Lionsgate Responds to Outcry over ENDER’S GAME Author Orson Scott Card’s Anti-Gay Comments

by     Posted 1 year, 50 days ago

enders-game-slice

While Orson Scott Card’s award-winning sci-fi novel Ender’s Game continues to be beloved around the world (and a favorite of yours truly), Card’s own outspoken anti-homosexual beliefs have resulted in a planned boycott of Lionsgate’s upcoming movie adaptation.  The situation is unfortunate on a number of levels, Card’s lack of human decency aside.  Fans of the novel have been waiting to see Ender’s Game on the big screen for years, but now face a moral quandary over whether or not they want their hard-earned money to line the pockets of a bigot.  Members of the LGBT community may now forever associate the story of Ender’s Game with the misguided hatred of its author.  On a studio level, Lionsgate is attempting to distance their picture from the author and has released a statement in the hopes of getting back in the good graces of all movie-goers.  Hit the jump to see what they have to say.

enders-game-hailee-steinfeld-asa-butterfieldHere’s Lionsgate’s official statement:

“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.”

First of all, I don’t buy that Card’s views are “irrelevant” to a movie adaptation of his book since there is quite a bit of money on the line, money that will continue to fund his attempts to trod on equal rights for all.  While the studio’s statement reads like someone who says, “It’s cool, I have loads of gay friends,” after laughing at an anti-homosexual joke, I applaud them for hosting a benefit premiere.  It’s not much, but it’s something.  And in a difficult situation where there are no winners, at least they’re trying to stay out in front of it rather than staying quiet and hoping it all blows over.

[Update: A few of you have requested examples of Card's anti-homosexual comments so I've included them below along with their sources.  All of them are excerpts from articles written by Card himself.  I apologize for not having them up earlier.]

One of the earliest records is a 1990 account from Card written to the conservative members of the Church of Latter-Day Saints, pleasantly titled “The Hypocrites of Homosexuality”.  While he did speak out against the enforcement of a then Constitutionally-sound Georgia law prohibiting sodomy in the privacy of one’s own home (a position he still holds since the decision was overturned in 2003), Card’s belief that homosexuality is a sin that can be controlled is evident here:

One thing is certain: one cannot serve two masters. And when one’s life is given over to one community that demands utter allegiance, it cannot be given to another. The LDS church is one such community. The homosexual community seems to be another. And when I read the statements of those who claim to be both LDS and homosexual, trying to persuade the former community to cease making their membership contingent upon abandoning the latter, I wonder if they realize that the price of such “tolerance” would be, in the long run, the destruction of the Church…The Church has plenty of room for individuals who are struggling to overcome their temptation toward homosexual behavior. But for the protection of the Saints and the good of the persons themselves, the Church has no room for those who, instead of repenting of homosexuality, wish it to become an acceptable behavior in the society of the Saints. They are wolves in sheep’s clothing, preaching meekness while attempting to devour the flock.

Thankfully, the First Amendment grants the Church of Latter-Day Saints freedom of religion, as well as members who aren’t of that particular faith freedom from religion.  The supposed separation of Church and State was lost on Card, as seen in this 2004 article on The Ornery American:

The Massachusetts Supreme Court has not yet declared that “day” shall now be construed to include that which was formerly known as “night,” but it might as well.

By declaring that homosexual couples are denied their constitutional rights by being forbidden to “marry,” it is treading on the same ground.

Do you want to know whose constitutional rights are being violated? Everybody’s. Because no constitution in the United States has ever granted the courts the right to make vast, sweeping changes in the law to reform society.

So it is a flat lie to say that homosexuals are deprived of any civil right pertaining to marriage. To get those civil rights, all homosexuals have to do is find someone of the opposite sex willing to join them in marriage.

In order to claim that they are deprived, you have to change the meaning of “marriage” to include a relationship that it has never included before this generation, anywhere on earth.

Just because homosexual partners wish to be called “married” and wish to force everyone else around them to regard them as “married,” does not mean that their Humpty-Dumpty-ish wish should be granted at the expense of the common language, democratic process, and the facts of human social organization.

