Ender's Game Author Asks For Tolerance After Boycott Threat

[Diana Kingston-Gabai]

Enders Game though.....was and is a great book, and I hope it will be a great movie. You are not "supporting" Orson Scott Card by watching it...other then possibly opening the door to a sequel, as to make a movie they have to pay for the rights to use the book up front. It's part of the cost of producing the movie...and it's very unlikely that Card will see a dime of any profits (if there even are any) from the movie.

Really? Can you guarantee that? Have you read his contract with the studio? Because it's far more likely he's entitled to a certain percentage of the film's overall profits, which is exactly the point of the boycott - he tithes a specific amount of his earnings to the National Organization for Marriage. By paying to see this film, you are indirectly putting money in the pocket of a group that devotes 100% of its time and resources to combating against the granting of civil rights for a specific minority.

Or, put more simply: Your money -> Lionsgate -> Orson Scott Card -> NOM.

 

[HyenaThePirate]

Here's a question.

A boycott against Card for allowing his personal beliefs to define himself as a public figure might be justifiable depending on which side of the argument you fall on.

But what about the other people who don't share Card's point of view that are involved in the film that could be hurt by the boycott? The actors. The producers. The special effects people.

This isn't just a film, it's also a livelihood for a bunch of people. Funny how it's NOT okay for someone to have a negative personal belief but it IS okay to collaterally harm ANYONE that might be associated with that person..

So yeah, I think tolerance is in order. After all, tolerance doesn't have to have conditions. Being tolerant means RESPECTING someone's opinion. Even if they weren't tolerant. You can't play fast and loose with the definition so that it suits your liking. You can't DEMAND tolerance and then turn around and be overtly INTOLERANT.

It really is that simple.

Edit: Another thought occurs to me. People overestimate the pro-gay equality lobby. More people could care less if Gays get married as it doesn't effect them. That doesn't mean they actually support homosexuality or even like gays, just that they don't support restricting them.

But you know what people support more? People's RIGHTS TO BELIEVE what ever they WANT.

I'll cite you one prominent and recent example: CHICK FIL-A. Remember how everyone was gonna boycott them because one guy in their corporation said he disagreed with gay marriage when asked point blank about it in an interview? Does anyone remember how that turned out?? In fact, didn't the reverse happen and they ended up with FAR more support than ever and the boycott suffered a public and humiliating defeat?

Yeah, the last thing I think anyone wants to do is turn this movie into a blockbuster smash hit not because the story and visuals were breathtaking cinema, but simply because butts got put in seats due to political controversy.

 

[ellieallegro]

Card is just a sad little man who is trying to stay relevant in his old age. It's sad, really. Yes, his first book is a great work, no question... but so is alot of other works by questionable artists who happen to be bigoted jerks. It doesn't diminish my enjoyment of their works but it does inform my critique and support of them. I will catch the movie eventually when it comes out on netflix but I'm not rushing to support it in the theater.

He has the right to his bigoted opinion. Just as I have the right to refer to Ender's Game as a great book... that was written by a bigoted jerk rather than just "a great book".

 

[1337mokro]

That's right Pickapok is a being made out of lots of polygons! He has so much more emotions than you do toaster! A short joke to bring some levity to this discussion.

If Ender's Game does well and we don't get that movie. What then? You will have supported a person who most likely after the success of his movie will revert right back to his earlier ways in the vain hope of catching a carrot.

Why not just support Pacific Rim? Why bother also supporting Enders Game? If everyone who boycotts Enders Game goes out to see Pacific Rim instead you'd have the same effect. Doing something that gives money to a person who has the potential and the history of wanting to harm and oppress others is never justifiable just because there is a dangling carrot in the distance.

Why don't we just let Hollywood die and see what rises from the ashes? Maybe a less racist, misogynistic, stupid industry will take it's place.

I have all the polygons.

Pacific Rim and Ender's Game won't be in theatres at the same time. Aside from that, the same goes for the flip side of the coin. What if the boycott doesn't catch on and Ender's Game still makes a ton of money? What then? You may not have added your support to the film but in the end it didn't make that much of a difference at all. "But at least he didn't get any of MY money," you might say. "But at least I tried!"

And that would be my response to the possible outcome you presented. "At least I tried."

