I was flipping through an entertainment magazine and it had a picture of Harrison Ford and the kid from Hugo for Ender's Game. I haven't seen a link about this on either the main page or in the forums.
Did anyone else miss that they are already filming?
Most people here are aware of it and there have been a few threads about it. The general feeling is a reluctant excitement since most people don't want to be let down and don't want their favorite book of all time ruined.
For some reason I thought the release date was early 2013. Either I was completely off the mark or they changed it. It's now November 1, 2013.
Posted by SteveRogers (Member # 7130) on :
It was originally supposed to be released in March of 2013, but they changed it to a November release date.
Posted by Stephan (Member # 7549) on :
I think it was March at some point, I was surprised to see it changed to November.
It can't ruin the book, no matter how bad it is. At least not for me. I have been reading the thing for 20 years now. If the movie stinks, I just won't watch it again. I am just happy to see Hollywood taking a chance on it.
My prediction is that it just will not do well financially, no matter how good it is.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
I predict it will be surprisingly good, and at least as far as Utah movie goers are concerned, everybody will go see it. I will be surprised if it ends up at a loss after worldwide grosses are tabulated. I expect it will make a decent profit.
Mr. Card is something of a minor celebrity out here.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
I'd be shocked if it was bad enough to suffer a loss. Big stars in it, good looking effects it seems, classic story that's easy to sell in a trailer, and the media will hype the book connection, giving it credibility with uninitiated audiences.
The issue will be whether it makes only enough to make it an auto-green light for a sequel of dubious quality (or a large enough return to green-light a serious sequel).
Posted by steven (Member # 8099) on :
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro: I'd be shocked if it was bad enough to suffer a loss. Big stars in it, good looking effects it seems, classic story that's easy to sell in a trailer, and the media will hype the book connection, giving it credibility with uninitiated audiences.
The issue will be whether it makes only enough to make it an auto-green light for a sequel of dubious quality (or a large enough return to green-light a serious sequel).
Agreed. It's got Harrison Ford, for pete's sake. He was in Cowboys vs Aliens. I seriously doubt even an average-ish rendition of EG will be worse than that, and probably a lot better.
All the studio needs to do is promote it well, and it'll make some money.
The question is not only "can we get a GOOD 'Speaker for the Dead' out of this?", but "can we get a GOOD 'Seventh Son' and 'Red Prophet' too?".
Posted by Ginol_Enam (Member # 7070) on :
I doubt the potential success of EG would have much affect on the chances of un-Ender related OSC books being made into movies.
The only way I see it having much of an impact is if its a total runaway success and that momentum continues throughout whatever they decide an Ender movieverse would consist of. Once they run out of Ender ideas, they could potentially try to use OSC himself as a brand similar to what they're doing with Stephanie Meyer and The Host. I don't see this happening after just one movie, though, regardless of how successful.
Posted by umberhulk (Member # 11788) on :
quote:Originally posted by steven:
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro: I'd be shocked if it was bad enough to suffer a loss. Big stars in it, good looking effects it seems, classic story that's easy to sell in a trailer, and the media will hype the book connection, giving it credibility with uninitiated audiences.
The issue will be whether it makes only enough to make it an auto-green light for a sequel of dubious quality (or a large enough return to green-light a serious sequel).
Agreed. It's got Harrison Ford, for pete's sake. He was in Cowboys vs Aliens. I seriously doubt even an average-ish rendition of EG will be worse than that, and probably a lot better.
All the studio needs to do is promote it well, and it'll make some money.
The question is not only "can we get a GOOD 'Speaker for the Dead' out of this?", but "can we get a GOOD 'Seventh Son' and 'Red Prophet' too?".
Cowboys and Aliens completely bombed.
Golden Compass (which is pretty analagous to Ender's Game in terms of book popularity) put New Line in the dump.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by Ginol_Enam: I doubt the potential success of EG would have much affect on the chances of un-Ender related OSC books being made into movies.
The only way I see it having much of an impact is if its a total runaway success and that momentum continues throughout whatever they decide an Ender movieverse would consist of. Once they run out of Ender ideas, they could potentially try to use OSC himself as a brand similar to what they're doing with Stephanie Meyer and The Host. I don't see this happening after just one movie, though, regardless of how successful.
