Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Ender's Game Trailer Released

Soulskill posted about a year and a half ago | from the enemy's-gate-is-down dept.

Movies 470

The first trailer has been released for the movie adaptation of Orson Scott Card's sci-fi classic Ender's Game. It gives us a good look at Harrison Ford as Colonel Graff, Ben Kingsley as Mazer Rackham, and Hugo's Asa Butterfield as Ender. It also demonstrates just how much money they put into the special effects for this movie.

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

every time i see "Ender's Game" (1, Funny)

who_stole_my_kidneys (1956012) | about a year and a half ago | (#43658307)

i think some one forgot the 'B' at the beginning of the first word.

Re:every time i see "Ender's Game" (0, Offtopic)

Synerg1y (2169962) | about a year and a half ago | (#43658333)

you've never read the books have you?

Ender's game = work of art
Bender's game = shitty animated film

I for one would never think of them in the same thought(s)... except for your post.

Re:every time i see "Ender's Game" (5, Funny)

eternaldoctorwho (2563923) | about a year and a half ago | (#43658383)

Shut up, meatbag! Bender's the best one of the bunch!

Re:every time i see "Ender's Game" (2)

Culture20 (968837) | about a year and a half ago | (#43658679)

"Bender Should Not Be Allowed on TV!" -F.A.R.T.

Elon's Game (1)

sanman2 (928866) | about a year and a half ago | (#43658751)

I think the hero would sound more intelligent with a British or South African accent.

Re:every time i see "Ender's Game" (0, Troll)

gl4ss (559668) | about a year and a half ago | (#43658429)

imho enders game has a lame cheapskate plot, a real cheapskateydyu plot come to think of it. you can pile up all kinds of reasoning why it's brilliant show of how a soldier just follows orders or how parents are full of shit BUT IT'S A REAL FUCKING CHEAPSKATE PLOT - which on the other hand is good reasoning for why "they spent a lot of money on special FX" is actually needed for the movie(if the plot wasn't a cheapskate fast short story plot then the war sim could be a fucking pc with starcraft on it).

btw. I went from the slashdot mainpage to the article to the trailer(I know, I know, should know better than to go to the articles), after getting puzzled at the link(which doesn't have the trailer) I remembered that slashdot has videos now but forgets to mention it in the article text.

any one liners from bender == real art.

Re:every time i see "Ender's Game" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43658517)

True. I never understood the massive praise for 'Ender's Game'. It was kind of fun, but the ending was obvious from about 3/4 of the way through.

As a result, I can't say I have any real urge to see the movie version.

Bean's Game (2)

sanman2 (928866) | about a year and a half ago | (#43658693)

Bean was more badass

Re:every time i see "Ender's Game" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43658523)

agreed, this book is so overrated.
its based on taking the last starfighter too seriously

Re:every time i see "Ender's Game" (5, Insightful)

MozeeToby (1163751) | about a year and a half ago | (#43658639)

I'm not really sure you read the same book I did. Ender's game isn't about "just following orders"... I can't think of a single character who has that as their motivation at any level. Everyone involved is either being lied to and manipulated or is trying to save the world by any means necessary. If you insist on making it about the military, I would take it as an attack on spending soldiers' lives on wars that the soldiers know and care nothing about. Especially since most of the people doing the fighting 'on screen' were drafted into the situation long before they could make that decision for themselves (even genius children can be manipulated).

But really it should be a story of "the ends justify the means" and questioning if they really do or not. Ender's Game is a story about adults who put kids through hell, leading to nervous breakdowns and at least a few deaths. All because they think it's the only way to save the world and in the end not only were they wrong, but their crimes were far worse than we had been led to believe.

Re:every time i see "Ender's Game" (2)

Synerg1y (2169962) | about a year and a half ago | (#43658737)

obvious troll is obvious.

Re:every time i see "Ender's Game" (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43658433)

Ender's Game = more money for a asshole Mormon who hates gays and isn't afraid to use his pocketbook to hurt them. He's a board member of NOM. Any support of Ender's Game is an attack on civil rights.

Re: every time i see "Ender's Game" (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43658491)

That's why I'm going to pirate it.

Actually, can I just pirate a good movie?

Re:every time i see "Ender's Game" (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43658465)

I'll take the shittiest Futurama ever over anything tainted by OSC, thank you very much. I wouldn't piss on his face if his teeth were on fire.