Your failure state:

At least you tried, you supported someone who campaigns for things you despise in the hope you would get a different movie. You didn't even really want to see Enders Game (just adding to the disappointment here) but it was all in the hope for that other movie that never appeared. A new anti-gay campaign is funded using the money that Card got for this movie. Your money is partially used to fund that campaign and a trip to the hooters bar.

My failure state:

At least you tried, you did not support someone who campaigns for things you despise. Sadly not enough people thought like you and the movie was still a financial success. You are now getting to see At the Mountains of Madness from an author who did not hold any such hateful views and/or is no longer alive to campaign in favour of them. A new anti-gay campaign is funded using the money that Card got for this movie. None of yours went towards it.

I like my failure state allot better. However let's look at the success states.

Yours:

You went to see Enders game, it was a great movie and instilled trust in weird sci-fi concepts. The film was a box office block buster hit and Card got rich of the movie. He immediately does a heal turn and funds more anti-gay campaigns. Continuing like he has done for decades now. Everything is alright though because now that movie you really wanted is being made.

Mine:

You didn't go to see Enders game, so did millions of others who would have gone to see it. The film tanked harder than the Lone Ranger and John Carter combined. Instead everyone went to see Pacific Rim, supporting Guillermo directly without having to lower themselves because of the shiny carrot dangling in-front of themselves. The studios green-light his next movie. Card is forced to reconcile himself with a changing environment, becoming either less vocal or a recluse who surrounds himself with people who think the same as he does in the LDS church. Of course anti-gay campaigns will still be run, but there is at least one less to be worried about.

It's funny how both my failure and success states end up benefiting more people with less suffering overall than yours

EMOTIONS!

 

[bravetoaster]

Please don't insult me or my emotional capacity. I am very capable of feeling just as pissed off as everybody else and by all means, be pissed off at Card as much as you want. But by boycotting this film people are doing more damage to the state of Hollywood as a whole than they are to Card himself. Hollywood needs good stories and good storytelling. You always hear that consumers vote with their wallets and that is very much true. Right now the message that Hollywood is getting is that the people want mindless explosions and action in the style of Michael Bay and that's killing creativity in film. It's part of the reason why so many of the great directors and actors have fled to make amazing television series like Hannibal and Game of Thrones.

Forget about Card. If we help Ender's Game become a success, who knows what we could see next? If both this film and Pcific Rim do well then we could finally see that At the Mountains of Madness film Guillermo Del Toro has been wanting to make for ages now.

That wasn't meant as an insult, nor do I know why you (or anyone) would take it as such.

Hollywood, I assure you, is unfazed by anything you or I or basically any group of normal people could ever do. Moreover, films are not exclusively made by a monolithic entity that is "Hollywood" and there is not a single variety of film being made even within the main Hollywood studio system. Michael Bay is not destroying creativity or ruining the world, nor does any part of that argument make actual sense.

Moreover, there is nothing you or I can do to make Ender's Game a success. It will be successful, financially, regardless of anything anyone does (if, somehow, not massively so in theaters, it will still makes its money back and a tidy profit). It is one of the bestselling books of our lifetime, has a massive, loyal fanbase, and the film is loaded with big names and flashy special effects to draw in people who've never heard of it. It is an incredibly accessible story with enough of an interesting bit at the end to make the average person feel like they've read/watched something clever and are, themselves, clever.

There's no valid reason or rationale to think that my dislike of a shitty person and personal decision to not give him my money affects the realization of your for your favorite film fantasies.

 

[1337mokro]

Here's a question.

A boycott against Card for allowing his personal beliefs to define himself as a public figure might be justifiable depending on which side of the argument you fall on.

But what about the other people who don't share Card's point of view that are involved in the film that could be hurt by the boycott? The actors. The producers. The special effects people.

This isn't just a film, it's also a livelihood for a bunch of people. Funny how it's NOT okay for someone to have a negative personal belief but it IS okay to collaterally harm ANYONE that might be associated with that person..

So yeah, I think tolerance is in order. After all, tolerance doesn't have to have conditions. Being tolerant means RESPECTING someone's opinion. Even if they weren't tolerant. You can't play fast and loose with the definition so that it suits your liking. You can't DEMAND tolerance and then turn around and be overtly INTOLERANT.

It really is that simple.

Those people still get paid regardless.

