comScore
  1. Mediaite
  2. Gossip Cop
  3. Geekosystem
  4. Styleite
  5. SportsGrid
  6. The Mary Sue
  7. The Maude
  8. The Braiser

What's with the name?

Allow us to explain.

Meanwhile...

UPDATED: Lionsgate Attempts To Distance Themselves From Orson Scott Card Before Ender’s Game Hits Theaters


Lionsgate has issued an official statement to distance themselves from Orson Scott Card, the creator whose book their new movie Ender’s Game is based on. 

We’ve been discussing the author recently on The Mary Sue thanks to a call to boycott the Summit Entertainment/Lionsgate film by Geeks OUT, an LGBT website celebrating pop-culture. The call for a boycott was just that, an attempt to let a wider audience know of Card’s personal beliefs and active participation in the National Organization for Marriage, a group working against equality for all human beings, and let said audience decide if they’re ok with some of their money possibly going to further that cause.

Not everyone agreed with the boycott, and not because they side with Card, but because they feel he and his work are separate entities, that he’s getting money either way, or because other, hard working people might take a hit from such an event. But people are certainly divided on the subject. Some refuse to see the film, some will see it but give money toward organizations helping to further equality, while others have admitted they’ll pirate Ender’s Game as soon as it’s available. No matter how you look at it, the controversy currently swirling around the film can’t be good for sales. Especially when Card went and publicly asked people to be tolerant of his intolerance.

And earlier story had unnamed executives at Summit Entertainment saying they were going to try and keep Card as far away from the film’s publicity as possible. But after the boycott call, and what must be thousands of posts in support of said boycott, Lionsgate decided to make a public statement. It reads:

As proud longtime supporters of the LGBT community, champions of films ranging from GODS AND MONSTERS to THE PERKS OF BEING A WALLFLOWER and a Company that is proud to have recognized same-sex unions and domestic partnerships within its employee benefits policies for many years, we obviously do not agree with the personal views of Orson Scott Card and those of the National Organization for Marriage. However, they are completely irrelevant to a discussion of ENDER’S GAME. The simple fact is that neither the underlying book nor the film itself reflect these views in any way, shape or form. On the contrary, the film not only transports viewers to an entertaining and action-filled world, but it does so with positive and inspiring characters who ultimately deliver an ennobling and life-affirming message. Lionsgate will continue its longstanding commitment to the LGBT community by exploring new ways we can support LGBT causes and, as part of this ongoing process, will host a benefit premiere for ENDER’S GAME.

It’s certainly a very well-written, well-supported statement from Lionsgate but I suppose the question people will have to ponder now is – did it come too late? Should Lionsgate have come out against the author, whose work they optioned for a film, the moment they optioned it? Considering Hollywood deals, I don’t think that’s a realistic expectation but I do wonder why their public relations team didn’t have someone do an interview at least discussing the topic earlier. Perhaps they thought they would be the impetus for a boycott themselves if they did?

We can’t be sure at this point of course but what do you make of their statement? Are Card’s views “completely irrelevant to a discussion of Ender’s Game” the movie as they suggest? Is Lionsgate holding a benefit premiere enough to balance out Card’s financial profit (perhaps going to further NOM’s work) from the film?

[UPDATE] Geeks OUT have issued a response to Lionsgate’s statement:

As proud members of the LGBT community, champions of creative freedom and honest self-expression, and a group at whom the film Ender’s Game is directly marketed, we appreciate Lionsgate’s record of doing good things and its admirable, strongly worded rejection of Ender’s Game author Orson Scott Card’s and the National Organization for Marriage’s anti-gay activism.

The simple fact is that Skip Ender’s Game has never been about the content of the novel or the film Ender’s Game. It’s about money. It’s about the millions of dollars the company has already paid to Card and the potential millions he and the National Organization for Marriage stand to make off of the success of the film—our money.

A benefit premiere, indeed any outreach to the LGBT community by Lionsgate, ought to be much appreciated. What’s clear is that whether or not they support his views, Lionsgate is standing by their man and their would-be blockbuster. They made the common, perhaps cynical, calculation that audiences wouldn’t connect Ender’s Game with Card’s very public homophobia—or wouldn’t care. Geeks OUT appreciates that most American families work for every dollar and care deeply about where that money goes and what it supports.

Skip Ender’s Game is not a threat; it is a reality. Our pledge adds hundreds of signtatures every day from sci-fi fans around the world who would rather stay home than support homophobia. We have only just started and Geeks OUT and its allies are prepared to carry on past November 1. Nothing Card nor Lionsgate has said changes the fact that skipping Ender’s Game is the easiest way to ensure none of your dollars go to Orson Scott Card’s and the National Organization for Marriage’s extreme anti-gay agenda.

(via Collider)

Are you following The Mary Sue on Twitter, Facebook, Tumblr, Pinterest, & Google +?

TAGS: | | | |


  • Anonymous

    I have mixed feelings still. On one hand, I don’t want a drop of MY capital anywhere near the National Organization for Marriage where Card is a board member and major contributor. But his hands aren’t the only hands upon Ender’s Game. Which…is exactly what the article highlights. So I’ve contributed nothing really.

  • Synovial

    It doesn’t matter if Lionsgate agrees with Card or not. The simple fact is that if you see Ender’s game in theaters, your money is going to go to a man who is known for donating to groups that seek to limit the rights of other human beings.

    I am asking anybody and everybody: please don’t see this film in theaters. If you are a fan of the novels (which I certainly am), pirate the film and maybe have a viewing party at home with your friends. As both a lesbian and a nerd, it breaks my heart to see a science-fiction series that I used to love used to profit a man who sees me as a “tragic genetic mixup” (his actual words, not mine) that needs to be contained. Please; don’t let him see a cent.

  • Anonymous

    I just want to say one thing: If you advocate boycotting this movie so that OSC doesn’t get any money and it fails dragging the studio into a hole because it produced a costly flop, then you’re not allowed to whine (that’s right, I said WHINE) about the lack of new material in theater’s these days. *whew* Boy was that a run on sentence.

  • Philip Lopez

    An adaptation of one of the most popular Sci-Fi novels is hardly “new material”

  • Anonymous

    If a studio fails because of one flop then they aren’t being run well…at all.