However emotionally bonded a pair of homosexual lovers may feel themselves to be, what they are doing is not marriage. Nor does society benefit in any way from treating it as if it were.

Not content with his previous effort, a similar article appeared in 2008 in The Deseret News.  Here, Card is still under the impression that his religiously-influenced concept of marriage should be a blanket fact for all citizens, regardless of their own belief systems.  His aggression towards the more tolerant rulings U.S. courts now increases:

Here’s the irony: There is no branch of government with the authority to redefine marriage.

Marriage is older than government. Its meaning is universal: It is the permanent or semipermanent bond between a man and a woman, establishing responsibilities between the couple and any children that ensue.

The laws concerning marriage did not create marriage, they merely attempted to solve problems in such areas as inheritance, property, paternity, divorce, adoption and so on.

No matter how sexually attracted a man might be toward other men, or a woman toward other women, and no matter how close the bonds of affection and friendship might be within same-sex couples, there is no act of court or Congress that can make these relationships the same as the coupling between a man and a woman.

This is a permanent fact of nature.

I also like this particular argument:

There is no natural method by which two males or two females can create offspring in which both partners contribute genetically. This is not subject to legislation, let alone fashionable opinion.

As if the end-all, be-all reason for marriage as recognized by a government is only to produce offspring and has nothing to do with taxes, insurance beneficiaries, property and other financially-related issues. (Fun fact: Did you know two people can make a baby without first being married?)  And God forbid (literally, according to Card) same-sex couples adopt and unwanted or orphaned child.

He does go on to say that:

We heterosexuals have put marriage in such a state that it’s a wonder homosexuals would even aspire to call their unions by that name.

Which would be redeeming except for his follow-up:

With “gay marriage,” the last shreds of meaning will be stripped away from marriage, with homosexuals finishing what faithless, selfish heterosexuals have begun.

Here’s another fun bit:

Biological imperatives trump laws.

Although we just saw Card say that such biological imperatives are expected to be corrected if they don’t line up with the tenets of the Church.  So by this logic, God > Church > Biological Imperatives > Laws.  All well and good until that pesky “Separation of Church and State” butts in again.

A recent 2012 effort seen in the Greensboro Rhino Times shows that Card still hasn’t grasped this basic concept as he still sees gay marriage as a threat to his religious values, even if his religious values have no business in others’ lives. (He also plays the, “I have gay friends” card, which is fun.):

There’s no need to legalize gay marriage. I have plenty of gay friends who are committed couples; some of them call themselves married, some don’t, but their friends treat them as married. Anybody who doesn’t like it just doesn’t hang out with them.
It’s just like heterosexual couples who are living together without marriage. Their friends still treat them like married couples, inviting them places together; they’re a social unit. Those who strongly disapprove leave them alone.
There are no laws left standing that discriminate against gay couples. They can visit each other in the hospital. They can benefit from each other’s insurance.
No, legalizing gay marriage is not about making it possible for gay people to become couples.
It’s about giving the left the power to force anti-religious values on our children. Once they legalize gay marriage, it will be the bludgeon they use to make sure that it becomes illegal to teach traditional values in the schools.
Our children will be barraged with the deceptions of the left. Parents will be forbidden to remove their children from the propaganda.

What a horrible dystopian world, where children are more tolerant than their parents.  I haven’t used this word for Card yet but this last article shows he deserves it: fear-monger.  As for Card’s repeated denials that there is any science to support a genetic (or epigenetic) heredity of homosexuality, well here’s some evidence.  Oh and there’s some over here, too; this one reminds (or informs people for the first time) that despite the argument that “homosexuality is unnatural,” it has been documented in over 450 species found, you know, in nature.

I’d also like to point out this particular snippet from Card’s 1990 article:

“… America, a democratic society, is under no obligation to preserve some imagined “right” of citizens who wish to use their freedom to overthrow that democracy and institute tyranny, …”

Juxtaposed against this little nugget from his 2008 article in the Deseret News:

How long before married people answer the dictators thus: 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, and help me raise my children in a society where they will expect to marry in their turn … Because when government is the enemy of marriage, then the people who are actually creating successful marriages have no choice but to change governments, by whatever means is made possible or necessary.