The only people that lose money are the studios. Who are always at risk for losing money.

The same argument you use here could be used for every BAD movie ever made.

"Everyone who didn't go see the Lone Ranger should really think about the poor producers and investors who lost money on reviving an old time classic. Sure they fucked it up royally and screwed up everything about the characters, but hey, someone somewhere will lose money because you didn't go to see it anyway and you should feel bad."

The cameraman is not losing sleep over if a movie will be a success or not. He already gets paid by the hour and the actors get paid for each contract signed.

Being tolerant of intolerance is a paradox. If someone goes up to you and tells you he hates your face and is going to make it illegal for you to walk around in public without a bag over your head, you aren't going to respect this man's "Beliefs"/"Ideas".

You are going to tell him to fuck off and take his bullshit somewhere else.

If tolerance means respect, then like respect tolerance should be EARNED, not expected.

 

[wulfy42]

Enders Game though.....was and is a great book, and I hope it will be a great movie. You are not "supporting" Orson Scott Card by watching it...other then possibly opening the door to a sequel, as to make a movie they have to pay for the rights to use the book up front. It's part of the cost of producing the movie...and it's very unlikely that Card will see a dime of any profits (if there even are any) from the movie.

Really? Can you guarantee that? Have you read his contract with the studio? Because it's far more likely he's entitled to a certain percentage of the film's overall profits, which is exactly the point of the boycott - he tithes a specific amount of his earnings to the National Organization for Marriage. By paying to see this film, you are indirectly putting money in the pocket of a group that devotes 100% of its time and resources to combating against the granting of civil rights for a specific minority.

Or, put more simply: Your money -> Lionsgate -> Orson Scott Card -> NOM.

Lol.

First....it's POSSIBLE I guess that he'd get a percentage of profits...but how often has that happened in the past? More tot he point, why would he agree to such horrible terms. Now he may be getting BOTH a percentage of profits (which is a very risky proposition for movies btw), and a flat payment up front. That is more likely, but I still say in most cases the author gets paid up front and that is part of the production cost of the movie. I certainly would not bet on Ender's game having a high profit though as it has high production costs and I believe it will be mostly a nitch film as far as who watches it.

If you don't want to see the movie....don't see it. Whatever your reason is for not wanting to see it. If you don't like the author of the story behind the movie...that is just as valid a reason as not liking an Actor in a movie. But, if your trying to hurt Orson Scott Card....you are certainly not going to hurt him by boycotting this movie. He has plenty of money from his books already....and he almost certainly has already been paid for the movie as well.

I'll watch the movie...probably...although I may wait for on Demand. I do that with most movies at this point anyway. I think movie theators are becoming obsolete. I have as good, or better experience watching movies at home. With my wife and friends and even paying on demand prices (and not redbox or using netflix etc), It's only $6 for ALL of us to watch the movie vs at least $50 if we go to the theator. We are all comfy in our chairs, can pause at any time, can have our favorite snacks/drinks...or even a meal while watching.

So yeah, I'd boycott movies in general in the theator at this point....before boycotting a movie because of an authors views on a silly subject. As I said above..the whole marriage thing is rediculous, the goverment should not be involved in it anyway...which takes care of the whole...right to gay marriage. You have no right to be married.....gay or straight.....because the goverment should not have anything to do with marriage. It should be totally up to your religion..and your own beliefs. That is what should determine marriage...not what politicians say.

 

[bravetoaster]

Here's a question.

A boycott against Card for allowing his personal beliefs to define himself as a public figure might be justifiable depending on which side of the argument you fall on.

But what about the other people who don't share Card's point of view that are involved in the film that could be hurt by the boycott? The actors. The producers. The special effects people.

This isn't just a film, it's also a livelihood for a bunch of people. Funny how it's NOT okay for someone to have a negative personal belief but it IS okay to collaterally harm ANYONE that might be associated with that person..

So yeah, I think tolerance is in order. After all, tolerance doesn't have to have conditions. Being tolerant means RESPECTING someone's opinion. Even if they weren't tolerant. You can't play fast and loose with the definition so that it suits your liking. You can't DEMAND tolerance and then turn around and be overtly INTOLERANT.

It really is that simple.