    And an adaptation of Ender’s Game doesn’t really fall into the “new material” vein. When people complain about a lack of original properties they are complaining about not only sequels, but also the endless book adaptations, comic adaptations, and remakes.

    Now, if Pacific Rim fails, that might be a blow to original properties.

  • Calum Syers

    Like some other people have suggested, I’ll probably pirate the film at some point. Asa Butterfield and Haillee Steinfeld, I think, are two talented young actors and I wish them luck in the future, for other projects, and at the very least I’d like to see their performances, even if I’m not paying Card (pirate etc.)

  • Anonymous

    Didn’t you buy the books?

    Not that I don’t agree with you (I do); just asking.

  • Robert Vary

    I wonder how much of the proceeds from the movie go to him? I mean, at least with some authors, they’re paid a flat fee for the movie rights to their work, which gets paid no matter how the movie does, right? Or does he get a percentage of the gross as well?

    Not that that should necessarily make anyone feel more comfortable about seeing the movie, even if his fee is independent of the movie’s performance. I’m not sure I personally feel right about supporting his work, even if my money wouldn’t actually be going to him.

  • Adam R. Charpentier

    Eh, I’m going to see it. It looks good.

  • kristen mchugh

    The statement from Lionsgate is nice, but the premiere reads beyond hand-wavey to me. Whatever any one person chooses to do is their business, and I don’t have a problem with what anyone decides re: seeing the film. Benefits are nice, though I hope they don’t affiliate with HRC because that’s a whole other kettle of problematic fish, and I’d like to see money going to something like Lambda Legal which is doing the actual legal work to fight what NOM is doing, but I don’t want anyone thinking this makes things okay. Any money Card receives from paid work is still being tithed to the CoLDS (which also funded Prop 8) and being put into NOM. Residuals, back-end points, etc., put money in his pockets. To me, that’s a problem. If the perception is that the film is being let off the hook of Card’s utter failure at humanity allows people to stop thinking about how they consume media, then we’re back to square one. My hope for this entire situation is not that EG will fail at the box office, (I don’t know that the general public is aware enough for that) but that perhaps we can look at the ethical considerations of our media consumption. I don’t require the art I love to be made by good people, that’s an irrational expectation of life. Card may be a perfectly nice person to the people around him, make art that people love which does no harm to anyone, and still be incredibly dangerous to our society because he has the money and authority to pursue a bigoted agenda and make it stick. If we don’t question our consumption of media in the face of his actions, when will we?

  • http://www.thenerdybird.com/ Jill Pantozzi

    When most people first read/bought the books, no one knew Card’s beliefs/connections.

  • Anonymous

    fair enough

  • Synovial

    I did, but I was in elementary school at the time and didn’t know anything about Orson Scott Card.

  • BabeWoreRed

    *possible spoiler*

    The Ennobling and life-affirming message of unwittingly committing genocide?
    Bah?

  • Ruby Dynamite

    Well, it was written by a Mormon and Mormons dressed up as Natives and killed a bunch of people once. Maybe that’s what he was thinking of? xp

  • Anonymous

    Card is listed on IMDB.com as one of the movie’s producers, in addition to his writing credit. Lionsgate’s disavowals to the contrary, Card will be getting a nice, big percentage of any profit that the movie makes. The argument that buying a ticket to see Ender’s Game financially rewards a politically active bigot is a sound one.

  • Anonymous

    I don’t know about Synovial, but I bought a few OSC books (including Ender’s Game) in high school (10+ years ago) before I knew anything about him personally. I would not spend money on his work now.

  • kristen mchugh

    The movie’s been made, the crew has been paid, critical reception will ameliorate any flak the screenwriter/producer/director/cast face, and there’s just enough recognition in the media of why people are boycotting to make its failure roll off their backs. The studio can take a tax write-off, so. . . the only person who will bear the brunt is Card. I’m okay with that.

  • Michael Capanelli

    I really don’t care what Cards opinions are. If I want to se it I will and if I don’t, I won’t. If you really think not seeing a film will change the world, well then more power to you. In reality though, it’ll do less than nothing. He has a right to his views just like you have a right to yours. If you don’t support the right of someone to have an opposing viewpoint you do not support free speech, plain and simple.

    Anyway. its just a film and Cards been paid already. instead why not display tolerence and win people over with love. Seems to have worked for Jesus and Gandhi.

  • Anonymous

    “However, they are completely irrelevant to a discussion of ENDER’S GAME” is an incredibly condescending sentence coming from a company trying to save its own ass.

  • Pomfelo

    And it’s not just this film. The bigger the success E’SG is; the more film, tv, video game projects he’ll be offered, the higher his asking price will become.

  • Anonymous

    God, what I wouldn’t give for a Disqus filter that blocks comments that use the phrase “free speech.”

  • Michael Capanelli

    In reality I’ll most likely wait till it hits HBO.

  • http://www.thenerdybird.com/ Jill Pantozzi

    I shake my head ever time someone tells people fighting for a positive change in the world that their actions mean nothing. Take a look at history. Small efforts matter just as much as the big ones.

    And I’m not sure how it’s not obvious to you that anyone here is anything but in support of free speech. Card can say anything he wants, people who don’t agree can choose to not support him.

  • Guest

    Tell me about it. I wish there was a screener that didn’t let people post that use “free speech” when the opinion is against their own.

  • Supermorff

    Card has probably already been paid, and little if anything of the film’s takings will go to him. My bigger concern is that if the film is a big success, then it will lead Hollywood to option more of Card’s work; if it fails, we can only hope that it’s understood that Card and his toxic opinions are responsible, and it’s not because we don’t want to see high quality sci-fi.

  • kristen mchugh

    You are absolutely entitled to see it or not as you see fit. Card is absolutely entitled to his *views* just as the rest of us are. “Free Speech,” does not mean freedom from consequences of that speech. It’s not his speech that pays for lobbying and legislation, it’s not his speech that causes 5 years of legal wrangling that ended up at the US Supreme Court, it’s not his speech that makes it legal for people to be fired for being LGBT, lose parental rights, be unable to marry or adopt, although it is his speech that propagates dangerous lies about homosexuals being pedophiles and unsafe for children to be around, it is his speech that propagates bigotry and hatred, it is his speech that tells people it is okay to hurt people for being LGBT. There are no laws being proposed to stop his speech, but he’ll have to live with the consequences of the right to that speech and if people object to his speech and actions we are certainly entitled to decide we don’t want to give him our money and make others aware of that choice.