As a bonus, here’s an article of Card’s addressed to the media and journalists just after President Barack Obama was elected to his second term.  Oh and for everyone who wanted me to cite his quotes, I’d just like to mention that Card does not provide references for any of his claims in any of the above articles.

Are you a fan of Ender’s Game?  Are you contemplating boycotting the movie because of Card’s views or do you think the two are unrelated?  Did Lionsgate handle this in the best way possible?  Let us know your thoughts in the comments!

enders-game-poster




Like Us


Comments:

FB Comments

  • Mike

    I’m not not going to see this movie because of Card’s statements and views (even though he’s an ass), I’m not going to see it because I’ve already seen the whole movie in the trailer.

    • Let The Wookie Win

      Usually I think people overreact to “the trailer showed the whole movie!” but this was one of the worst offenders I have ever seen. For people who are familiar with the story you know exactly why.

      • http://www.gotham-news.com/ Pietro Filipponi

        I couldn’t believe they showed that much. And there was absolutely no need for it.

      • indy42

        …but only if you’re familiar to the story. In which case it isn’t going to ruin anything for you anyway.

        I thought the trailer was fine. It only shows “too much” if you already know the story/have read the book.

      • Let The Wookie Win

        I think if you haven’t read the book, see some of the imagery in the trailer, and then get towards the end of the movie (or even half way for some viewers) you will figure out exactly what is about to happen. Therefore, the trailer could potentially ruin the movie experience for someone who hasn’t read the book.

    • emma852

      as Joseph explained I didn’t even know that a mom can profit $5895 in 1 month on the internet. did you look at this web site w­w­w.K­E­P­2.c­o­m

  • pinkincide

    I’ve met Card and painting him as a hate filled monster is laughable. I get that lgbt community want to further their cause, but the Orwellian Two Minutes Hate tactics they employ against any who disagree with them is disgusting.

    • Troy Otts

      But using your millions to lobby our government to deny rights to all gay people isn’t disgusting? Don’t get me wrong, everyone has their right to free speech, but no one has the right to huge box office earnings. If Card is using his name and money to back a hateful organization, then I have the right to not give him my money. No one is standing outside of theaters and disallowing people to enter the film.

      • John Wojciechowski

        Don’t fault the guy for having an opinion.

        Boycott if you want, but he is agreeing with the opinion held by billions of people across thousands of years of human history.

      • doctor_robot

        well, damn… that makes it ok then!! (smh) also… you might want to research the origins of marriage, and when christianity started adopting the whole marriage thing. it’s not a “christian” invention.

      • joe

        of course its not a Christian invention. there was marriage faaar before the birth of Christ.

      • doctor_robot

        many think it is.

      • chris

        how is national organization for marriage a hateful organization? Yall are nothing but bullies he has a right to believe what his faith tells him to believe. just because ur against gay marriage doesn’t make u a bigot just as being 7 ft tall doesn’t automatically make u a great basketball player.

      • Troy Otts

        It’s an organization that is trying to inject its personal religious beliefs into national and state politics, and subsequently into the lives of millions of people who don’t share the same beliefs as they do. If you haven’t looked at it in a while, you might notice that this a direct violation of the first amendment. And no, being seven foot tall doesn’t mean you are good at basketball. Just like being gay doesn’t mean you aren’t fit to marry the person you love. No one is stopping Christians from being Christians. No one is stopping heterosexuals from marrying heterosexuals. But NOM is actively trying to stop homosexuals from marrying homosexuals. If you want to call somebody a bully, then you better remove the plank from your eye before complaining about the speck in mine.

      • paul h

        LMAO

        “just because ur against gay marriage doesn’t make u a bigot”

        That’s the very definition of “bigot”!