Re:every time i see "Ender's Game" (1, Funny)

Sebastopol (189276) | about a year and a half ago | (#43658467)

FTFY:

Ender's game = hunger games for 13 year old boys

Yes I read the book, I thought it was garbage pulp fantasy for those of limited breadth and imagination.

Re:every time i see "Ender's Game" (0)

chispito (1870390) | about a year and a half ago | (#43658581)

FTFY:

Ender's game = hunger games for 13 year old boys

Yes I read the book, I thought it was garbage pulp fantasy for those of limited breadth and imagination.

Limited breadth? Just how fat are we talking here?

Re: every time i see "Ender's Game" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43658627)

If u read the book you wouldn't be comparing it with that garbage hunger games

Re:every time i see "Ender's Game" (2, Insightful)

Mordok-DestroyerOfWo (1000167) | about a year and a half ago | (#43658593)

With Orson Scott Card's emphatically homophobic [salon.com] world view, I refuse to help finance any of his works.

Re:every time i see "Ender's Game" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43658705)

You are a winner

Re:every time i see "Ender's Game" (1, Insightful)

Synerg1y (2169962) | about a year and a half ago | (#43658775)

What a moronic argument, Nietzsche fucked some animal in a street, does that mean we should disregard him as a philosopher?

Re:every time i see "Ender's Game" (1)

Mordok-DestroyerOfWo (1000167) | about a year and a half ago | (#43658783)

What a moronic argument, Nietzsche fucked some animal in a street, does that mean we should disregard him as a philosopher?

Umm...yes

Re:every time i see "Ender's Game" (2)

Synerg1y (2169962) | about a year and a half ago | (#43658809)

you don't know who Nietzsche is do you?

Re:every time i see "Ender's Game" (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43658865)

What a moronic argument, Nietzsche fucked some animal in a street, does that mean we should disregard him as a philosopher?

You seem to be confusing appreciation of work with the desire to financially support the creator. Your argument would be moronic, sir... the GP doesn't need to disregard Nietzsche to not 'finance any of his works'.

Get it?

Re:every time i see "Ender's Game" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43658821)

Hmm had no idea (and really still do not care). But just because you are like that I will go buy 2 more copies. Just to piss you off.

Re:every time i see "Ender's Game" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43658781)

Mismodded

Re:every time i see "Ender's Game" (0)

westlake (615356) | about a year and a half ago | (#43658925)

i think some one forgot the 'B' at the beginning of the first word.

This has me wondering how much sci-fi the geek has actually read ---- vesus the half dozen or so franchise products he knows from movies and tv.

I'd be excited about this movie, except... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43658325)

I can't stand the thought of giving Orson Scott Card a dime. Sigh. Maybe I can bittorrent.

Re:I'd be excited about this movie, except... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43658425)

This.

Re:I'd be excited about this movie, except... (5, Insightful)

cervesaebraciator (2352888) | about a year and a half ago | (#43658503)

In case you're referring to his political views, I'd have you consider an excerpt from Janis Ian [janisian.com] , a friend of Card's whose personal life is also relevant to the recent controversies surrounding him:

I'm sorry you appear ready to discount or avoid a writer of Card's stature, because I consider Scott one of the finest writers of my generation, period. His short stories about musicians and music are the best I've ever read. What a pity, to deny yourself and your friends the illumination that level of artistry can provide! I suppose we'd also have to discount Wagner because of the Nazi connection? James Joyce and Ezra Pound for their anti-Semitism? Thomas Jefferson, who believed slavery was God-intended? Most, if not all, of the founding fathers, who considered black Africans sub-human? Continuing in that vein, we should probably discount Picasso, a sexist pig. And Beethoven, a royalist and a snob if you ever met one - and if memory serves, an anti-Semite. Not to mention the current pope, who's called homosexuality as big a threat to the world as global warming, and warned that it would destroy civilization as we know it if gays were allowed to marry. Should I discount every faithful Catholic writer, dump Tennessee Williams, Madeleine L'Engel, Flannery O'Connor, because their religion's figurehead is a lunatic? Sorry if you're Catholic... Scratch any artist, in any form, and you'll find things you don't like. You can't judge art by the artist; it has to be judged seperately, on its own merits. The artist himself has to be taken in the context of his times, and of his own culture, including his religion. So long as that art isn't being used to actively cause or promote harm to someone, as in a "Triumph of the Will," I don't think anyone has the right to judge the work by the artist's personal beliefs. But that's my own take. Just for the record, as a gay person who campaigned for and voted for Obama - Obama doesn't think we should be able to marry, either. For many of the same reasons. And I'm sure you're aware of his former pastor's views on not just gays, but whites, and Jews. I have no idea what Obama thinks about gay people, and I fear it's "hate the sin, love the sinner," which I find condescending and disrespectful in the extreme. I'm still glad he's president, and I still think he's an honorable man. Again, I'd hate to think anyone avoided great art just because they disagreed with the artist... On a last note, to say someone is "crazy" or a "lunatic" because they deeply disagree with you, well, that's just as narrow, isn't it? Janis