  • Michael Capanelli

    Tell me about it. I wish there was a screener that would block people from posting that only cry foul when its their opinions being attacked.

  • .GONNY

    Don’t actors, directors and screenwriters also receive residuals? Am I missing something here? Seems like more people are hurt by a potential boycott than just Card.

  • Calum Syers

    “If you really think not seeing a film will change the world, well then more power to you.”

    If enough people do it, then the film will perform poorly at the box office. If it does, Lionsgate will think before putting hundreds of millions of dollars into projects. Especially in this day and age where simply putting enough expensive visual effects up on the screen doesn’t guarantee a hit (John Carter/Jack the Giant Killer).

  • Anonymous

    Yeah, that’s something I’ve been a bit conflicted on, but I doubt that many careers are going to be ruined by working on one movie that flops. If I’m still going to see other movies (possibly other movies with the same actors, crew, etc involved), I’m still supporting their work.

  • Michael Capanelli

    Don’t ever mention John Carter in my presence again….. :-)

    They really killed that story for me.

  • Anonymous

    …And Geeks OUT’s statement rips it apart quite eloquently. Love it.

  • kristen mchugh

    Residuals for actors/directors/screenwriters are usually tied to home sale (dvd/digital) or broadcast on tv. They get them regardless. If the cast has back-end points, they will lose *that* money (like Card) but they get paid upfront in most cases (Ford and Kingsley are likely the only cast to have clout to get such deals, btw) and won’t take much of a hit. The significant positive to EG failure at box office is that any options for sequels won’t get picked up. Card loses.

  • Anonymous

    5 down, I’m on a role.
    1) Yes it is “new material.” It is neither a sequel nor a spin-off of an existing movie franchise.
    2) I didn’t say the studio would fail, but that the studio would be dragged into a hole. If you think that when a studio goes out on a limb and fails that that doesn’t affect it’s decision making process, you’re an idiot.
    3) If you boycott this because of who makes it, than studios will buy “new material” from inoffensive people, turning out inoffensive drivel.

  • http://www.thenerdybird.com/ Jill Pantozzi

    Summit did Twilight, they will not be dragged into a hole if Ender’s Game fails.

  • Charles Ranier

    *cough* Lone Ranger *cough*

  • kristen mchugh

    FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU. So, yeah: I am more than perfectly okay with boat-rocking even more now.

  • kristen mchugh

    Ironically, another series I avoid for multiple reasons including tithing to LDS.

  • http://runt.org/ Adrian

    2. If Ender’s Game fails and the studio blames anything BUT the massive boycott as the reason why Ender’s Game fails, then that studio “is an idiot.”
    3. You’re implying that creators who are not bigots are unable to create compelling content. What.

  • r2_44

    And that’s assuming that a lot of those actors get hired again. Harrison Ford will be fine, but there are a lot of rookies. This may be their first movie, and if it’s a flop movie, then who knows.

    Also, who knows what other opportunities this movie created elsewhere. Because it’s such a classic book, it might have opened up doors to animation studios making a cartoon or game companies making a game- a lot of those people might be excited to finally “work on something recognizable” to help launch their careers. (Just speaking from personal experience of knowing lots and lots of people who work in those industries)…

    But I also am vehemently against NOM and everything OSC stands for. I’m just saying understand the conflict.

  • ampersands

    Well, that that action was basically the most horrific thing a person could do, yes. It totally fucks Ender up, and he spends the rest of his life attempting to atone for that action. Also, the “message” that we get from the aliens is that to kill another sentient being is the most immoral action one can commit. Which is certainly life-affirming, in a proof by negation sort of way.

  • http://www.fangsforthefantasy.com/ Fangs for the Fantasy

    Lionsgate says they don’t agree with Card but their actions still support him. They are still giving a whack of cash to a man who wants gay people locked up. They are still endorsing Card by not treating him as the bigot he is, they’re willingly entering into a partnership with a leader of a hate group.

    I don’t care how much they try to wave around their record to make it seem like this is ok. It’s not, quoting policy doesn’t change their actions. You can’t declare how much you are against bigotry then hand clubs to the bigots to use to beat us. It doesn’t matter if you’re there saying that they shouldn’t be doing it, or even if you’re there with bandages afterwards – you handed them the clubs! You looked treated him and his behaviour as something reasonable worth doing business with!

    The work is not separate from the creator. It was written by a bigot, a hate group leader, someone who advocates the worst kind of persecution – it didn’t plop into existence in a cabbage patch. He is making money for it, money he puts into hate groups. He is the one being worked with and approached rather than being ostracised. He is the one who will enjoy further increase in his profile adding legitimacy and volume to his genocidal rhetoric. There is no separation, Lionsgate cannot take Orson Scott Card’s work without similarly taking Orson Scott Card

    Lionsgate lay down with dogs, now they have fleas. Their statement is a pathetic attempt to gloss over bigotry and support for bigotry because they fear people won’t give them money for endorsing bigotry.

  • Anonymous

    Maybe not, but that doesn’t mean they would repeat “failure methodology.” (Yes, I made that phrase up. Anybody got a better one, I’m willing to switch.)

  • Lisbeth

    A company taking a “tax write-off” isn’t some magical thing that makes losses go away. That just means a company doesn’t have to pay as much in taxes (or any) because they lost money on a particular venture, resulting in lower profits or a net loss for the year. So yes, the studio would still be hurt — probably far more than Card, because they are the ones who have put a lot of capital at risk in making the film.

  • http://www.fangsforthefantasy.com/ Fangs for the Fantasy

    I want a new internet tool that pops up “hi, you mentioned free speech, please take a brief test to establish you actually know what that means before you say something mind bogglingly stupid!”