Tom Clancy comes to mind, as does John Grisham. The Clancy parallel is closer- but his books are more formulaic and mapped out like movies in the first place.
I would bet on a Non-speaker sequel involving story elements from Ender in Exile, although it would be significantly different as a film, story wise. But I think this film would have to make a metric ton of money (actually closer to about 3 metric tons considering the actual weight of money), in order for a sequel to be contemplated. It just isn't a film that lends itself to a sequel -which is why the original story had no direct sequel for 30 years (and the eventual direct sequel was itself a very different type of novel).
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by umberhulk:
quote:Originally posted by steven:
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro: I'd be shocked if it was bad enough to suffer a loss. Big stars in it, good looking effects it seems, classic story that's easy to sell in a trailer, and the media will hype the book connection, giving it credibility with uninitiated audiences.
The issue will be whether it makes only enough to make it an auto-green light for a sequel of dubious quality (or a large enough return to green-light a serious sequel).
Agreed. It's got Harrison Ford, for pete's sake. He was in Cowboys vs Aliens. I seriously doubt even an average-ish rendition of EG will be worse than that, and probably a lot better.
All the studio needs to do is promote it well, and it'll make some money.
The question is not only "can we get a GOOD 'Speaker for the Dead' out of this?", but "can we get a GOOD 'Seventh Son' and 'Red Prophet' too?".
Cowboys and Aliens completely bombed.
Golden Compass (which is pretty analagous to Ender's Game in terms of book popularity) put New Line in the dump.
Actually Cowboys and Aliens recouped its budget. It's very difficult to say whether it was a financial success. Due to Hollywood accounting, it's extremely tricky to calculate whether the company suffers a loss, even when the box office return comes in under the stated budget. This is partly because a lot of the "costs," of a film have bonuses and premiums figured in before they are paid out, and also because studio owners pay their *own* subsidiaries for various services, which funnels money from one side of a corporation to the other, without an actual total loss to the parent group. Then there is the advertising budget, which itself is sometimes a significant percentage of the production budget (or as much as twice the production budget, for a comedy).
So for instance, it is possible for a film with a stated budget of $100M, to make box office of $80M, and be an actual financial success. That is, if some greater part of that $100 million is internal revenue for the corporation, and in addition, some of that stated budget is never actually realized as payments to actors. This is done to pump up the "quote" of an actor. So for instance, the studio "pays," Harrison Ford $10M, and that falls into the budget, except the agreement states that Ford receives 50% of this from net earnings (in some order with other profiting parties), meaning that it is never actually payed, but goes on the books as an outlay, that is then written down by the company as a "loss."
This was the main reason why Schwarzenegger was considered such a big shot in the 80's and 90's, because he got profit sharing deals that figured his payment from the *gross* of the film. Meaning he *always* made money, no matter what.
There are actors that have a "quote" of $20M or more, but never actually see most of that money -it's all hype. Denzel Washington, for instance, has a pay or play contract arrangement that guarantees him a supposed $20M payment for each film, except if you actually look at his finances, his net worth is under $150M dollars, when it should be closer to $300M. Schwarzenegger did fewer films, and for a lower quote, and is worth up to 6 times that much.
Posted by Geraine (Member # 9913) on :
You never know. Ender's Game has been around for almsot 30 years now, so I wouldn't expect it to be as big as Hunger Games or Twilight. Then again, I am Legend did pretty well in the theatre, and the book that movie was based on was even older. It had a budget of $150 million and made over $250 million world wide.
I think it will do pretty well, but they REALLY need to start releasing teaser trailers soon in order to start generating hype. From what I remember most of the "big" movies that sci-fi fans watch this year are coming out this summer (they usually do) so moving the film to November may end up being a good move. The day after Thanksgiving crowd could only help it!
Posted by umberhulk (Member # 11788) on :
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro:
quote:Originally posted by umberhulk:
quote:Originally posted by steven:
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro: I'd be shocked if it was bad enough to suffer a loss. Big stars in it, good looking effects it seems, classic story that's easy to sell in a trailer, and the media will hype the book connection, giving it credibility with uninitiated audiences.
The issue will be whether it makes only enough to make it an auto-green light for a sequel of dubious quality (or a large enough return to green-light a serious sequel).