[Emphasis mine] Appreciate art on its own merits and you'll be the happier for it. Not everything has to be politicized. When everything is politicized, we become incapable of finding common ground with people we disagree with. When we can't even appreciate art together with others who have views we disagree with, how can we ever learn to tolerate each other? How can we have unity amidst diversity if we do not, as Plato said, have a communion of pleasure where we might at least rejoice and mourn over some things we hold common?

Re:I'd be excited about this movie, except... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43658579)

Wagner, Joyce and Pound are dead. And yes, they all should have been boycotted in their time. Obama doesn't label homosexuals as 'abnormal' or link it to paraphilia.

Giving Scott a fucking dime while he's still breathing is validating his disturbing views.

I mean for fuck sakes, the book is highly overrated anyhow.

Re:I'd be excited about this movie, except... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43658837)

For most of their lives the opinions of Wagner, Joyce and Pound were pretty common.

Re:I'd be excited about this movie, except... (4, Funny)

alexander_686 (957440) | about a year and a half ago | (#43658845)

This reminds me of 2 of my ex-girlfriends.
            One would not read The Chronicles of Narnia because she was Christian and the books were not.
              The other would not read them because the books were too Christian.

I am with Cervesaebraciator on this one – judge art on it’s own sake. And if it bugs you too much then borrow the DVD from the local library – Card won’t get too much money that way.

Re:I'd be excited about this movie, except... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43658947)

...and nobody is saying not to judge the 'art' on it's own. It's the matter of giving the despicable bag of flesh that is OSC a single fucking dime.

Re:I'd be excited about this movie, except... (2)

ToadProphet (1148333) | about a year and a half ago | (#43658619)

You seem to be talking about art, while the GP is referring to money. Apparently the GP does indeed appreciate the art but would rather not give his money to an artist he doesn't deem fit to receive it.

Re:I'd be excited about this movie, except... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43658629)

This is very weak argument to ignore his outmoded views. I am not going to turn a blind eye to what someone is or does just because they are an artist.

Re:I'd be excited about this movie, except... (2)

pavon (30274) | about a year and a half ago | (#43658631)

There is a distinction between enjoying art separately from it's creator, and participating in commerce that funds people and organizations that you don't support.

Re:I'd be excited about this movie, except... (1)

runeghost (2509522) | about a year and a half ago | (#43658671)

Exactly. It may be a fine movie, but I don't want any portion of my ticket price to be funding anti-gay hate speech, period.

Re:I'd be excited about this movie, except... (1, Informative)

geoskd (321194) | about a year and a half ago | (#43658867)

Exactly. It may be a fine movie, but I don't want any portion of my ticket price to be funding anti-gay hate speech, period.

Tolerance goes both ways. It is far too easy to claim the high road and seek to prevent those with different viewpoints from being heard. It is another thing entirely to stand and defend a persons right to freedom of speech when you don't like their message. If you can't acknowledge his right to speak his mind, then you are no better than he is.

Re:I'd be excited about this movie, except... (4, Insightful)

sessamoid (165542) | about a year and a half ago | (#43658965)

Exactly. It may be a fine movie, but I don't want any portion of my ticket price to be funding anti-gay hate speech, period.

Tolerance goes both ways. It is far too easy to claim the high road and seek to prevent those with different viewpoints from being heard. It is another thing entirely to stand and defend a persons right to freedom of speech when you don't like their message. If you can't acknowledge his right to speak his mind, then you are no better than he is.