    And lo, when it turns out that “free speech” in their lexicon means “ZOMG A PRIVILEGES STRAIGHT WHITE DUDE IS BEING CRITICISED FOR BEING A BIGOT! OH THE TAGEDY?!” the comment would be screened so only other neckbeards need read it

  • kristen mchugh

    I object to the implication you make in #3: “Inoffensive people, turning out inoffensive drivel.” There are plenty of inoffensive people turning out offensive drivel, plenty of offensive people turning out inoffensive drivel, and plenty of both offensive and inoffensive people turning out good work. That binary is ridiculous though, because it implies that not being a horrible human being means you can’t make vibrant, entertaining, interesting, complex art. It implies that not being an offensive person means you are uninteresting or uncomplicated. Think bigger than that, because if being offensive as a person or offensive (i.e., cruel and inhumane) is your metric on the quality of art, doesn’t that get just as dull?

  • kristen mchugh

    Nothing substantive to add, it’s just nice to see someone who can look at something that clearly means a lot to them and view it and criticism of it/Creator objectively without releasing a Kraken of defensiveness. There was a great article on EG regarding the killer as victim that made me profoundly certain that I would be throwing the book against a wall, much as I’ve done with other of Card’s books (before I knew anything about him as a person.)

  • Anonymous

    YES.

  • Chris Ryan

    Actually, according the WGA rules, he does get a percentage of the net profits as a writer. As a producer as well, he definitely is getting a cut of the pie.

  • Jamie Jeans

    “Hey guys! Look how many of our friends are gay and LGBTQ! We’re totally not homophoboes even though we bought this book from an active member of a hate organization who has operated in public for some time now! So you should watch this movie and give us money which we will then give to that hateful ignorant shit!”

    “After all, how can we be homophobes? We have gay friends!”

    Yeah, try again, Lionsgate. You got into Orson Scott Card, and now you have to lay in it. You’ll get no money from me, and with all due luck, this movie will bomb as badly as The Lone Ranger.

  • kristen mchugh

    Is there an impact? Yes. Short-term impact which is an unknown variable on the lives of all of these hypothetical people. The long-term impact of Card’s political activities on a much larger population of people (millions and millions of them) and/or the impact that will result from a boycott on Card’s future earning opportunity is the other side of the scale. The hypothetical people being hurt if the film fails are a different argument from saying that the people who worked directly on the film will be hurt, which is often the one put forth. Those people will not be substantively hurt by its failure because they’ve already been paid for their work. What, if any future reduced opportunities for work are part of the job market at large, and certainly the job market in filmmaking. I may be the the shining star at my place of work but if I absolutely screw up an account because of my own failure, I’m not guaranteed the opportunity to do it again, am I? If an account underperforms because of factors outside of my control, then that is taken into account. Film studios usually don’t have all their eggs in one basket, and if they do, it’s a bad business plan and they deserve to go under. We have to stop constructing illusory reasons to feel bad for taking an ethical stance.

  • Charles Ranier

    it’s not just that there aren’t any gay people in his future or that secularism is bad. It’s the conflicting message, and boy howdy is it a bit one: there’s more than one mention of young boys naked/showering together. There’s a mention of one kid hating another because “he wiggles his butt at me” and this devolves into a “ur gay” “no u” thing. There’s a single girl character who is assumed to be a boy on introduction even when she’s stark naked (whut) There’s the aliens called “buggers” (really, OSC?) and, as a friend pointed out, the two brothers are named Peter and oh wait no his real name is Andrew but he’s called ENDer? I guess because the names “Bruce and Dick” were taken by Batman and Robin? And the whole thing where the older brother’s public anger and hatred toward Ender becomes private “I’m sorry I love you”?

    Just what are you trying to say with this book, Mr. Card?

  • kristen mchugh

    Shakespeare’s Father is starting to seem like a much more logical progression for Card than I understood before. Ew.

  • Charles Ranier

    actually it’s even worse now that I think about those names: Peter (the too-aggressive one) Ender (the not too aggressive, b/c EMPATHY one) and the sister (beard) between them: Valentine

    ARGH I’m going to the store for some brain bleach.

  • Anonymous

    Based on my experience with book contracts he likely got a large sum of money for the option to produce the film. He may have also gotten an advance against royalties/profits for his writers credit or as part of the option, which means as soon as the film nets a profit against what the production company spent to make the film, he’ll start getting a percentage of the profits. I’m not sure what producers make, since I don’t work with films, be I’m sure there is some profit sharing involved in that as well, so he can continue to rake in dough as long as the film is making money, forever.

  • Anonymous

    ha! probably right

  • Robert Vary

    Ah, great point. I had been thinking of him only as the source material, and for some reason it didn’t occur to me that he was a producer too. Well, that makes the choice a little more clear-cut. Thanks!

  • Anonymous

    Personally, I don’t really understand this “conflict”. I’m assuming that all crew members for this film have already been paid, so boycotting this film isn’t going to snatch any money out of their pockets. As for the talent? Well, movies flop all the time for a thousand different reasons and that may or may not hurt their chances of working again, but those are the breaks, as they say. So, if you’re weighing the possibility of indirectly contributing to NOM v/s possibly making it harder for an young actor to get another gig, I think it becomes pretty obvious which is more important.

  • Brian

    Fortunately, there’s a new Left Behind movie coming out, and that’s a case where the author AND the book are homophobic. So we can all agree on that. Also, Nicolas Cage and Ashley Tisdale are in it. That’s not controversial, just weird.

  • Brian

    I’ve heard these people referred to as “Freeze Peach”, because it’s such a knee-jerk reaction with them that there’s no indication they actually know what it means.

  • Lisbeth

    Oh, I don’t feel *bad* about boycotting something I’m morally opposed to, even if there is some collateral damage. As things stand now, I’ve no intention of going to see EG in theaters. If it’s well done, I will want to watch it — I’ll just wait for it to get to Netflix.

  • RMCoyote

    Not to mention by supporting this, you are giving the OK for Hollywood to buy more material off of Homophobic jerks without repercussions.

  • RMCoyote

    Then go see another movie.

    I hate this line of thought, because it’s so hand-wringy. People choose not to support movies for all sorts of reasons! Being part of a Homophobic jerk’s profit should be on par with it sucking.

    We have money, we choose who to support with it. I’m choosing to support Pacific Rim, Despicable Me 2, and The Heat. That’s 30 bucks I will be spending in the next couple of months. How dare I boycott a single movie and deprive all those other people? HOW DARE I. I am a horrible monster!