Agreed. It's got Harrison Ford, for pete's sake. He was in Cowboys vs Aliens. I seriously doubt even an average-ish rendition of EG will be worse than that, and probably a lot better.
All the studio needs to do is promote it well, and it'll make some money.
The question is not only "can we get a GOOD 'Speaker for the Dead' out of this?", but "can we get a GOOD 'Seventh Son' and 'Red Prophet' too?".
Cowboys and Aliens completely bombed.
Golden Compass (which is pretty analagous to Ender's Game in terms of book popularity) put New Line in the dump.
Actually Cowboys and Aliens recouped its budget. It's very difficult to say whether it was a financial success. Due to Hollywood accounting, it's extremely tricky to calculate whether the company suffers a loss, even when the box office return comes in under the stated budget. This is partly because a lot of the "costs," of a film have bonuses and premiums figured in before they are paid out, and also because studio owners pay their *own* subsidiaries for various services, which funnels money from one side of a corporation to the other, without an actual total loss to the parent group. Then there is the advertising budget, which itself is sometimes a significant percentage of the production budget (or as much as twice the production budget, for a comedy).
So for instance, it is possible for a film with a stated budget of $100M, to make box office of $80M, and be an actual financial success. That is, if some greater part of that $100 million is internal revenue for the corporation, and in addition, some of that stated budget is never actually realized as payments to actors. This is done to pump up the "quote" of an actor. So for instance, the studio "pays," Harrison Ford $10M, and that falls into the budget, except the agreement states that Ford receives 50% of this from net earnings (in some order with other profiting parties), meaning that it is never actually payed, but goes on the books as an outlay, that is then written down by the company as a "loss."
This was the main reason why Schwarzenegger was considered such a big shot in the 80's and 90's, because he got profit sharing deals that figured his payment from the *gross* of the film. Meaning he *always* made money, no matter what.
There are actors that have a "quote" of $20M or more, but never actually see most of that money -it's all hype. Denzel Washington, for instance, has a pay or play contract arrangement that guarantees him a supposed $20M payment for each film, except if you actually look at his finances, his net worth is under $150M dollars, when it should be closer to $300M. Schwarzenegger did fewer films, and for a lower quote, and is worth up to 6 times that much.
From what I understand, money is spent on marketing after the fact; it isn't part of the production budget. Cowboys and Aliens had much more star power than EG, and it wasn't just coming from the actors.
(Kinda misread)
I dunno. C&A narrowly made it's budget back, and we don't know what extra was spent on marketing (it had a superbowl comercial). No strong opinion, but I wouldn't be shocked if EG sold to a small loss.
[ January 17, 2013, 03:35 PM: Message edited by: umberhulk ]
Posted by DustinDopps (Member # 12640) on :
The fact that it got moved to November actually seems to be a good sign to me. March isn't the best release window (if the studio expected big things they would wait for a summer push in May) but November is a prime spot. It makes me think the studio has faith in the movie, which gives me faith.
But I agree - even if it stinks, we'll still have the book. So whatever.
Edited to say: I understand the push back in release might be due to not having the film ready by March, but at least it wasn't dumped in August or September, the months movies go to when they're stinkers.
Posted by JonHecht (Member # 9712) on :
Huh, they made Alai Indian.
Posted by theamazeeaz (Member # 6970) on :
To answer the OP's question, I think that we're so used to talk about the movie meaning absolutely nothing, that the idea of the movie coming along and being real just doesn't exist, and then all of a sudden it happened.
Posted by madvogon (Member # 12938) on :
I'm not trying to hijack the thread, but I have some specific concerns about the movie.
First, my immediate reaction to news of the movie: They turned Jumper from a culturally appropriate anti-terrorism story into something almost unrecognizable. Ender's Game, done properly, is at least an R, if an NC-17, for child abuse and on-screen violence.
Second, in the movie's favor, Hollywood is slowly learning not to mess with the tween and teen market where favorite books are involved. The best example of this is The Hunger Games.
Earlier posts have mentioned the Golden Compass. To be fair, no one in Hollywood would touch killing God as an acceptable plot element. The third movie could not have been made as written.
Ender's Game is taught in many schools, so there may be a wider base than is apparent to regular fandom.
Based upon the casting for the movie, it seems more likely that the sequels will follow the Ender's Shadow path rather than Speaker and Children.