...are you somehow under the impression that people work on a film for free, then only get paid after the fact, depending on how well a film does? Those actors, special effects people, and everyone working their butts off to build sets and light scenes and make things look fancy and shiny and pretty for the screen--they get paid. They do their job, get paid, and go onto their next job.

 

[HyenaThePirate]

Being tolerant of intolerance is a paradox. If someone goes up to you and tells you he hates your face and is going to make it illegal for you to walk around in public without a bag over your head, you aren't going to respect this man's "Belief"/"Ideas".

You are going to tell him to fuck off and take his bullshit somewhere else.

Yes, but I'm not going to spend the rest of my life trying to destroy HIM for HIS beliefs. I'm going to tell him to go away and leave it at that. I'm not going to start a MOVEMENT to ruin his career, his life, or anything else. WHY should I? Because it is hypocritical, and I don't understand how people just don't get that.

If someone offends me by trying to marginalize me, if I try to marginalize him in return, how am I no worse than he?
Again, Tolerance is not a two way street. It does NOT have to be reciprocated. You know what makes me the better man? Letting HIM have his beliefs, and me not CARING about it.

Gay rights organizations protest and do things based on their belief that there is nothing wrong with being gay.
Why is it not acceptable for anti-gay believers to do the same thing? Who gets to decide what is right and what is wrong morally? If one side should not dictate morality, neither should the other.

This is why I always say that equality, fairness, and tolerance are false ideals. Because you can NEVER truly have ANY of those things, since people will always try to impose their side onto the other.

 

[HyenaThePirate]

...are you somehow under the impression that people work on a film for free, then only get paid after the fact, depending on how well a film does? Those actors, special effects people, and everyone working their butts off to build sets and light scenes and make things look fancy and shiny and pretty for the screen--they get paid. They do their job, get paid, and go onto their next job.

No but the films you work on in the film industry are essentially your RESUME. If you work on a crappy film that impacts your ability to get hired on to OTHER jobs. Like it or not, the success or failure of a film has resonating effects on all people involved. Sure the STUDIO takes it in the shorts over the money spent in the budget, but even then people are affected in ways that are hard to quantify. The studio is ALSO not responsible for Card's personal behavior and actions and allegiances, so why should THEY suffer financially for it? You aren't hurting HIM, he's already been paid right?
But you ARE hurting the films that the studio may cancel that might be in production because they took a big hit on a film that performed poorly.
That loss might result in other people not getting their chance to break into acting, or special effects work, or script writing or directing or working behind cameras.

So yeah, to simply dismiss it as "No one takes a hit but the studio!" is short-sighted at best, and willfully indignant at worst.

 

[Riobux]

TL;DR version: "I showed intolerance to other people doing what they wish, now can people show tolerance to my intolerance?". Like the fascist political parties screaming "free speech", I quite frankly just do not care. I might see the film off it's own merits, but I probably wouldn't due to my severe apathy.

The only thing this piss and whine fest has affected me (which I've only just heard about, so thanks for the awareness!), is a minor regret of quoting Ender's Game for a dissertation project. Besides that, I just don't care.

 

[1337mokro]

Being tolerant of intolerance is a paradox. If someone goes up to you and tells you he hates your face and is going to make it illegal for you to walk around in public without a bag over your head, you aren't going to respect this man's "Belief"/"Ideas".

You are going to tell him to fuck off and take his bullshit somewhere else.

Yes, but I'm not going to spend the rest of my life trying to destroy HIM for HIS beliefs. I'm going to tell him to go away and leave it at that. I'm not going to start a MOVEMENT to ruin his career, his life, or anything else. WHY should I? Because it is hypocritical, and I don't understand how people just don't get that.

If someone offends me by trying to marginalize me, if I try to marginalize him in return, how am I no worse than he?
Again, Tolerance is not a two way street. It does NOT have to be reciprocated. You know what makes me the better man? Letting HIM have his beliefs, and me not CARING about it.

Gay rights organizations protest and do things based on their belief that there is nothing wrong with being gay.
Why is it not acceptable for anti-gay believers to do the same thing? Who gets to decide what is right and what is wrong morally? If one side should not dictate morality, neither should the other.

This is why I always say that equality, fairness, and tolerance are false ideals. Because you can NEVER truly have ANY of those things, since people will always try to impose their side onto the other.