    (Seriously though: You don’t see this argument being trotted out with any other damn reason not to see a movie.)

  • RMCoyote

    I KNOW. I had a guildie utilize this the other day (I am GM and was telling that they needed to move their political discussion about how Obama sucked and should be impeached into Whispers as it was FUN OLD RAID NIGHT and no one wanted to see that gunk, especially since most of us are liberals and some nights we don’t want to argue with people who are making ‘Obama is Islamic!’ “jokes”).

    I pointed out that that night I wasn’t saying anything political either, and then I sweetly said “And if someone told me that them not being able to speak in a single chat channel in a video game is oppressing their free speech, I will laugh in that M*****F*****s face.” They shut up after that.

    Because REALLY? Watch the video of the young Latina woman getting pulled off the stand by cops at the SB9 hearing for calling politicians out on their lies and blatant misinformation and THEN tell me your speech is so “oppressed”.

  • RMCoyote

    I really, REALLY hope the result of The Lone Ranger will teach Hollywood a lesson about White Washing and racism.

    Except that Star Trek: Into Darkness was still a success. But then again, they hid the White Washing sooo….

  • http://www.thenerdybird.com/ Jill Pantozzi

    “Watch the video of the young Latina woman getting pulled off the stand by cops at the SB9 hearing for calling politicians out on their lies and blatant misinformation and THEN tell me your speech is so ‘oppressed’.”

    THANK YOU.

  • Nat

    Be as it may, OSC book on writing Sci-Fi and Fantasy was in my writer’s survivor kit and it’s helped me with my writing.

  • Kris

    I do think the idea of turning the premiere of “Ender’s Game” into a benefit premiere for LBQT charities (maybe The Trevor Project or Lifeworks) is a good one, simply because it will probably irritate Orson Scott Card. That said, Lionsgate is doing a terrible job of CYA.

    I know I’m probably going to need to turn in my nerd card for this, but I couldn’t finish “Ender’s Game.” I tried multiple times in middle school and high school, and we just never clicked. The trailers for this movie look terrible, and I suspect it’s going to get legitimately bad reviews that Lionsgate and Card will try to blame on the controversy. It’s likely that even people who enjoyed the book will be disappointed in the movie if they go see it. I’m thinking I’ll see if Zebra Youth needs any help/donations instead of participating in a boycott, because I don’t think skipping “Ender’s Game” counts as activism if you’re not really missing anything.

  • Anonymous

    I agree he wasn’t as tract-y back then, but there are certainly homophobic undertones in several of his books. Have you read Songmaster? Came out between the EG novella and the EG book. It’s one of the strangest examples of personal philosophy clashing with good narrative out there. You can just feel him going “This relationship isn’t natural… but in this alien society it is… gnnnrrgghh… OK, horrific twist ending prevents characters from consummating their love, problem solved!”

    (and then it hits Hamlet’s Father and he just stops caring)

  • Megaera

    Perhaps they meant the ennobling and life-affirming message of the state ordering the birth of a child and then manipulating the emotional development and education of that child from birth, sometimes cruelly, in order to turn that child into the tool they need for a particular job, without once considering the well-being of that child, except insofar as it affects his ability to carry out orders?

  • Anonymous

    I think it’s easier to ignore with Ender’s Game than some of his other novels. If you only read that one and none of the others, you could easily think that certain elements were intended to be dystopian, and Ender is like four/eight/twelve/some ridiculously young age, so it’s not that unusual that there’s no sexual content.

    But then you get to his other stuff, and you start to notice a pattern, and it’s like, “Oh, I guess that accidental awful implication… wasn’t so accidental after all.” :/

  • Nick Gaston

    Lionsgate donating a percentage of the profits to an LGBT organization to exactly offset or even top Card’s profits would work for me, more than a benefit premiere.

  • Megaera

    We all have different tastes. Personally, I couldn’t stand Thomas Covenant or The Lord of the Rings and I gave them both a bloody good go: I waded through two and a half books of each out of sheer bloody-minded determination before realising that I’d rather eat my own hand than stagger on to the end. It’s just as well there’s plenty of choice!

  • Megaera

    The trouble with that is that it doesn’t really make up for the fact that an international organisation which exists solely to promote discrimination against a particular population is still likely to directly financially benefit from this film, and will use that money to spread hate and intolerance.

  • http://taste-is-sweet.livejournal.com/ Aundrea Singer

    Personally, I’ve read the EG Novella and thought it was interesting, but I wasn’t planning on seeing it in theatres anyway. Now I’m not planning on seeing it at all.

    But I have to say that I’m disappointed with Ford’s choice to be in the movie. Didn’t he publicly support same-sex marriage recently? Maybe like me he didn’t know about OSC’s political views until it was too late?

  • Anonymous

    All of that is true, but if you boycott because you find OSC offensive, then the studios will make movies from inoffensive people (so you won’t boycott because of them) making inoffensive drivel (so that you won’t boycott because of that).

  • http://www.facebook.com/nuuni.nuunani Nuuni Nuunani

    Excuse me but out of curiosity, is there a special context with the term ‘buggers’? The significance is lost on me.

  • http://skemono.blogspot.com/ Skemono

    “Bugger” is British slang for–among other things–“sodomize” / “sodomite”.

  • http://skemono.blogspot.com/ Skemono

    He has a right to his views just like you have a right to yours. If you
    don’t support the right of someone to have an opposing viewpoint you do
    not support free speech, plain and simple.

    Given that no-one here has so much as intimated that Card is not entitled to have or even speak his views, looks like we all support free speech. So it’s strange that you’d even drop that in there, really.

  • Heina Dadabhoy

    I’ve read most of his works through the library. I’ve also picked them up at yard and rummage sales.

  • Laura Truxillo

    Yes, THIS. This exactly. This is modern Hollywood, movies aren’t really a one-time thing anymore.

  • Laura Truxillo

    But as RMCoyote pointed out, that’s the case with EVERY movie. You have to chose what you spend your money on. I don’t have enough money to see all the movies and support all the little people catching their first big break. (Heck, Harrison Ford is proof that if you’re going to be a rookie in Hollywood, you’d better be able to stand the crappy lean times and keep going.)

    I want to see more movies like Pacific Rim being made–I pay my money to go see Pacific Rim. I don’t want to see more movies like Lone Ranger being made–I don’t pay money and don’t see the movie.