There is a big difference between a person acknowledging his right to speak his mind and buying the megaphone for him to speak it loudly.

Re:I'd be excited about this movie, except... (4, Insightful)

cervesaebraciator (2352888) | about a year and a half ago | (#43658927)

Card has some gay characters in his work and they're portrayed sympathetically (or, at least as much as any other of his characters), so the "anti-gay hate speech" can't be referring to his art. So it must refer to statements he's made on his personal blog, etc.

If this is the case, I can only reconstruct your reasoning thus (please feel free to let me know if I'm missing your point): 1) Card says things I consider reprehensible; 2) Giving him money supports his ability to say reprehensible things; 3) Therefore, if I pay for his work, I am implicated in the reprehensible things he does.

If I am correct in understanding this line of reasoning, it must be a terrible burden to bear. For consistency's sake, it would implicate you in the wrong doing of anyone to whom you pay for services, whether a news-paper editor who runs the local daily, a car mechanic, or a doctor. We could imagine the editor, the doctor, and the mechanic attend rallies on the weekend where they say things we consider reprehensible. But according to this line of thought, by paying for the weekly classified ads, getting bronchitis treated, and having brakes checked, is funding reprehensible speech. To be truly consistent in this line of reasoning, you'd need to evaluate the politics (or morals, if you prefer) of everyone you interact with in civil society before exchanging money with them.

This notion of "funding people [...] you don't support" is totalizing: it politicizes all acts in civil society. One might deem it a good thing to do this, but it is not a step toward a tolerant and diverse society.

Re:I'd be excited about this movie, except... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43658647)

(Different AC here.)

I am judging the art on it's merits. I enjoyed Ender's Game. The movie will probably be at least worth watching once. There's a difference between liking someone's art and being willing to give them money for it.

Re:I'd be excited about this movie, except... (2)

cervesaebraciator (2352888) | about a year and a half ago | (#43658719)

I think there are some very good reasons for pirating, opposing current copyright law, etc. I do not think the fact that the artist who produced something you enjoyed is one of those reasons.

Re:I'd be excited about this movie, except... (1)

cervesaebraciator (2352888) | about a year and a half ago | (#43658731)

Apologies: that should read, "I do not think that the artist who produced something you enjoyed might get paid is one of those reasons.

Re:I'd be excited about this movie, except... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43658815)

Apparently, the preceding AC does think that --- perhaps from a "chaotic good" vs. "lawful evil" perspective. Not everyone's moral system need consider overarching legalistic formalisms (e.g. proper forms for copyright law) to be the foundation for determining right action.

Re:I'd be excited about this movie, except... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43658699)

Nevermind the fact that OP wanted to see the movie, he was just reluctant to send money OSC's way...

You can judge art by the artist if you want to. And given how much of the artists' soul lives in the art, I don't see why you shouldn't. After all, when you imbibe culture you give it life. You also put yourself in debt to the artist. When that artist was a racist who probably considered you sub-human, it's perfectly reasonable to shun their art.

Why have unity for unity's sake if it means uniting with those you consider evil? Have the balls to reject what you reject.

Fuck Wager, fuck Heidegger, fuck von Karajan. May they all be forgotten.

Re:I'd be excited about this movie, except... (1)

bargainsale (1038112) | about a year and a half ago | (#43658811)

Anybody who thinks James Joyce was antisemitic plainly hasn't done the research - in particular, hasn't read Ulysses. Or even seen a synopsis of the plot ...

General point is right, though. Which proves that even people who don't bother checking facts get it right sometimes.

Not difficult to construct a list of horrible people who made great novels, great poetry, great art ... but then only people who think that Art can play the role of morality or religion should be surprised.

Re:I'd be excited about this movie, except... (5, Interesting)

znanue (2782675) | about a year and a half ago | (#43658903)

The most fascinating part of this, for me, is that I connected with Ender's Game more easily as a young adolescent precisely because I was gay and understood how harsh and how quickly a child has to grow up. I also understood empathizing with my enemy, my enemy not understanding the degree of harm he was doing to me, and not trusting adults or authorities.

I also keenly felt the idea of being tested in subtle ways, in manipulating adults and politics with their own fears, and deeply appreciated the affects of demagoguery before I even knew what it was called.

