Ender's Game (movie)
- Thread starter strawman
- Start date
It's Charlie though, he's two faced about everything when it's convenient. Much how my sister pointed out before he left the forums for that long period of time.
Yeah, this is why I care more about Card than Polanski. He's out there actively promoting his views, and I think they're fucking crazy.
Shouldn't that be "Didn't CM Punk teach you anything?"?*you're
DID CM PUNK TEACH YOU ANYTHING?!
Shit, I originally typed "nothing" and then changed it. Blame it on me just waking up.
Oh, I respect that and I'm sure if I thought hard enough I could come up with some artist I find reprehensible enough to say I wouldn't view their art, etc. I guess I just can't think of one right now.
I suppose I do view a business like Chik-fil-A or Starbucks or whatever as different from art like books or movies or music though. I suppose because theres a million different options for what are basic commodities while art *tends* to be unique. So sure, theres other sci-fi, but Enders Game is it's own unique thing that I can't go get a comparable replacement for.
They've been relative ghost towns since the boycotts in Austin. Whereas before you'd see them packed to the brim at all hours. Now they barely get a lunch rush.
Question: There has been, historically, a link between those individuals who are creators who can produce things that no one else has ever conceived of, whether technological or artistic, and decided antisocial tendencies. Should leeway be given when the very fact that these people think differently is what enables them to be creators in the first place? (Important note: When I say "leeway", do not confuse it with forgiveness or acceptance of this behavior. Rather, do we accept that these works can be appreciated, but come with a certain amount of unwanted byproducts. Also, these byproducts are limited in scope to opinion. The actual victimization of others is an obvious line not to be crossed.)
I guess the example that comes to mind is that Thomas Edison was a notorious douchebag, but I don't see anyone suggesting that we turn in all of our light bulbs.
I guess the example that comes to mind is that Thomas Edison was a notorious douchebag, but I don't see anyone suggesting that we turn in all of our light bulbs.
It's simple, if someone does something I find morally reprehensible and I have the opportunity to not give them any direct kind of financial gain, then I will.
To use your example: If there were an Edison Brand light bulb, I'd buy the competitor instead.
My example: I do not eat at Chik-Fil-A anymore, despite visiting twice a months prior. I instead eat elsewhere.
An example of separating art from artist: I will watch a Tom Cruise movie, because he's already gotten paid for the acting and will not further benefit from my attending his film. Knowing he's a complete nutcase IRL does not keep me from believing his characters on screen either.
I disagree, because I believe these people will continue to be whomever they are regardless of how much money they make. OSC will continue to be a crazy bigot whether this movie tanks or becomes the highest grossing film of all time. Polanski will still be a rapist piece of shit. So in my opinion people might as well enjoy the art they create, if they are going to enjoy it at all. That's how I separate the art from the artist.
It's illegal to seel light bulbs in Belgium, except under very limiting conditions. LEDs and CFLs are the norm, with halogens when you need dimming.
Yes, that's ridiculous, but it's also true.
That said - the House/Sherlock/etc stereotype of the antisocial genius is based in reality, yes. As long as it's just opinions, meh. The line between genius and crazy is thin, and all that, and we ned those creative types - be it Edison, Einstein, or Pollock.
This violates your own logic. If you buy a ticket to a Tom Cruise movie, his sales go up. The higher his sales go, the more appealing he is to studios. The more appealing he is, the more work he gets and the more money he gets. Therefore you are supporting him, and allowing him to keep being a crazy asshole.
That's indirect gain, not quite the same. I'm not directly putting money in his pockets, but yes, he stays appealing to movie studios so it's indirect. I understand and that's just the way I do it.
The problem with this logic is that OSC has donated decent sums of money to supporting anti-gay movements and propositions, and stemming his income would effectively stem his ability to do that sort of thing.
I won't be seeing Ender's Game in theatres mostly because I didn't much care for the book.
I won't be seeing it in theaters because it's probably going to suck, even though I adore the book. As Nostalgia Chick pointed out in her Ender's Game video, the book feels like it was written by someone less bigoted and hateful than OSC.
I wish I could claim some moral high ground on other names here, but Polanski's movies are so fucking good.
But if you need an artist to abstain from, there's Victor Salva, director of the Jeepers Creepers films, who molested a six-year-old.
I wish I could claim some moral high ground on other names here, but Polanski's movies are so fucking good.
But if you need an artist to abstain from, there's Victor Salva, director of the Jeepers Creepers films, who molested a six-year-old.
I still don't want to see this, but my 11-year-old cousin really wants to go. I told him that if he finishes the book by opening weekend, I'll take him. His moms bought it for him back in August, so there was plenty of time.
He hasn't started it yet. I think I'm in the clear.
He hasn't started it yet. I think I'm in the clear.
Still a great big...
...from me.
...from me.
Dave
Staff member
I watched Wolverine last night. Terrible movie. Absolutely crap. Predictable and stupid. If that's the bar you're measuring it by I'm not convinced.
GasBandit
Staff member
Are you guys talking about the same movie? Hood directed X-Men Origins: Wolverine (2009), not The Wolverine (2013). I didn't think the 2009 one was absolutely horrible, and I haven't seen the 2013 one.
Dave
Staff member
Probably different movies, then I don't know who directs what, usually. I retract my derision.
GasBandit
Staff member
Did he go to Japan in yours, or did he tussle with Sabertooth for his whole life?
The former is 2013, the latter is 2009.
What are we deciding?
I think I'm just cautious because I don't want to go in knowing that I love the book and be disappointed. If I go in, loving the book, but expecting a mediocre rendition of it, I am less likely to be disappointed.
But, you know, I enjoyed transformers despite its flaws, so I'm sure I'll enjoy it from an entertainment standpoint. My worry is mainly what is the major theme?
So on and so forth. They might have just plucked the neat ideas out of the book and turned it into a popcorn flick, which would probably still be enjoyable, but annoying.
But, you know, I enjoyed transformers despite its flaws, so I'm sure I'll enjoy it from an entertainment standpoint. My worry is mainly what is the major theme?
The "twist" at the end was never meant to be important, it was the using children as instruments of war and genocide, and the ethical questions surrounding that. Secondarily it approached the odd mixture of genius and psychopathy, and the underlying social structures formed by very intelligent people of widely varying personalities.
Will the movie, like the book, show ender as a flawed human being prior to the events that turn him into a hero? Are we going to hear anything about how children are selected? How much of Ender's Shadow is used - does Bean shine as brightly as Ender?
Will the movie, like the book, show ender as a flawed human being prior to the events that turn him into a hero? Are we going to hear anything about how children are selected? How much of Ender's Shadow is used - does Bean shine as brightly as Ender?
So on and so forth. They might have just plucked the neat ideas out of the book and turned it into a popcorn flick, which would probably still be enjoyable, but annoying.
See I get what you're trying to say but Transformers wasn't -just- bad from a source material perspective, it was also a bad movie on the counts of what makes a film good. I'm very sure Ender's Game won't follow in that sort of direction. It'll be a well done film I'm sure.