My third concern is casting in general and its impact on the story. My wife's first reaction to the cast list was that there are too many adults. Although adults were present in Battle School, moving them from an almost unseen background to the foreground changes the almost Darwinian purpose of the Battle School. Additionally, advancing the ages of Peter and Valentine, as evidenced by casting two 19 year olds in these roles, drastically diminishes the accomplishments of Locke and Demosthenes. In my opinion, as welcome as the presence of Ben Kingsley is in any movie, he is too old to play Mazer. He does not fit the mold of mentor/nemesis to a child of Ender's age.
Finally, just as a personal comment, the only way this movie works is to embrace the horror of what was done to Ender. They cannot make him a hero. I pray they forced the entire production staff to listen to Julia Ecklar's "Tin Soldier" non-stop for several hours before they touched the property.
Let us not forget: The enemy gate is down.
Note from wife: I hope they don't break it so badly I have to refuse to go and forbid the Vogon from going too. Reference "I, Robot."
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by Geraine: You never know. Ender's Game has been around for almsot 30 years now, so I wouldn't expect it to be as big as Hunger Games or Twilight. Then again, I am Legend did pretty well in the theatre, and the book that movie was based on was even older. It had a budget of $150 million and made over $250 million world wide.
Also the book it's based on is *awful,* as an example of literature. Pure trash, but it goes to show that doesn't matter that much because the film is all about marketing and presentation. Also, that particular "adaption," was basically in name only.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by madvogon: Based upon the casting for the movie, it seems more likely that the sequels will follow the Ender's Shadow path rather than Speaker and Children.
I am struggling to see how this has any bearing at all on what the sequels will be. What casting decisions would have indicated the opposite? You cast for the film you're doing, not the film you might do later.
quote: In my opinion, as welcome as the presence of Ben Kingsley is in any movie, he is too old to play Mazer. He does not fit the mold of mentor/nemesis to a child of Ender's age.
Ben Kingsley is not significantly older than Mazer's character in the novel. Also, 69 is not 69 on film- lighting, angles, makeup, stunt choreography- actors play to the age of the character.
quote: the only way this movie works is to embrace the horror of what was done to Ender. They cannot make him a hero.
I get a sense that you've lost perspective on what this novel is about, overall. The fim needs engaging, likable adult characters who *do* monstrous things, even though they love their charges, and don't want to be hurting them. That's the central conflict of the novel- you just rarely get that from the adult perspective. The film's perspective will necessarily be different because we won't have Ender has a POV narrator. That means more adult characters, and a different perspective.
Posted by umberhulk (Member # 11788) on :
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro: [QUOTE]Originally posted by madvogon: [qb]Based upon the casting for the movie, it seems more likely that the sequels will follow the Ender's Shadow path rather than Speaker and Children.
It could make more sense to do Shadow, from a marketing perspective, because part of the appeal to a sequel is come back to the familiar characters' face and hear their exact voices. Particularly with Graff, since he would actually be in Ender's Shadow, and Harrison Ford could help sell the movie again.
Speaker would be the first direct sequel in history, or atleast that I know of (dicounting something like Paranormal Activity as a direct sequel) not to have a single returning actor, assuming they didn't wait more than fifteen years.
Posted by sabracarioca (Member # 12940) on :
but "can we get a GOOD 'Seventh Son' and 'Red Prophet' too?".
OK, my first post and I'll get skewered for asking this - but what are "Seventh Son" and "Red Prophet?"
Sorry, I recently happened onto Orson Scott Card and Ender's Game instantaneously made me return to writing and became of my of 3 favorite books of all time. I plowed through the entire Enderverse on audiobook and I am desperately looking for anything...anything at all, to get something similar to the Enderverse in tone and spirit. So if you have some info.......
I also don't see how Ender is anything other than a noble hero?
The series brought out Hyram Graff as a flawed hero. I ended up liking him tremendously as he was what virtually every world leader should aspire to be: a man who is ruthless and has gran aspirations and ambitions, yet is forced to do things that are terrible in the name of humanity.
If the Ender situation was real, Graff would be remembered as the co-founder of world peace and the father of interstellar travel. I'm quite sure that all of the heroic leaders of the 20th century have had some monstrous attributes to their resumes; can you imagine Winston Churchill as an example of a shining moral pearl without the backdrop of World War 2 to make him the hero he was.