I felt like Orson Scott Card so deeply understood the plight of being a bright, homosexual child with more self-awareness and introspection than many an adult, that I was shocked to find out that he was so antagonistic to it. This was after I read Speaker of the Dead which seems to so perfectly capture that sensation of oppression.

Maybe my sense of connecting with the author and his general outlook on human emotion was so great, that to find out he is as homophobic as he is caused a deep-seated sensation of betrayal and cognitive dissonance. Also, I don't even want to separate my knowledge of the artist from the art, which is a topic worthy of an essay itself.

Also, I feel that while it seems a bit pushy and bitchy, and will evoke the typical "uppity homosexual" response, complaining about a popular person's homophobia and suggesting that they, and even their art, be considered as lesser because of it, still seems to me to be an effective way at showing strength and causing people to realize the tenuousness of their position.

No art or artist is held to account for all their crimes, and in the fullness of time people will forgive Card as a fuddy duddy for his homophobia, but in the here and now where it has extreme political relevance to my life and the lives of hundreds of thousands of people on this globe, I say he is an ass for his views and I do not wish to patronize him. Let the future enjoy him unfettered by these concerns like I can enjoy Wagner now.

Re:I'd be excited about this movie, except... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43658547)

Don't worry too much; if the Hollywood accountants have done their job right, Card will owe them a few million dollars at the end of the day.

Re:I'd be excited about this movie, except... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43658559)

I wouldn't be surprised if he's closeted.

His books are so-so, too. Ender's Game was his best, and even that failed to rise to the level of literature. He's no better than Frank Herbert, which I don't intend as a compliment.

Pointless (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43658343)

Provide a link perhaps?

Re:Pointless (2)

darkonc (47285) | about a year and a half ago | (#43658485)

You mean like the trailer at the top of the page?
It's not mentioned in the text of the article, but it's there when you go to post.

Re: Pointless (1)

jaminJay (1198469) | about a year and a half ago | (#43658951)

Not if you've had the "touch" site thrust upon you...

Re: Pointless (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43658667)

Where is the link?

Re: Pointless (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43658829)

Don't worry about it. If you can't figure out something this simple, it's not for you. Remember to wipe your drool!

FX spaceships are cheap (4, Insightful)

Animats (122034) | about a year and a half ago | (#43658345)

FX spaceships are cheap. The effects are no better than Iron Sky. Since this has Big Name Actors, they probably spent too much.

In the book, the adults barely appear. But if they paid for Harrison Ford, they probably let him talk too much.

Re:FX spaceships are cheap (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43658441)

FX spaceships are cheap. The effects are no better than Iron Sky. Since this has Big Name Actors, they probably spent too much.

In the book, the adults barely appear. But if they paid for Harrison Ford, they probably let him talk too much.

Just wait til the narrated cut comes out.

Re:FX spaceships are cheap (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43658451)

In the book, the adults barely appear. But if they paid for Harrison Ford, they probably let him talk too much.

Why do you assume they'd need Ford to play an adult? With good makeup artists, you can do pretty much anything. They could have Ford playing Ender's desk chair.

Re:FX spaceships are cheap (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43658633)

That would be an interesting twist on all the boy on boy action in Ender's Game.

Re:FX spaceships are cheap (2)

Demonantis (1340557) | about a year and a half ago | (#43658979)

I felt like it looked like Star Trek. I think I even saw Nero. I hope they actually tell the story and don't trim away the complex parts to appeal to a broader audience.

bad (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43658357)

looks like shit

Auto-complain activated! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43658367)

SWEET! Now we can properly bitch about how much it sucks compared to the memories of something we read when we were younger and more impressionable!

I mean, we could do that before, but now that the trailer's been actually released, we can put up a false air of authority as we do so! And we don't even have to watch it, either!

Points at Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43658407)

Hideki!

Trailer Link (1, Informative)

DrkShadow (72055) | about a year and a half ago | (#43658377)

Re: Trailer Link (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43658713)

Thank you the link and video in the article did not show up on my galaxy s3

If my kids don't have this downloaded by Nov 1... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43658411)

If my kids haven't downloaded this by Nov 1, I'll know they weren't paying attention when I read them the book.