      • http://www.nerdcrunch.com NerdCrunch

        No it is not, but the rational you used to define bigotry is ACTUAL definition of “bigot”!

      • paul h

        LMAO

        “just because ur against gay marriage doesn’t make u a bigot”

        That’s the very definition of “bigot”!

    • goop

      This is no longer one of Card’s stances, but he only recanted it when he realized it would never be made law… Card called for laws that ban consensual homosexual acts to “remain on the books, not to be indiscriminately enforced against anyone who happens to be caught violating them, but to be used when necessary to send a clear message that those who flagrantly violate society’s regulation of sexual behavior cannot be permitted to remain as acceptable, equal citizens within that society.”

      I show this to show you just how messed up this guy is. He believed that it would be acceptable to regulate sexual behavior. This is pretty outrageous. A guy can have a firm handshake and a nice smile, and still be a “hate filled monster” as you described it. His hate is deep and longstanding, regardless of his personal demeanor.

  • Merlin235

    I keep forgetting that this website is essentially a blog. Every time I read some personal comment from the author I’m taken aback, which I shouldn’t be. So Collider is political now, eh? Is that how we should take your comments, David? When you say someone lacks “human decency” you’re taking a pretty strong stand, especially considering a fair number of your readers might disagree with Orson’s statements but agree with him position in favor of traditional marriage. Then to call him a ‘bigot’?

    Personally, I’m tired of hearing people talk about each other in those terms. Now it’s impossible to take a stand on anything without someone labeling you a ‘bigot’, a ‘baby killer’, a ‘homophobe’, or some other name better reserved for the elementary school playground than on a geek’s website.

    Today, I’m sad I read this website.

    • Colin

      Well said. David painted him as a monster. Because one opposes same sex marriage, doesn’t make him/her a bigot.

      • doctor_robot

        yes it does. he is a bigot. i don’t know if he’s a “monster” or not, but he is intolerant of homosexuals, and would like to deny them things that he has as a hetero. and he belongs to a pretty f**ked up anti-gay group. that is a bigot. sorry. the story is awesome… but.. uh… ya.

      • John Wojciechowski

        If anyone who disagreed with same sex marriage were a bigot, almost all humans in all of history would fit into that category. Let’s let the guy have his own opinion… and if it happens to match the majority opinion from all of human history, except for the last decade, let’s not call him a bigot. And if we do, let’s concede to the point that almost all of our presidents and national leaders and world leaders for the last several thousand years have also been bigots, including our current president when he was first elected in 2008.

      • Troy Otts

        You could say the same about slavery. It used to be a common, and publicly accepted thing. Heck, it was even condoned and given regulations in the Christian Bible. And we, as a nation, let slavery happen until the majority opinion began to shift on the matter. Even polygamy and bigamy was rampant in the Christian Bible, with some of its most revered characters taking part in it. And not every one in history was anti-gay. There are plenty of civilizations throughout humanity that had publicly accepted homosexuality.

      • Fubeca

        and slavery was started by a black guy…

      • Northern Star

        Where does the Bible condone slavery? I think you grossly misunderstand the historical and social context of those days, Troy sir. And as for the polygamy accusation? You also have no idea about what you’re talking about… God allowed family members to intermarry until there was a sizable enough gene pool to continue procreation and THEN He outlawed it.

        If you’re gong to misrepresent God’s infallible and holy Word, try actually reading it first… unless your clear anti-religious bigotry gets in the way of you forming a coherent opinion on something you deem to comment on!

      • Troy Otts

        If you can make the argument that God limited marriage to a man and a woman for the sake of a stagnant human population, then you can also make the argument that God disallowed homosexual marriage for the sole purpose of repopulation of the Earth. And in this case, why shouldn’t we allow homosexual marriage these days? Is there a need to continue growing the human population? Aren’t there already thousands of children entering foster care each and every year? In fact…why is homosexuality even considered a sin among Christians? There is the one mention of it in the Old Testament that most Christians I know cite. “If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death. Their bloodguiltiness is upon them. (Leviticus 20:13)” To be completely honest, I’ve always found it weird that the bible actually calls for the murder and execution of anyone who commits a sin. Aren’t we told that God is the only one who has judgement over us? Aren’t we told to judge ourselves before we judge others? Didn’t Christ tell us to look at the plank in our own eyes before pointing out the speck in others? Also, this one passage contradicts itself with one of the ten commandments. “Thou shalt not kill.” But you’ll also notice a few sentences down from that Leviticus passage is another passage that tells us not to wear clothes that are made from a cotton/linen blend. So, should we also stone everyone who works for Fruit of the Loom? And yes, the bible did condone slavery, and it set rules for it.