Graff and Peter were in every sense of the word, absolutely realistic leaders and in comparison to some of the current crop of winners on the world stage, quite moral and somewhat sensitive and soft in comparison
In regards to Cowboy's and Aliens and The Golden Compass I think people are missing te obvious foibles
Cowboy's and Alien's was an attempt to mix two genres that really don't mix well. Old Western's and Sci-Fi. Director Jon Favreau acknowledged that this was something that would be hard to pull off. I'm not sure the movie did pull it off but from a character POV Daniel Craig managed to hold his own with Harrison Ford. I don't know how the movie did but it looked strange from the outset
I didn't see The Golden Compass nor was I aware that it was even a book. When I saw it the first thing that entered my mind was "why is James Bond playing in The Chronicles of Narnia?"
I didn't bother to see it and apparently i was vindicated
I think Ender's Game will be a success if the sci-fi aspect is played up well. When you take out all the things that make OSC OSC and look at the book from an outsiders perspective,; their is Harrison Ford looking to all the world as Han Solo by being on a space ship, ben Kinglsey as IMO a very young 69 (age is a bit of a soapbox for me and I don't consider 69 to be very old at all - I could go on for hours on this if anyone is interested)
There are fleets of spaceships, aliens and space battles with the actual story taking place in it. If the movie is a flop from the perspective of people not understanding the complexity of the characters, then the space battles should salvage it.
A sequel would, in my mind either follow the Shadow series and the aftermath or be a self-contained tale written specifically for the big screen. As much as I'd love to see it, I don't think ostof the Ender-verse aside from Ender's Game would transfer to the big screen: a televison show maybe, but no t film.
I COULD see OSC becoming a very Hollywood type writer in the vein of Joss Whedon or many of the comic book writers like Mark Millar who are suddenly getting consulting and advisory roles in big screen projects
I want to see OSC on Superman :-)
Posted by umberhulk (Member # 11788) on :
I wonder how they're actually going to do the strategy game.
Posted by AchillesHeel (Member # 11736) on :
I wonder if they are going to show a little boy digging his way into the eyeball of a giant.
Posted by sabracarioca (Member # 12940) on :
I hope so
Posted by umberhulk (Member # 11788) on :
IN 3D
Posted by Macery (Member # 8251) on :
quote:Originally posted by sabracarioca: but "can we get a GOOD 'Seventh Son' and 'Red Prophet' too?".
OK, my first post and I'll get skewered for asking this - but what are "Seventh Son" and "Red Prophet?"
"Seventh Son" and "Red Prophet" are the first 2 books in Card's "Tales of Alvin Maker" series.
Honestly I would have preferred this series be the first to make in to the big screen, because the story translates a little easier without the need for heavy CGI, and let's not forget if there is a movie sequel to EG which path would they take (shadow vs speaker).
As for the mention of the Giant, I thought I read in the twitterverse and the production blogs that the Giant's drink would not make it to the movie. Sad if they go the speaker route to lose the origin story for Jane Posted by umberhulk (Member # 11788) on :
My proposed voice actress for Jane.
Posted by Ginol_Enam (Member # 7070) on :
quote:Originally posted by madvogon: Ender's Game, done properly, is at least an R, if an NC-17, for child abuse and on-screen violence.
The only thing that would probably give the MPAA major pause would the child nudity, which Hollywood couldn't do anyway. The violence is no where near the level where an R is assumed, much less an NC-17. There ways you can film violent scenes without getting brutal enough for an R. The Dark Knight is a good example of this. The only instance in EG anyway where it might be an issue is the shower scene. Even then, it wouldn't be hard to edit that down and maintain the impact (it'll probably have to be reworked somehow anyway; nudity).
And that's for R. NC-17 would be out of the question. Maybe it should be NC-17 in your worldview, and that's fine, but there's no way the MPAA would give it that based on violence. It takes a lot of violence and gore to get a movie pushed to NC-17 on its own. That's why movie like Saw or Hostel could get made with the R rating.
Posted by umberhulk (Member # 11788) on :
Yeah, The Raid isn't even NC17. Neither is The Hills Have Eyes (2006), and that movie borders on being snuff film.
