Not signed in (Sign In)
  1.  (11115.21)
    Boycotting media products only works when you make it known 1) that you are doing it and 2) why you are doing it. Otherwise it's just chalked under piracy and at the worst you give the people an another pedestal to preach from.
    •  
      CommentAuthorsneak046
    • CommentTimeJul 10th 2013
     (11115.22)
    Ok fair enough - I've just tried to put forward my thoughts, I don't want to change anyone's opinions or suggest they are wrong in doing what they believe is the right thing.
  2.  (11115.23)
    But in the end a boycott will do nothing but harm the studio making the film though because OSC will have already been paid upfront for the screen adaptation rights.
    This is basically what Brubaker's argument was, and it's wrong. Card's also a credited producer on the film. He's getting additional money off the film's profits. A writer of his renown (deserved or not) is not taking a one-off upfront payment for the film rights of his best known work.
  3.  (11115.24)
    @sneak46:

    Well hey, this is a discussion and I appreciate your point of view. Just don't agree with all of it :)
    •  
      CommentAuthorsneak046
    • CommentTimeJul 10th 2013
     (11115.25)
    @david - as I said, I am only dimly aware of orson scott card/enders game so thanks for correcting my factual error.

    @janos - Cool, I am well used to being disagreed with. ;-)
    •  
      CommentAuthorAlan Tyson
    • CommentTimeJul 10th 2013 edited
     (11115.26)
    Something that's been said further upstream, which I agree with, is the fact that if a boycott is to really succeed, the studios need to know why people aren't going to see Ender's Game, and that it has very little to do with the story, the actors involved, or the general look and feel of the film, and everything to do with the person in charge.

    I'll be writing a letter, both as email and as wood-pulp-and-ink. as my little part of the boycott. It'll probably never get read, but if it does, I'll point out that I'm very much the target demographic for this movie. I like science fiction, I don't mind an interesting and well-done adaptation, and I'm not averse to big ideas or political themes in my movies. I even read the book and a few of his others as a kid and teenager, and I remember liking it a good deal and I am sort of curious about how they would do things like the microgravity fighting and the bit with the giant. Not, however, curious enough to give Card any more money than I already have throughout my lifetime (which I'm dubiously glad to report only amounts to about ten bucks).

    The point is, the studio should know that money they may very well have made will now no longer be made, because of the person they chose to work with and the ideals that person holds and financially supports. I probably wouldn't have seen Ender's Game to begin with, because it doesn't look like that great of a flick, but they don't necessarily need to know that, only that they will have lost money on this particular venture. With any luck, Ender's Game will tank, and the studios will take a slightly closer look at what works they pull from and who they decide to bring in to work on a project.
    •  
      CommentAuthorjohnjones
    • CommentTimeJul 10th 2013
     (11115.27)
    I don't know that I'll see the movie, but I don't think I'll actively boycott it either. For one thing, if I boycotted every work whose creator I disagreed with, I'd have very little to watch, read, etc, granted that OSC is a special case of active assholery. For another, more important thing, by boycotting the movie I'm hurting everyone involved in the movie. I like Abigail Breslin and Asa Butterfield (from Hugo), Harrison Ford and especially Hailee Steinfeld, who was by far the best thing about the True Grit remake. So, I don't see the point of directly hurting people I like just to indirectly punish somebody that I don't like.
    • CommentAuthorRenThing
    • CommentTimeJul 10th 2013 edited
     (11115.28)
    Here's the thing: I don't see it as punishing those people.

    One, they aren't going to suffer any loss themselves, unless part of their contract is that they get a chunk of the ticket sales. They've already been paid.

    Two, even if people do boycott this film and it negatively impacts the success of the movie to the point it's a failure, that does nothing to impact the performance those actors you list gave. There are many times when a movie bombs but the actors in it are given good credit for the work they did; the failure of the movie isn't attributed to them. Considering the fact that the unpopularity and controversy regarding OSC is getting more well-known, I'd argue that if this movie isn't successful it won't be hung on the necks of the performers.

    Three, all of those actors will see future work after this. If Hollywood can continue to keep giving money to M Night Shamalamdingdong to produce more appalling shit then I can't see quality acting talent not getting future work.
  4.  (11115.29)
    Orci and Kurtzman will still make new sci-fi films if this one goes down. The risk of an "impact" on the genre is overblown.

    The company that provided the special effects ALREADY went bankrupt. Don't see how success/failure will affect them at all. No one blames the actor unless she/he are the overpaid star--hardly the case here.

    This is a fight Card started, cultivated, relished, and then lost. He's standing on the sidelines of the kingdom politely asking the victorious horde not to burn it down. That's like asking Ender not to pull the trigger. Spoils of war.
    •  
      CommentAuthorjohnjones
    • CommentTimeJul 10th 2013
     (11115.30)
    Number one could just as easily apply to OSC. It probably doesn't, but it could.

    As for number two, there are also many times when a movie tanks and that doesn't happen. Some actor might well be a shining gem in a bucket of shit but the stink of failure is such that no one bothers to get said gem for something else.

    Similarly for number three, they might well get work, certainly Harrison Ford will. That said, how much have you heard about current or future projects by Ed Speleers (Eragon), Alexander Ludwig (The Seeker: The Dark is Rising) or Noah Ringer (The Last Airbender)? If Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone had sunk without trace back in 2001, boycott or no, do you seriously believe that Daniel Radcliff, Rupert Grint or Emma Watson would have become the superstars they are now? Me either.

    And fourth, boycotts just seem... distasteful to me. They feel like a weapon of the enemy that's used when their counterarguments have been exposed as hollow and all they have left is yelling "Shut up. Shut up! SHUT UP!" When I think of boycotts, what first comes to my mind are these assholes. I'd rather live with Orson Card making a little more money than act like those assholes. He can spend that money failing to prevent his homophobic bullshit from being tossed onto the ash heap of history.
    • CommentAuthorRenThing
    • CommentTimeJul 10th 2013
     (11115.31)
    @johnjones

    So what's the difference then between someone saying "I chose not to spend my money on something I dislike" and actively participating in an organized boycott aside from scope? I can hardly see you, or any other rational person, making an argument that people must financially support things that they don't want to, simply because doing otherwise would be "intolerant" or "distasteful"?
    • CommentAuthorRenThing
    • CommentTimeJul 10th 2013
     (11115.32)
    And to answer your question:
    Ed Speelers
    Alexander Ludwig
    Noah Ringer

    All three have had work since, Alexander Ludwig was chief bad guy in a fairly successful movie you might've heard of.
    •  
      CommentAuthoroldhat
    • CommentTimeJul 10th 2013 edited
     (11115.33)
    Bored now.