        “When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property.” (Exodus 21:20-21)

        “Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. Obey them not only to win their favor when their eye is on you, but as slaves of Christ, doing the will of God from your heart. 7 Serve wholeheartedly, as if you were serving the Lord, not people, 8 because you know that the Lord will reward each one for whatever good they do, whether they are slave or free.” (Ephesians 6:5)

        “Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them.” (1 Timothy 6:1-2)

        “The servant will be severely punished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. ‘But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.’” (Luke 12:47-48)

        “If a man has two wives, and he loves one but not the other, and both bear him sons but the firstborn is the son of the wife he does not love, when he wills his property to his sons, he must not give the rights of the firstborn to the son of the wife he loves in preference to his actual firstborn, the son of the wife he does not love. He must acknowledge the son of his unloved wife as the firstborn by giving him a double share of all he has. That son is the first sign of his father’s strength. The right of the firstborn belongs to him.” (Deuteronomy 21:15-17)

      • Fubeca

        Gays are bigots as well for all their hatred toward religious people (Except Muslims who ironically stone gay people to death…I don’t get it!)

      • Why Bother Anymore?

        That’s a very stupid thing you just said. A number of gays are actually very religious and have a strong faith in God. They don’t hate religious people, if they hate any religion it’s the Westboro Baptist Church. And they’re more of a hate group these days.

      • http://www.nerdcrunch.com NerdCrunch

        What kind of faith it is then when you are going against the very thing God asked you not to do?

      • http://profiles.google.com/cuhulin1 Cuhulin AmHairghin

        Like having a cheesburger?

      • http://www.nerdcrunch.com NerdCrunch

        TROLL alert!

      • Troy Otts

        I don’t hate religious people. My entire family is religious. My best friend is religious. I grew up in religious schools! The only thing I actually hate about religion is how it is used in American politics as reasoning for oppressing others.

        Oh, and you actually know who started slavery? And it was a black guy, you say? Someone call up a historian…this guy knows something we don’t!

      • doctor_robot

        jesus… you’re an idiot.

      • http://www.nerdcrunch.com NerdCrunch

        There is no specific punishment regarding homosexuality among Muslims. Dont extrapolate the action of few misguided to 1.5 billion people. Homosexuality is to be dealt as per law. But it is definitely a punishable sin among Muslims.

    • ReasonableSanity

      Orson Scott Card is the very definition of a bigot. And if you don’t believe me, here is the definition of bigot: “a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group with hatred and intolerance”. So what part of the word bigot does not apply to Orson Scott Card.

      • Merlin235

        What part of that definition doesn’t apply to someone like you, who seems comfortable labeling others?

        Look, I’m not saying bigotry doesn’t exist. What I’m saying is people are way too lax with the word these days, and I have no patience for it whatsoever (especially on a site like this). Maybe Orson Scott Card said, at some point, “gays should be strung up and shot because I hate them.” But I haven’t read it.

      • John Wojciechowski

        So, Obama was a bigot in 2008? All of our Presidents have lived and died as bigots? Leaders for thousands of years from across the globe and the billions of people who have followed them have all been bigots? Human history is filled with billions of bigots? Everyone is a bigot except the new clan of folks trying to shove homosexuality into every aspect of global human culture? Perhaps being called a ‘bigot’ isn’t an insult, because when you are, you are joined by billions of great men and women from throughout human history.

      • Dave Trumbore

        Thank you! Saved me the trouble of posting the definition under half of these comments.