Posted by AchillesHeel (Member # 11736) on :
As strong as my stomach is when it comes to violent and shocking art, that particular scene from The Hills Have Eyes, the one in the camper is something I can't stand. If you've seen it you can probably guess which one.
Also, American Pie got away with graphically molesting a pie among a lot of other things. Memoirs of a Geisha had a child catching a couple mid-coitus, only to have an older woman put her hand inside the womans clothes to find and display the evidence. That was pg-13.
This Film Is Not Yet Rated is on Netflix, and it answers a few questions about how the MPAA reaches a decision.
Posted by theamazeeaz (Member # 6970) on :
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro:
quote:Originally posted by madvogon: [qb] [QUOTE] In my opinion, as welcome as the presence of Ben Kingsley is in any movie, he is too old to play Mazer. He does not fit the mold of mentor/nemesis to a child of Ender's age.
Ben Kingsley is not significantly older than Mazer's character in the novel. Also, 69 is not 69 on film- lighting, angles, makeup, stunt choreography- actors play to the age of the character.
He did age on the ship, a little bit. He can be any age beyond middle age really, because of the ship thing.
Honestly, my only thought was, "Damn, they dropped the ball on getting a Maori guy, what about the guy who was Boba Fett in the Star Wars prequels?"
Posted by sabracarioca (Member # 12940) on :
KInglseys ethnicity is ambiguous enough to qualify iMO
Posted by Stone_Wolf_ (Member # 8299) on :
There has to be some wiggle room when changing formats, and as long as they represent that battle school is ethnically diverse then I'm good.
I'm happy about Sir Ben, he is one of the best actors still working today.
Posted by Jeff C. (Member # 12496) on :
In my opinion, what's going to make or break this movie is the directing. They must focus in on the emotional depth of the characters and the situations, since there isn't a narrator and we won't be inside Ender's head. I've seen plenty of directors who can do this quite well, but I've yet to see this director pull it off with a major franchise. If he knows how to handle his actors, this movie could end up being brilliant, but we'll see. Something tells me we aren't going to get that, and instead see a stock by the numbers scifi film. I'll still see it regardless, but I really hope we see something more.
Posted by madvogon (Member # 12938) on :
quote:Originally posted by sabracarioca: Cowboy's and Alien's was an attempt to mix two genres that really don't mix well. Old Western's and Sci-Fi. Director Jon Favreau acknowledged that this was something that would be hard to pull off. I'm not sure the movie did pull it off but from a character POV Daniel Craig managed to hold his own with Harrison Ford. I don't know how the movie did but it looked strange from the outset
My one word response to this is "Cliffhanger." For those who do not remember this 80s tv show, it had 3 separate story lines in old school serial format. One of them was an amazing weird west story of cowboys discovering a lost high tech city. As strange as this sounds, it was amazingly well done and proved that cowboys and science fiction do indeed mesh. For the record, the other two storylines were a Michael Nouri Dracula story and a pulp reporter adventure story line. I truly wish that someone would release this gem on DVD as with the exception of the Dracula story, it has vanished into television history.
quote:Originally posted by Ginol_Enam: <snip> NC-17 would be out of the question. Maybe it should be NC-17 in your worldview, and that's fine, but there's no way the MPAA would give it that based on violence. It takes a lot of violence and gore to get a movie pushed to NC-17 on its own. That's why movie like Saw or Hostel could get made with the R rating.
The MPAA quidelines specify violence against children as a special category. It is similar to the presence of lit tobacco products in a film, which now rates an automatic R rating. It was rumored, in an attempt to break the MPAA, that some film maker was going to make an otherwise G film with a lit cigarette in one scene, then litigate to reduce the rating. Such automatic triggers are the true weakness of the rating system and anti-free-expression.
In response to the earlier post about the adults, more adults present offers more crutches to Ender. This violates Graff's often stated motivation that Ender can depend on no one except himself.
[ January 21, 2013, 09:11 PM: Message edited by: madvogon ]
Posted by Geraine (Member # 9913) on :
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro:
quote:Originally posted by Geraine: You never know. Ender's Game has been around for almsot 30 years now, so I wouldn't expect it to be as big as Hunger Games or Twilight. Then again, I am Legend did pretty well in the theatre, and the book that movie was based on was even older. It had a budget of $150 million and made over $250 million world wide.