I can't see it. (4, Insightful)

darkonc (47285) | about a year and a half ago | (#43658427)

This is one book that I couldn't see Hollywood doing justice to. The trailer doesn't really leave me feeling any better about it. Lots of nice effects, but I think it's going to come out all bubble-gum.

Re:I can't see it. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43658541)

I wonder how much of the raw violence is going to be stripped out. The story is nothing if they take out the reason for the training, to desensitize soldiers from what they're doing.

Re:I can't see it. (3, Insightful)

Attila Dimedici (1036002) | about a year and a half ago | (#43658553)

Yeah, I wonder if they ruin it by missing the point the way the did with with David Brin's "Postman" (which would have won the Hugo and Nebula had it come out any other year).

Re:I can't see it. (1)

Mazda6s (904056) | about a year and a half ago | (#43658659)

This is one book that I couldn't see Hollywood doing justice to. The trailer doesn't really leave me feeling any better about it. Lots of nice effects, but I think it's going to come out all bubble-gum.

I agree. This looks like it changes the entire feel that OSC was trying to convey. I wonder if he decided he needed the money...

Re:I can't see it. (2)

ArsonSmith (13997) | about a year and a half ago | (#43658901)

10 years ago I would have said for sure they were just going to screw it up. Things have changed a lot in Hollywood. Where as before I would have given it a 10% chance of being any good, these days I give it closer to 50-50%

F22s (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43658473)

Were those F22s at the beginning?

Looks like it might be good and not just another action movie in space.

PS what's the deal with Kingsley's makeup? Was that in the book? I don't recall.

Re:F22s (2)

X0563511 (793323) | about a year and a half ago | (#43658599)

I was kind of confused about that too. Still are.

I don't understand what relativistic deep space combat has to do with F22s in atmosphere.

Re:F22s (2)

runeghost (2509522) | about a year and a half ago | (#43658739)

Perhaps they were trying to invoke that sci-fi classic, Independence Day? :-D

Re:F22s (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43658789)

*shudder*

Re:F22s (2)

nickersonm (1646933) | about a year and a half ago | (#43658875)

All that stuff in atmosphere is presumably part of a recap of the invasion of Earth.

Re:F22s (1)

DanTheStone (1212500) | about a year and a half ago | (#43658773)

I believe that's supposed to be showing when humans were attacked, prior to the events of the book.

Re:F22s (4, Informative)

HPHatecraft (2748003) | about a year and a half ago | (#43658937)

Mazer Rackham is Maori -- the facial tattoo is typically applied to the face if you are a male.

The actual link (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43658497)

Climax (1)

addie (470476) | about a year and a half ago | (#43658505)

Just in case anyone didn't know how it all ends, they were kind enough to put the climax directly in the trailer. I'll withhold judgement on the film itself, but that trailer didn't do it for me.

Re:Climax (4, Insightful)

runeghost (2509522) | about a year and a half ago | (#43658689)

That's not the climax. The climax is when Ender realizes what he's actually done. Since it's a morally complex point, I have little doubt that part will be cut from the film.

Re:Climax (1)

HPHatecraft (2748003) | about a year and a half ago | (#43658869)

Meh, I'll just hold out for the Swedish version -- you know, the one this film is a remake of ;-)

Re:Climax (1, Interesting)

Fallen Kell (165468) | about a year and a half ago | (#43658957)

Actually that wasn't the climax... The climax was later /







The climax was Ender realizing that it wasn't a video game simulation, but that it was actually real and he just destroyed the homeworld of another species, killing billions, and more importantly, killing the only ones that had brains.

Torn (2)

MozeeToby (1163751) | about a year and a half ago | (#43658519)

On the one hand, I really did enjoy Ender's Game and Ender's Shadow as a kid (and to a lesser extent the other books in the series). On the other hand, art does not exist in a vacuum and I really do have a hard time separating Card's homophobic views from his works; especially since, in retrospect they do creep into his books at least occasionally.

On the gripping hand, this will almost certainly be a dud. It won't live up to the expectations and hopes of those who wanted the movie made 20 years ago and it won't have much appeal to the others.

Re:Torn (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43658695)

Ender's Game was pretty good. The rest of the series was crap.

Re:Torn (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43658701)

Honestly, I'm kind of tired of hearing this line about Card's views versus his art. Most good artists, in any medium, are kind of nutty. They're not all going to be the types of nuts that you like, but that's life. If I had a nickel for every time some homophobic religious nut watched a movie written and directed by a gay environmentalist, I could afford to educate you better.

