Re:Hemos: by WIAKywbfatw · · Score: 5, Informative

      on an unrelated note: kudo points for a creative spelling of favorite.

      Uh, that's how most of the English-speaking worlds spells the word. Unless I am very much mistaken, it's only the US (and US dependencies) where the spelling "favorite" is used instead of "favourite".

      --

      "Accept that some days you are the pigeon, and some days you are the statue." - David Brent, Wernham Hogg
  2. Well, I think that explains by ChipMonk · · Score: 4, Funny

    the rather shocked expression on the face by the posting.

  3. Re:LOL... by WormholeFiend · · Score: 4, Funny

    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

    As long as they get Hayden Christensen to play Ender in the sequel movie Speaker for the Dead, I have no problem with this.

  4. "a long time"? by FooAtWFU · · Score: 4, Interesting
    The rumours have been out there "a long time"? That's an understatement. I swear, there are USENET postings from 1992 on the topic.

    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.
  5. Re:Enders Game (the book) by kin_korn_karn · · Score: 4, Insightful

    A lot of people in the 'geek community' that gave this book rave reviews and SF awards also had childhood experiences similar to Ender's, where they were used for various selfish purposes by the adults in their life. If you didn't go through something like that, the book will resonate less with you.

  6. Re:Wouldn't go, anyhow. by Skyshadow · · Score: 4, Insightful
    I assume he's referring to Card's rantings against gay marriage, which aren't hard to find if you go hit Google.

    I've got to admit, I'm a little torn about this myself. It tears me up a bit to think that my patronage of this man's works (I've bought a lot of his books) has enriched someone who uses his money and fame to soapbox out his (IMO) detestable position.

    You can argue that the movie itself is not directly associated with his position, but that seems like a bit of a cop-out. It'd be like buying cookies when the proceeds go to benefit the Klan -- even if what you're doing is innocent, the cause it supports isn't any less vile.

    Anyhow, I figure that this won't be a big deal since it sounds like the movie's going to suck.

    --
    Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
  7. Fears I have about the film by Chairboy · · Score: 5, Funny

    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)

    1. Re:Fears I have about the film by jonastullus · · Score: 4, Funny

      you seem to be very much in touch with your worst nightmares.
      maybe you should do some script writing for george lucas there!

      BTW, those visions were awful, damn close to my personal nightmare of an ender's game movie adaptation. thanks for bringing this up so early, so i won't be shocked when the final film will actually be even worse!

      jethr0

  8. Too bad they didn't pick the good version. by argent · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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.

  9. 25th Hour as well by GunFodder · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

  10. Re:Disappointed by Ender's Shadow? by JayBlalock · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Since the Shadow books are told from Bean's point of view, of course he'll be critical of Ender's actions. I thought the entire point of Shadow was that, while Bean was technically smarter and more competent, he utterly lacked the people skills necessary to get the job done. Ender succeeded for the reason he was selected in the first place - his combination of Peter's ruthlessness AND Val's empathy. He had to be *balanced* in these things to win, and Bean would have failed in the end just as Val or Peter would have. What I took away from the book was that it emphasized even more Ender's flawed humanity and how, ultimately, those flaws were needed instead of simple machine-like perfection.

    Don't forget, BTW, that while Bean had awesome deductive powers, he could also get off on wildly incorrect tangents precisely because he was too self-reliant. Unwilling to really trust any source outside of his own head, he lacked any real "reality check," and that too would have likely proven fatal had he been the child chosen.

    (don't take this as uncritical praise of Card, BTW. He seems to have a long history of taking a good idea and then running it deep into the ground. I was disappointed in Shadow Puppets and, while I haven't read Shadow of the Giant yet, I have a sinking feeling that he'll end up torpedoing the series by the end, just as he did the "Ender Saga")

    --
    Bush: He's Liberal in all the wrong ways.
  11. Basic Plot Inaccuracies? by Ieshan · · Score: 4, Informative

    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.

    1. Re:Basic Plot Inaccuracies? by DarkFencer · · Score: 4, Insightful

      At some point, when you are going to differentiate SO MUCH from the original story - that's when you should just create your own fucking story with a new title.

    2. Re:Basic Plot Inaccuracies? by DarkSarin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think the point is that we are discussing making a movie based on a book (Ender's Game). The guys they are hiring to script it just finished doing something similar, and weren't very good as sticking close to the source.