Also the book it's based on is *awful,* as an example of literature. Pure trash, but it goes to show that doesn't matter that much because the film is all about marketing and presentation. Also, that particular "adaption," was basically in name only.
Meh, that is true. I think you hit it right on the head though. It is going to come down to the marketing and presentation.
Speaking of marketing, I am expecting the first trailers for Ender's Game to be full of flashy lights, action scenes, and space battles. While we know the book is deeper than that, the action is what will sell tickets.
I think the trailer will go something like this:
1) Show Ender in school getting called to get his monitor out.
2) Show Ender being made fun of by Peter
3) Someone shows up to invite Ender to Battle School.
4) Ender arrives and part of his orientation is shown
5) Random school stuff / shots of other students
6) The Battle Room / battles are shown
7) Show Ender being bullied by Bonzo
8) Multiple, fast flashing screens of a space battle
9) Ender's Game title appears, followed by the release date.
Anyone think it will go down any differently? Posted by AchillesHeel (Member # 11736) on :
quote: The MPAA quidelines specify violence against children as a special category. It is similar to the presence of lit tobacco products in a film, which now rates an automatic R rating.
Memoirs of a Geisha not only has two little girls being sold into slavery, but one of the little girls is repeatedly beaten with a stick. The other is sold into child prostitution. All with a PG13 rating.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by Geraine:
I think the trailer will go something like this:
1) Show Ender in school getting called to get his monitor out.
2) Show Ender being made fun of by Peter
3) Someone shows up to invite Ender to Battle School.
4) Ender arrives and part of his orientation is shown
5) Random school stuff / shots of other students
6) The Battle Room / battles are shown
7) Show Ender being bullied by Bonzo
8) Multiple, fast flashing screens of a space battle
9) Ender's Game title appears, followed by the release date.
Anyone think it will go down any differently?
The trailer will assuredly look *nothing* like what you described.
Trailers are mini-stories of their own. They very rarely, if ever (these days) show the film's story in sequence, or reveal anything significant about the sequence of the plot. The main idea is to establish interesting characters and locations. That means the trailer will probably actually look like this:
1. Establishing space shot 2. intimation of an interstellar war (voice-over probable from some line in the film) 3. Shots of the simulator and kids: A space battle 4. Battle Room, intercut with Ender and Graff's relationship, also Rackhem 5. Shots of Bonzo, Ender and the other kids 6. Shot of a space battle of some kind 7. Shot of Ender, probably in battle school
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by AchillesHeel:
quote: The MPAA quidelines specify violence against children as a special category. It is similar to the presence of lit tobacco products in a film, which now rates an automatic R rating.
Memoirs of a Geisha not only has two little girls being sold into slavery, but one of the little girls is repeatedly beaten with a stick. The other is sold into child prostitution. All with a PG13 rating.
You mean the MPAA is a bumbling, corrupt, pointless, clueless organization that provides a sinecure for failed industry types? NO!
Posted by Parkour (Member # 12078) on :
But what about the anime???
Posted by madvogon (Member # 12938) on :
Only if Studio Ghibli does it.
Posted by Geraine (Member # 9913) on :
Not so sure Orincoro,if the film were called "Formics" or "Battle School" or something I could see the trailer going down like what you described.
I don't think the trailer will be what you described for the simple fact that if they don't show Ender enough, audiences won't know anything about him, won't want to find out what happens to him, and honestly will not understand why the title to the movie is "Ender's Game."
Usually, if a movie has a character's name in it, the trailer is going to focus on that character and almost spell out what is going to happen to him. Movies such as The Amazing Spiderman had trailers that took you through a synopsis of the story, because the movie was based on the character named in the title.
I just don't think the movie will get the audience it deserves unless the trailer makes you care about Ender in some way, and to do that you have to show some of the struggles he goes through. His motivation if you will.
I guess we will see though!
Posted by Geraine (Member # 9913) on :
Looks like James Horner, of Avatar, Aliens,and Star Trek II and III fame is writing the soundtrack for Ender's Game.
My hopes just went a little higher!
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
I just came here to post that. I'm a big fan of his work.
Posted by Stone_Wolf_ (Member # 8299) on :
Don't forget Glory!
Posted by Geraine (Member # 9913) on :
quote:Originally posted by Stone_Wolf_: Don't forget Glory!