How are you destroying him? Are you actively hindering him in his work? He can write anything he wants, whenever he wants, I just won't buy it. The same way I will not buy anything off the guy in my example.

This is a stupid thing to say because if you consider that "destroying his life" then basically whenever you walk past anything and don't buy it because you didn't like the guy or the product you are "destroying the vendor's life".

You speak of marginalization as if beliefs and ideologies that require the marginalization of others should be respected and preserved. Forever cherished in a glass box rather than dumped into a man hole to be dragged away by the rest of the sewage far away from humanity.

We don't cherish Apartheid. We don't cherish fundamentalist terrorists. We don't cherish criminals who think it's alright to murder, rape and steal. We don't cherish the inferiority of women as property.

All these people hold beliefs and ideas that are harmful to the people around them. That is a pretty good standard to decide what is right and wrong.

The demand from the pro-gay side "Let us be ourselves and have equal rights!"

The demand from Card and the anti-gay side "Take away their rights from them and make homosexuality illegal!"

Guess which side wins based on simple ethics and morality?

Seriously I don't know why all these amateur philosophers come out of the closet each and every time with the same bullshit "you are a racist because you discriminate against racists" arguments. These are stupid arguments people, they are REALLY stupid.

When people's beliefs demand the mistreatment of others based on who they are, for an act that does not involve or harm them, for something they have no control over, for really any reason that does not involve this other party directly harming you, there is no justification for it.

 

[Bruce]

Being tolerant of intolerance is a paradox. If someone goes up to you and tells you he hates your face and is going to make it illegal for you to walk around in public without a bag over your head, you aren't going to respect this man's "Belief"/"Ideas".

You are going to tell him to fuck off and take his bullshit somewhere else.

Yes, but I'm not going to spend the rest of my life trying to destroy HIM for HIS beliefs. I'm going to tell him to go away and leave it at that. I'm not going to start a MOVEMENT to ruin his career, his life, or anything else. WHY should I? Because it is hypocritical, and I don't understand how people just don't get that.

If someone offends me by trying to marginalize me, if I try to marginalize him in return, how am I no worse than he?
Again, Tolerance is not a two way street. It does NOT have to be reciprocated. You know what makes me the better man? Letting HIM have his beliefs, and me not CARING about it.

And thus my point on how tolerance is a bad thing is demonstrated.

You are in the fortunate position where your rights are not subject to debate, political will and the vagaries of whether the voting public likes where the economy is going right now. You are in the fortunate position where somebody saying they hate your face and are going to make it illegal for you to walk around with a paper bag over your face will never actually be able to conceivably make it so.

Gay people are not in that position. It is a relatively recent thing that gay marriage has become legal in the US. If you believe that gay marriage being legalised is the end of the battle in the US, may I point you to the nearest abortion clinic? Roe Vs Wade was a long time ago, yet you still see that battle is ongoing.

Major segments of the American religious believe homosexuality to be an abomination before the eyes of their God. They will not stop in America, any more than they have stopped in South Africa. We legalised gay marriage a long time ago, we still have homophobia.

You, as a presumably straight person, are in a position where the right to marry the person you want to marry is not going to be vigorously challenged. You are in the fortunate position of having your life as being your business. This is as it should be for everyone.

Now I am not gay, but I recognise that as a straight person I have to stand up alongside those who stand up for themselves. I do this because I do not care about tolerance, I care about justice and it is injustice that fuels the fight against gay marriage.

I will not go to see Enders Game. I will rather spend my money somewhere where if it ends up supporting oppression I at least don't know about it.

 

[Jadak]

I liked the books and have every intention of seeing the movie, I don't particularly give much of a shit about the authors views and they certainly won't alter my movie going habits one way or the other.

Far more concerned with how well the adapt the book than I am with gay marriage.

 

[HyenaThePirate]

How are you destroying him? Are you actively hindering him in his work? He can write anything he wants, whenever he wants, I just won't buy it. The same way I will not buy anything off the guy in my example.

This is a stupid thing to say because if you consider that "destroying his life" then basically whenever you walk past anything and don't buy it because you didn't like the guy or the product you are "destroying the vendor's life".

Then what is the point of the boycott? If it is not to cause him harm, it has no other purpose then and is simply the act of being vindictive for vindictiveness's sake.