  • Laura Truxillo

    I’m glad Pacific Rim beat it out of the gate. I get the feeling the last epic sci-fi battle movie to the table this summer’s gonna be left with scraps.

  • Laura Truxillo

    It’s something like “Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of people not to get their fee-fee’s hurt by being called out on their bulldookie.” Right?

  • Nick Gaston

    ‘s why I said “more than,” y’see.

  • Laura Truxillo

    At the very least, I hope it will teach them a lesson about making a big, bombastic, heartless and plastic movie.

    Or about letting Johnny Depp be Johnny Depp at things. We’re all very tired of it.

  • RMCoyote

    Exactly!

    Heck, unlike most of the people here (not saying that as a holier than thou, just as probable statistic likliehood) I support indie cinema and have spent 20 bucks on movies like “More Than Frybread” (which is gut bustingly hilarious), which will never be seen in the mainstream and are full of great talent that will likely never get their big shot because Hollywood sucks.

    If you are concerned about the little guys there are PLENTY of little guys to support that aren’t even big enough to make it into Hollywood and get the first big paycheck!

    Honestly, the whole “BUT THE LITTLE GUYS” argument strikes me as just trying to find a way to justify to yourself to see something. I mean, it’s logically bankrupt, because if you were concerned about every career from a flopped movie you would be going to see every single movie EVER.

  • Janelle S

    That’s a thing? There goes my afternoon.

  • totz the plaid

    Lionsgate is just attempting to play damage control.

    The fact is, they knew of OSC’s association with NOM before the deal to make the movie was finalized. There’s no way they didn’t.

    They knew that paying him, meant that at least some of that money would go to NOM.

    If they were _true_ allies of the LGBTQ Community, they never would’ve optioned the movie in the first place, no matter how great the story is.

  • Anonymous

    It means that they are going to write a lengthy speech about the perceived slight, and it only costs you your time.

  • Anonymous

    It is a desperate move, certainly. However, having read the books long before I even knew what a douchebag Orson Scott Card was, I believed them to be filled with a message for tolerance for a long time. I didn’t know it was just my perspective superimposed on the author’s true intent and religious martyrdom but nevertheless, they are right in a way. The book and the movie is not about anti-gay views or anti-anything.

  • Anonymous

    They probably should never have associated with him in the first place, if they are pro-LGBT. Everyone’s entitled to his/her opinion on anything without being ostracized but anyone can see it goes way farther than simply having an opinion, for OSC. He’s basically been calling for gay concentration camps.

    How can you give that guy money if you’re pro-LGBT?

  • Anonymous

    At the same time, it could be viewed as an author trying to attract attention to an issue. The same way Margaret Atwood does in Handmaid’s Tale.

    OSC felt the need to comment and explain what his intent was with the story, because it can be read in different ways and he needed people to know the idea was intolerance. It could be read both ways.

  • Anonymous

    The point, you are missing it.

  • Anonymous

    In what world is Ender’s Game a ‘novella’? It’s a full fledged book.

  • http://taste-is-sweet.livejournal.com/ Aundrea Singer

    Quoting from Wikipedia: “The original novelette “Ender’s Game” provides a small snapshot of Ender’s experiences in Battle School and Command School…” Here’s the full article, in case you’re interested: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ender%27s_Game (Also according to Wikipedia, ‘novelette’ is the same as ‘novella’, which is a piece of fiction longer than a short story by shorter than a novel. Here’s more information on that, too: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novella#Versus_novelette)

    And hey, Ender’s Game was originally a *short story* written in 1977. How about that?

    So, the world where I read the original novella instead of the novel is the world where it exists. I’m not sure, however, why you felt that it was necessary to be rude about it.

  • Anonymous

    No I get the point. I get the point of calling for the boycott, I get that Lionsgate is a bunch of hypocritical money-grubbing wimps. I’m just making a point: that when they say the movie is not about anti-gay anything, they are correct. They are misguided but they are not lying.

  • Jocelyn Burns

    I wasn’t aware of Card’s views until now. In no way did his homophobic ways come across in any of his books, and I’m sure it will not in this movie. Although I do agree that we shouldn’t put money into this guys pocket, there are other people involved in this film and as Lionsgate stated, they don’t share any of his views. I don’t think other people should be penalized for Card’s view and I don’t think that people who read the book and see the movie should be penalized for their devotion to the story. Many people enjoy his book and i’m sure will enjoy the movie without sharing the homophobic views of Card.

  • Anonymous

    A majority of Americans agree with Card and a majority of states’ marriage laws agree with Card.

    Why the need for an apology?

  • Red Snow

    There’s a movement afoot (I only heard about it this afternoon) to get a petition and/or a writing campaign up, beseeching Lionsgate itself to drop the movie entirely before they lose any more money. This would be a good site to start such a letter-writing campaign. If I can track down that original posting I’ll return and provide the URL. Sounds like a good idea to me. — that and protesting distributors and the theaters where the movie will be shown. Voices of protest are always heard!

  • Elena

    It references the Medieval Bogomil heresy, who as they came from Bulgaria were nicknamed “bougres”. As happened with most heresies, they were accused of having great parties with lots of gay sex. The Cathars were similarly said to have lots of buttsecs and thus they also had the “bougre” label applied to them. Anyway, the idea that “bougre” = “sodomite” took hold, and that’s where “buggery” and “bugger” come from.

    OSC was reportedly unaware of this meaning and just went “bugs” —> “buggers”.

    (now you know)

  • Brian

    Really? A majority of Americans agree gay people should be arrested? A majority of Americans believe gay parents should be forcibly separated from their children? A majority of Americans believe we should rise up in violent rebellion against the government if they allow gay marriage?

    Oh, you meant just on the marriage thing. Well, I got bad news for you, man. A majority of Americans support gay marriage. By a margin of 15 percent on average. And those laws are changing. Get used to it.

  • Brian

    “In no way did his homophobic ways come across in any of his books”

    Heh. You should read “Hamlet’s Father”.

  • Anonymous

    I wasn’t calling them out about the movie’s anti-gay or not anti-gay content. I was calling them out for claiming that OSC and NOM’s views are “irrelevant to a discussion.” They are deliberately misunderstanding the entire point of the boycott, which is that giving *money* to the movie means giving money to *OSC* and thence to NOM.