Re:Torn (1)

Moridineas (213502) | about a year and a half ago | (#43658893)

On the other hand, art does not exist in a vacuum and I really do have a hard time separating Card's homophobic views from his works; especially since, in retrospect they do creep into his books at least occasionally.

Just out of curiosity, where do you see this? For full disclose, I enjoy the works of plenty of artists, actors, and musicians whose personal views I find abhorrent. I enjoy Card's books (Enchantment is one of my favorite novels), and I'll leave it at that.

It's been quite some time since I've read many of Card's books, but if I recall the extended Ender universe has non-evil and non-stereotypical gay characters. The Earthfall books had at least one gay character who was good. One of the characters in that series (a scientist) even explained that homosexuality had to do with conditions in the womb and wasn't a choice (it's been a long time since I've read this, so I could be slightly off).

I've never read it, but Card's book Songmaster [wikipedia.org] apparently deals with homosexuality to a large extent. I remember a friend of mine called it the "gayest" book he had ever read (she meant that in a positive way).

Where do you see Card's negativity towards homosexuality?

starship troopers (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43658527)

well, it has to be better than starship troopers movie.

Orson Scott Card is a bigot (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43658583)

Card has consistently attacked homosexuals and fought against gay rights, including some damn awful language. Before you see this movie in the theater, google "Orson Scott Card" and "gay rights", and decide if you want to give your money to someone who will actively use it to promote hate speech.

Actions like this make me support him (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43658887)

I do not care about his opinions - I just like to read what he writes.

And I am fed up with gay activists concentrating on someone's opinions instead of works.

Such actions make me vote anti-gay any time.

Gays can have their parades, he can have his blabbing - this is a free country.

Slashdot really has changed... (1)

necro351 (593591) | about a year and a half ago | (#43658607)

They finally make an Ender's Game movie and it gets 34 some odd replies on Slashdot? Wow, the audience here has really changed...

Re:Slashdot really has changed... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43658721)

Yeah, apparently they're all gay now, since everybody's talking about OSC's religious beliefs.

Re:Slashdot really has changed... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43658805)

they're all gay now

Only homophobes aren't gay yet.

Re:Slashdot really has changed... (1, Interesting)

JeffElkins (977243) | about a year and a half ago | (#43658813)

This. Please mod up. Also sad to see Slashdot become a hope for politically correct groupthink.

Re:Slashdot really has changed... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43658843)

This. Please mod up. Also sad to see Slashdot become a hope for politically correct groupthink.

Right, because not supporting the views of a religious bigot makes you politically correct.

Re:Slashdot really has changed... (1)

JeffElkins (977243) | about a year and a half ago | (#43658847)

Home, not hope. Card is not hater/homophobe. See the Janis Ian link above.

Re:Slashdot really has changed... (0)

NeutronCowboy (896098) | about a year and a half ago | (#43658959)

You misread the Janis Ian link. Card is a card-carrying (nyuck nyuck) homophobe who is all about using state-sponsored violence to eradicate homosexuals. Janis is arguing that that should not dissuade people from reading and appreciating his work. I disagree even with that statement, as it would require that I financially support him.

Re:Slashdot really has changed... (1)

dwye (1127395) | about a year and a half ago | (#43658831)

It was 7 when I first looked. Give it time. OTOH, I doubt that an article on the first trailer will get into the 300+ levels. It was not nearly as good as the first trailer for the original Superman was (which came out 18 months before the movie, and the big news was that they got Marlon Brando to appear in it, not its subject or its "star").

I'm already disappointed (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43658763)

Ender's game is a fine bildungsroman, one of the best I read. This movie looks like yet another action movie saturated with high-contrast detail and grim color theme. It doesn't even look realistic.

Wait, who is in it? (0)

Rob_Bryerton (606093) | about a year and a half ago | (#43658943)

Wait, who is in it?

Asa Butterfield as Ender.

Before I saw the last name, I read it as Asa Akira. Now THAT is a movie I would go see!

Sorry...

Now waiting for someone to make it inception style (1)

Maxo-Texas (864189) | about a year and a half ago | (#43658955)

It's the perfect length....

Just have to lay the music over it.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?