I forgot about Glory! I remember watching that film in high school, hearing the soundtrack, crying, and getting picked on by some of the guys in my class. They stopped laughing when some of the girls started talking about how they loved how sensitive I was and how the wanted to find a guy like me to date. Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by theamazeeaz:
Honestly, my only thought was, "Damn, they dropped the ball on getting a Maori guy, what about the guy who was Boba Fett in the Star Wars prequels?"
There are doubtless plenty of talented *actual* half Maori actors out there. This was about money.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
Interview with Asa Butterfield talking about Ender's Game.
I kinda laughed when he called Harrison Ford the "King of Science Fiction". Still I'm very interested in seeing how he develops as an actor.
Posted by stacey (Member # 3661) on :
quote:I think the visuals of it are very, very original. Because the battle room is just a glass sphere, and because Battle School is in space, it allows you to see out. You can see stars, you can see Earth, you can see all of the colors from the sun and the sea and the green of the land. And it gives a very original and sort of beautiful look to the film that is unlike anything you'd see in a sci-fi film. And that's contrasted by the metal and the orderedness of the station. So you have these two contrasting elements: the freedom of the battle room and the ordered look of the dorms and the corridors.
Crazy - I never imagined that Battle School had lots of glass to see out into space.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
Especially since the lack of rotation (and their control of gravity) was a secret, originally.
Posted by C3PO the Dragon Slayer (Member # 10416) on :
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: Especially since the lack of rotation (and their control of gravity) was a secret, originally.
That was actually one of the problems I had with the book. There didn't seem to be a legitimate reason for the IF to keep artificial gravity a secret, so why would they use centrifugal force on a rotating space station and then use artificial gravity in the Battle Room to counteract it? Especially when the whole point of having Battle School in space was to get the students used to thinking in gravity-less environments.
Switching it around and making the rest of the space station use artificial gravity and keeping the Battle Room itself in microgravity is a deviation from the book, but a deviation that makes no less sense than the book itself. Though that glass must be REALLY strong to withstand that much atmospheric pressure.
Posted by Stone_Wolf_ (Member # 8299) on :
quote:Originally posted by C3PO the Dragon Slayer: Though that glass must be REALLY strong to withstand that much atmospheric pressure.
That's a common misconception confusing high pressure with high vacuum. There is no reason the for the pressure inside the glass sphere to be higher than 1 atm. It doesn't really matter whether the pressure outside the glass sphere is one hundreth of an atm or 1 trillionth of an atm the force on the glass would be essentially the same.
Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: Especially since the lack of rotation (and their control of gravity) was a secret, originally.
It's been a long time since I've read it, but I thought that the Battle School did rotate and that it was the 2nd Battle School that used Bugger anti-gravity technology.
Posted by Jeff C. (Member # 12496) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Rabbit:
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: Especially since the lack of rotation (and their control of gravity) was a secret, originally.
It's been a long time since I've read it, but I thought that the Battle School did rotate and that it was the 2nd Battle School that used Bugger anti-gravity technology.
I concur.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
IIRC, Ender figures out that they have antigrav tech when he realizes that the weightless areas at the center of the Battle School aren't docking realistically. This is the first time it's confirmed for him that we're using stolen Bugger tech -- although I have no idea why those techs, ranging from antigrav to the ansible, are still kept secret from civilians decades after the Second Invasion.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
I would surmise that the principle reason is that revealing this tech might also reveal the actual strategic plans of the fleet, which might cause unforeseen problems.
Because it is implied in both Speaker for the Dead and Ender in Exile that the "Park Shift," is an exploitation of the strong nuclear force to break subatomic particles and consume their energy at basically 100% efficiency, or possibly above 100% efficiency as the exploitation may draw energy out of parallel universes, which was presented as a kind of sick feeling that Ender has.
But the Park Shift, the MD and Gravity manipulation are all implied in various places to be essentially the exploitation of one kind of tech:
quote: it was anybody's guess, since nobody understood why philotic effects worked anyway; the Ansible had been discovered half by accident, and along with it the park instantaneous principle.
And later it is revealed that the MD device is also based on an uncontrolled park shift that spreads the energy out randomly instead of directing it. WHich you might read as a contradiction, or an implication that gravity manipulation, the ansible, and the Park Shift are all applications of one theory.
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)