  • Anonymous

    I first got them from my local library (about 20 years ago, and boy, does that make me feel old), few years later I bought EG and SFTD at a second-hand bookstore, because I wasn’t getting enough pocket money to buy a new copy… I haven’t spent a single cent on OSC’s books after learning about his views and more importantly about his financial support for anti-gay organizations.

  • kristen mchugh

    First: Both of your assertions are controverted directly by numerous polls. That some states have enacted bans while some have enacted marriage equality ignores that many states have done neither. The 2013 polling data reflects that anywhere from 47% to 55% +/- margin of error, agree that marriage equality should be in place, while about 33% disagree. The apology is part of basic humanity.

  • Anonymous

    To me Ender’s Game series is very strange, because the way I saw it when I was a kid and the way I see it now clash so badly.

    Back then it was an awesome science fiction story where the kids were the special ones and the heroes, there was the idea of games being used to educate, and in the long run to save the world and actually create a new form of life, and I absolutely loved the idea of Hierarchy of Foreignness and slavering monsters, trees and computer programs actually being people. To a 13 year old geeky kid this all sounded absolutely awesome.

    And then I reread it as an adult and it turned into a completely different story, with many elements that completely went over my head back then. Suddenly there was martyrdom, psychological manipulation and total control, child endangerment and abuse, oppressed religious fundamentalists, messianic imagery, conflict of faith and science, uncomfortable ideas about family and sexuality… Not the same book at all. One thing that was really hard for me to explain was how the hell the same man could beautifully talk about trees and giant insects being people who deserve the same treatment as humans, and also put all that garbage into his story. Not to mention his views about real-world issues. Because it would mean that for OSC a guy boinking another guy is a whole level of magnitude worse than attempted genocide, which is just too ridiculous for words.

    All in all, I’m kinda curious about what the film will do with all this mess. I really wish someone would one day make a film version of “Ender’s Game as seen by a kid”, because that was one fantastic story. But for that to happen someone would have to “reboot” the entire concept and write a new book with the same themes, because the original is burdened by all those things I’ve just listed.

    I’m also wondering about pirating the film, which is what I initially wanted to do. This is mentioned in the article as one of the “possible solutions” for those who don’t want to support OSC, but isn’t this also a sign for the studio that they should continue making this kind of stories? We know that GoT’s huge “success” on TPB and similar sites had some impact on what HBO is doing and was mentioned by mainstream media everywhere. If EG becomes an instant online hit, it could be seen as encouragement, because obviously the people want to see the movie. I’m a bit torn about this.

  • Anonymous

    Do you mind if I steal this for a Facebook status (with credit, of course)? You put into words so eloquently what I have been trying to say.

  • Carl Jackson

    Wouldn’t it make more sense to just ask them to offset any payment to Card with a donation plus one percent to a LGBT cause?

    The company has sunk probably 150 million minimum into this. It’s going to come out.

  • Anonymous

    Polls? I was speaking of reality.

    Same-sex marriage initiatives have been on state ballots 57 times — each and every time, including twice in CA, voters have rejected same-sex marriage. The only means by which same-sex marriage has been legalized in some states is either through the courts or through legislative action, never by the will of the people.

    There’s no reason people in these states, or Hollywood corporations located in those states somehow acting on their behalf, need to apologize for favoring traditional marriage.

  • http://youtube.com/user/oneminutegalactica OneMinuteGalactica

    “The only means by which same-sex marriage has been legalized in some states is either through the courts or through legislative action, never by the will of the people.”

    Surprised no one has bothered to call out this lie yet.

    In Nov. 2012, voters in Maine, Maryland and Washington chose to legalize gay marriage. And Minnesota voted down a constitutional amendment that would have defined marriage as being a union solely between a man and a woman.

    So that’s four times right there.

  • Anonymous

    Nope — not sure if your research was limited to Wikipedia or something but the OR initiative isn’t slated for the ballot until 2014. ME, MD, and WA passed their same-sex marriage laws via the state legislatures. (FYI, MN doesn’t even allow legislation to be passed by initiative, only state constitutional amendments.)

    No word yet whether these states will also approve consanguineous marriage and plural marriage.

  • Adam Grima

    Oh get over it, I can like OSC’s book and still think he is a bigoted idiot. The same way I can drive a car and not give a crap what the religious views were of the guy who did the 3d modelling for it.

    Unless the bigoted views were promoted by the movie it is completely irrelevant, it’s just an easy headline for an activist group.

  • Anonymous

    You’re right, they are ignoring the purpose of the boycott because the whole point of the movie is to make money so their goals don’t really align here.

  • Eve

    I was also inspired by that book.

  • Megaera

    ‘Democracy is not freedom. Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to eat for lunch. Freedom comes from the recognition of certain rights which may not be taken away, not even by a 99% vote.’ ~Anon~

  • Guymelef

    So you’re suggesting people be tolerant of intolerance?

  • Guymelef

    Colloquially, it’s just a general insult, but its actual definition means ‘to sodomise’.

  • Nat

    While I don’t agree with the Mormon religion, every Mormon I’ve met (a handful admittedly) have been the kindest people I have ever known and have been incriedbly welcoming and warm, even though I’m openly bi. Fundamentalistists in every religion are sketchy. just my 2cents

  • Nat

    Actually movie theater’s only make about a nickel on each ticket for a new movie and about 1-2 cents the longer ht emovie has been out. This is why concession prices are so high.

  • Nat

    I enjoy the world of Tolkien but damn if I can’t get through even a few chapters of his books. I did enjoy return of the king but that’s because I skipped most of it.

  • Nat

    This. My dad’s a full fledged geek and he had no idea about OSC’s personaly views. I support same-sex marriage but I dont’ really frequent LGBTQ blogs and if a particuarly story doesn’t get picked up by main stream or a popular blog I visit, I won’t know about it and I spend the majority of my day online

  • Ruby Dynamite

    Sorry, but I lost any and all sympathy for Mormons when I found out the LDS church was instrumental in funneling money to NOM to make sure Prop 8 was passed. I’ll say the same thing about *any* church that interferes with the due democratic process of elections and voting. It doesn’t matter if some of them ‘are really nice’ or ‘are trying to make up for it now’ — the damage was done, all thanks to them.