Choosing not to involve yourself with him or his work due to a personal disagreement with his beliefs is one thing. To do so ONLY because of his beliefs and because OTHERS are doing it as well makes it revenge.. a "punishment." When you punish, it means you are attempting to impose your authority onto someone else.
When you do that, you are no longer the oppressed but the oppressor.

I could be wrong though. Could you direct me to the school you went to when you obtained your "professional philosopher's" degree so that I can enter the program as well? I don't want to remain an amateur forever, you know.

 

[Adept Mechanicus]

When people ask for tolerance of LGBTs, they mean "Deign to acknowledge that they exist as 100% equal human beings and that it's not actually a problem." When bigots ask us to tolerate them, they mean "My lack of tolerance for my fellow man makes me an oppressed minority." When influential people use their status as famous people to oppress other people, refusing to support these people is not an act of injustice. It is a natural freaking consequence.

Suggesting that Card faces intolerance because people have stopped buying his stuff assumes that he has the god-given divine right to our money, which is completely not how capitalism works. I was really looking forward to this movie before I learned about this. If he retracts his statements, I may do what I was planning to do and support him as an artist, and that will be *my choice*, not his entitlement.

 

[lacktheknack]

The sociopolitical views of the author have no bearing on the quality of his work unless the work is centered on those views.

Ender's Game is decidedly NOT about gay marriage and is held as a classic work of science fiction, rightfully heavy with praise.

You are not promoting or supporting bigotry by seeing this movie or reading this book. You are promoting damn good storytelling and science fiction.

Besides, for all we know Card already got his check when he sold the rights to the studio/producers making the film. The rest may be going entirely towards recovering the budget and lining the pockets of those who made it.

For once I wish people could separate the views of a dickish author from the books and, worse still, it appears on a case by case basis. J.R.R. Tolkien was a devout Catholic and therefore opposed to homosexuality. You don't see people boycotting Lord of the Rings or The Hobbit to keep money from going to his family. What makes Card so different and special?

This.

I find it endlessly hilarious when people say "NOW HIS WORK IS RUINED FOREVER!" over things like this. Puh-leeze, if I reacted like that every time someone I liked mentioned they were pro-abortion, I wouldn't like things.

 

[LG Jargon]

I wonder if his Bigotry Club membership will get revoked now that he has shown that making money is more important to him than campaigning against equality?

Psshh, doubt it. They'll probably just see it as him trying to cover his own ass for past bigotry and will follow suit. Like a vizier that plots against a king, then grovels at same king's feet when the vizier's plans go awry.

OT: Fuck this guy. I'm not spending one red cent on any of his works while he still holds breath. I was never that interested in Ender's Game before, but until he grows too old and shuffles loose the mortal coil, I won't pay for jack. Sure, I might read one of his books if a friend lends it to me, or I might see the movie if someone pays for my ticket (or I use one of those free ticket certificate thingies I got for X-mas), but I will not spend any of my hard-earned money supporting him, and by transition, his bigoted views or bigoted friends.

Seriously...fuck this guy.

 

[Seracen]

Similar problems arise whenever myself or my friends try to get into HP Lovecraft. The derivative works are fine, but Lovecraft's original works are full of rampant racism, which was "the norm," for back in his day.

Doesn't make him right, not in any way. I refuse, however, to not partake of fun stuff like Arkham Horror as a result, but it's easier b/c I know HP isn't seeing my money, as he's long since dead.

As far as Card goes, however, I figured he pissed off people in tons of other ways before this. Still, I try not to look into the personal lives of any entertainers overmuch. Invariably, they act in a way that puts me off of the medium (ie: Tom Cruise, Piers Anthony, Bono from U2).

 

[Jotver]

There was a boycott planned?
Oh c'mon people. There's a word for you which I can't remember right now, and it's not a compliment. Why would you care about what he said? There's simply no point.

EDIT: I now see hate coming my way. Oh well. Not gonna retract.

I actually agree with you, art is art! it does not matter what the person does if you enjoy there art enjoy it, all you do by not watching it is to deny yourself, does it really matter if a hate monger gets a bit more money? will it change anything? but for you on a personal level if you miss a great book or movie that changes you! Just imagine if Beethoven was treated the same way for what he did! But no people cared about his music not the man. At the time enjoy the art, let history ruin him.