      The concern then, since you seem to have missed it, is that they will not stick close to the book (Ender's Game) when they do this movie, and it will not, by extension, be as good as the original (since his point is that the movie's aren't as good as the original--whether or not you agree).

      So the point is this: did the changes they make enhance the story, give it more depth and help it along, or did the changes merely dumb it down for the masses?

      Related to this point is this: since Card is alive (and well) at this time, how much say does he get in these movies? After all, if he is directly involved, they are much more likely to, if nothing else, stay close to what he intended. Which is what I want to see. I don't care if there are minor changes (even in the dialog), but I DO care if the intent is changed.

      That's why I like the LOTR movies--they make it about telling a story--not some political mumbo-jumbo. I think Tolkien would have been moderately pleased with the movies, had he been around for them.

      I think that if they screw with the plot on this one, Card will be ticked. Keep it close to the original (in this case), and the movie will be good. Otherwise, no show.

      --
      "We don't know what we are doing, but we are doing it very carefully,..." Wherry, R.J. Personnel Psychology (1995)
    3. Re:Basic Plot Inaccuracies? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      At some point, when you are going to differentiate SO MUCH from the original story - that's when you should just create your own f'ing story with a new title.

      Umm, you mean like calling it "Troy," instead of calling it "The Illiad?"

    4. Re:Basic Plot Inaccuracies? by 2nd+Post! · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Where do you get that Shakespeare is the cream?

      He was popular and funny and accessible. If I were to compare his works to anyone today, it would be Andrew Lloyd Weber.

  12. There is still a chance... by oren · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ... that this will be a good movie. I heard OSC give a talk where he refered to the movie, about two years back. It sounded as though he was going to great lengths to ensure Holywood doesn't ruin it.

    It seems he once (almost) sold the movie rights, and as soon as the ink was on paper the studio started making changes like raising the age of the actors to teenagers, adding romantic interest, changing the plot to add a final confrontation between Peter and Ender, and so on. When he protested, they pointed out that the contract gives them the final say on the script. If you want an idea of how bad it would have been, think "Starship Troopers".

    That deal fell through for various reasons, and he swore that next time he'll make sure he has the final say. That's one of the reasons it took so long for the movie to get started - he absolutely insisted that the children be played by, well, children, that the script will not be butchered, etc.

    Another reason is that he wanted to wait until special effects caught up with people's expectations - specifically, getting the battle room scenes right. If you give it a moment's thought, you'll see that this is very, very hard. A *lot* of people at arbitrary orientations very energetically trying to shoot each other out of the sky, creating formations, hiding and launching from the "stars", all in believable zero-G... I can't wait for "the making of" DVD :-)

    At any rate, OSC made it clear he'll have the final word on the movie, otherwise there would be no movie (it isn't as though he needs the money :-). As long as he keeps his word, getting a professional *cough* script writer involved is actually a good thing; books and movies are very different mediums, so being a book good writer doesn't automatically make one a good script writer.

  13. Expand your awareness ... by Chromodromic · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Well, gosh, with Troy under his belt, all my concerns about the movie sucking are straight out! *cough*

    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
  14. All political movements are "incrementalist" by aristus · · Score: 4, Interesting
    They have to be. That doesn't make them evil, sneaky, etc. Read up on the history of post-Goldwater Republicanism and expecially that inspired lunatic Ralph Reed. If you have a problem with the "agenda", fine, but there are a *lot* of tactics in common between the so-called Moral Majority and the icky Rainbow People.

    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
  15. Re:Wouldn't go, anyhow. by Richthofen80 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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
  16. OSC recently commented on this movie by DoctoRoR · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Uncle Orson talked about this movie at a signing a week ago. Here is the gist of his comments:

    • He's rejected quite a few contracts that try to use older characters. He would catch little clauses like the producers reserve the right to make modifications of age.
    • While this movie sits in purgatory, possible lead actors age themselves out of the picture. OSC, though, is confident the actor who will play Ender has indeed been born :)
    • They had to combine Ender's Game with Ender's Shadow in order to get at Ender's inner thoughts. If you look at Ender from the outside, OSC said, he just looks like an angry, dangerous boy.
    • He trashed Lucas and the new Star Wars films and thought Ender's Game, when it's finally made, will have a substantially better storyline.
  17. From a recent OSC talk by banesong · · Score: 5, Informative

    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.

  18. Re:Wouldn't go, anyhow. by Jim_Callahan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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. ~
  19. Re:Wouldn't go, anyhow. by jafac · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.