    I’m an atheist. That ‘turn the other cheek’ shit doesn’t fly with me.

  • Anonymous

    Sorry, I didn’t know there were two printed versions of the story. And for the record, I wasn’t trying being rude, but I’ll try to remember that tone and inflection aren’t easily conveyed in writing. You might like the story better if you haven’t read the book, which is excellent. I recommend renting it from the library. Ender’s Game was my gateway book and I consider the rest of the series (excluding Ender’s Game) to have the same kind of philosophical weight to it that many of Arthur C. Clark’s books had. It’s really too bad that OSC is a crappy person (or rather, being actively crappy is a large part of his defining moral character).

  • Ashe

    It’s more like, he actively gives his money, which we give him, to campaigns that seek to shut down opportunities for the LGBTQ community.

    There are artists who say bigoted shit or throw around disgusting slurs whose works I still enjoy, but with news like this, it’s making me wise up on where exactly my money is going to.

  • Ashe

    “If you really think not seeing a film will change the world, well then more power to you.”

    Nice strawman.

  • Ashe

    Don’t tell me you’ve grown weary of his bug-eyed, slurry speeched, limp-wristed, stone-faced, wacky, drunken, childishly unpredictable whimsy!

  • Ashe

    Approximately 82% of the internet would be screened.

  • Ashe

    Ahh, the scent of a company who wants to have their cake and eat it too.

    Smells like shit.

  • Megaera

    I suspect the main originality and interest of his work lies in the ‘character classes’ he invented, which, by the time I read them in the 1980s, were pretty old hat, because they had been picked up on by so many subsequent writers and by RPGs etc. I enjoy well-rounded characters and character-driven plots, but by the time I got to Tolkein, his characters were caricatures to me. (In fairness, I think they were all character-types/classes rather than rounded characters, but the originality of the work might have carried me through that if it had been as fresh to me as it was to contemporary readers the day it was published.)

  • Megaera

    They are called ‘buggers’ because they are insectoid aliens (bugs). Just as, IRL, people make up stupid, infantile and insulting names for people who they regard as their enemies, or who they regard as lesser than themselves. Silly names for enemies have even been created and disseminated as deliberate military policy in times of war, to dehumanise the enemy and reduce empathy for them among one’s own people.

    ‘Rag-heads’, ‘Beaners’ and ‘Kooks’ are examples of the kind of silly name we come up with. We’re accustomed to them, so we don’t usually recognise how ridiculous and childish they are. If we didn’t already know those terms, and if any of them were used as a derogatory term for aliens in a novel, we would find them ridiculous and infantile, too.

    Or maybe OSC is not as sophisticated in his thinking as I assumed when I first read this as a teenager. ;) It’s really just as well that that every reader brings their own perspective to a work – a perspective that is as relevant as whatever the author intended – isn’t it?

  • Megaera

    Bottom line: some people are great and others are shitty, regardless of religion. Shitty people will find justification for their prejudices and for whatever they want to do, whether through rationalisation or through cherry-picking their religious texts. Good people who do shitty things will eventually realise that what they did was shitty, and will re-orient themselves and try to make amends.

  • Ruby Dynamite

    Orson Scott Card made the CHOICE to remain in the church, to write his books, to say the hateful shit he’s said about gay people and marriage equality, and now that we’re making a choice and saying ‘nope – no, thank you – also, fuck you’, he’s acting butthurt.

    He chose to be an asshole and doubled down on it. Just because he’s a member of a church doesn’t mean he’s a moral person or making a ‘moral’ decision based on his beliefs.

    Seeking equality for everyone isn’t bigotry. Bigotry is bigotry. We’re not being bigoted towards OSC – we’re seeing his hateful behavior and *rejecting it,* because this society can do far better than homophobic, arrogant assholes like Card.

  • Ruby Dynamite

    Seriously. Small studios and indie features would be harmed more than a studio like Lionsgate.

    If they have literal millions to throw at a single picture, then me not going to see this movie more than likely isn’t going to break them. As someone else pointed out – if it comes down to a *single* movie potentially ruining the studio, that’s more an issue of mismanagement than anything else.

  • Ruby Dynamite

    It’s called having principles. Look it up, sometime.

  • http://youtube.com/user/oneminutegalactica OneMinuteGalactica

    But…you’re wrong. I guess they were approved first in the legislature (which I didn’t know about it, admittedly, because I don’t follow this stuff). But last November, voters backed up the legislature. With their votes.

    But that was funny with the Wikipedia joke and all. Actually, it was a pretty understated insult, what with this being the Internet.

  • http://youtube.com/user/oneminutegalactica OneMinuteGalactica

    http://www.ncsl.org/legislatures-elections/elections/same-sex-marriage-on-the-ballot.aspx

    Just in case you still don’t believe me or something. I know you’re heavily invested in this, unlike me, but I like to think I can look something up on the Internet and not be a liar, regardless of whether I agree with something or not.

  • http://taste-is-sweet.livejournal.com/ Aundrea Singer

    Thank you. :)

    I’ve been considering reading the full version of Ender’s Game (as well as the rest of the series), but what I’ve read about OSC has left such a bad taste in my mouth that I don’t want to give his work my time, even if he wouldn’t get money from my reading it.

  • http://youtube.com/user/oneminutegalactica OneMinuteGalactica

    I have to admit, I was kind of hoping for an “I guess I was wrong.” Not to gloat, but just as a simple act of humanness on the Internet.

  • Hypatia

    There’s a big difference between boycotting a movie because the creator is anti-gay, or because the creator is gay. I wouldn’t boycott a Jew’s film, but I’d boycott an anti-Semite’s film. One is a state of existence; one is a choice.

  • Hypatia

    They should post what Card said.

    “Regardless of law, marriage has only one definition, and any government
    that attempts to change it is my mortal enemy. I will act to destroy
    that government and bring it down, so it can be replaced with a
    government that will respect and support marriage.” (2008)

    Opposing gay rights is one thing, pledging to overthrow the government to stop gay marriage is another.

  • Hypatia

    To paraphrase Phil Ochs, “We’re not homophobes! Some of our best gays are friends!”