      • Al

        But the definition is intolerant of others. He just believes in a definition of marriage that differs from yours. Not wanting homosexuals to marry doesn’t necessarily equate to a problem with homosexuals. I personally don’t have a problem with them getting married, but I certainly wouldn’t consider someone who has a different opinion based on their interpretation of a definition of marriage a bigot.

        Grow up morons. Especially collider. What is going on with MOVIE news sites. It definitely makes sense to write about Lionsgate and Card, but you’re own political sentiments were not needed. Granted, the comments section has now been political based, but only because what we’re now posting on is effectively a political think piece. What happened guys….

      • Dave Trumbore

        People who disagree with gay marriage are not necessarily bigots. Those who refuse to accept others and actively lobby against them because of their own intolerance are, by definition, bigots. Card is unfortunately an example of the latter. You, by your own definition, would not be.

      • http://www.nerdcrunch.com NerdCrunch

        Actually thats exactly what collider wanted. They dont care who is homo or hetro. All they care about is more people getting engaged on their forums and they earn money through it. Part of how business work now a days.

      • http://www.nerdcrunch.com NerdCrunch

        By that definition, you just just called yourself as a bigot too!

    • doctor_robot

      He is a bigot… i’m sure i’ll still see the movie, but he is a bigot. He’s is a member of the anti-gay National Organization for Marriage. The guy has even tried to link pedophilia with homosexuality in his writings.

      “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..”

      “The dark secret of homosexual society—the one that dares not speak its name—is how many homosexuals first entered into that world through a disturbing seduction or rape or molestation or abuse, and how many of them yearn to get out of the homosexual community and live normally.”

      ya… you’re right. he’s not a bigot.

      • Merlin235

        I read that and you know what I think? I see someone who is bummed out that society’s morals are changing, doesn’t know how to harness that disappointment, and lashes out irrationally. Now you’re comfortable calling him names. I myself am not. I’m not interested in classifying people people into groups and labeling them how I see fit. I would rather have discussions about the merits of one’s opinions. To me, that’s much more satisfying.

      • Raven

        Then please entertain us one what merit exists in an argument that is the equivalent to hate speech! Just reading your defense of this man makes me sick, and I honestly think you are just defending his right to discriminate and spread his hate for the lgbt community. He is just like the Westboro Baptist Church. He doesn’t deserve even a modicum of respect. What he deserves is to be ignored. Furthermore, your argument that labeling him as a bigot is unethical/immoral/invalid is one of the most pathetic excuses of an argument that I have ever heard. Those that are stigmatized by a label are weakened in society. From what I can see, this man is not weakened. He is a sickening excuse for a human being. In the meantime those labeled horrendous titles, such as “fag”, “fag enablers”, and so on, are the one suffering much more. Therefore, please keep going with saying how much you “disagree” with calling someone a bigot. Your argument will not go very far. I guarantee it.

      • Raven

        Second of all, bigots deserve to be labeled because they make the entire human race look awful. I grew up in a Southern town full of racist “BIGOTS”! They had no qualms with stating the most vile and hateful words about African Americans in my community. I have no respect for people that stigmatize others just for being different, whether in terms of race, religion, sexual orientation, etc. Therefore, don’t you even think for a minute that these bigots do not deserve to be stigmatized just as much as people they have horribly harmed throughout the years.

      • Fubeca

        Love it when people hate people who hate LOL!

      • Johnny Bubonic

        Yeah. We should totally tolerate intolerance; especially, when it actively harms others. We’re such hypocrites. You seem to be a very stupid person.

      • doctor_robot

        call him names? all i said was that by definition, he is a bigot.

      • Al

        But by definition he isn’t. Hes not attacking a group of people. He disagrees with a different definition of marriage.

      • Dave Trumbore

        There’s a difference between being “bummed out” that the world around you is changing to a belief system that differs from your own and actively lobbying to restrict the rights of others who don’t fit into your ideal mold of society. If people who resisted change toward a more tolerant society were simply “bummed out” then they wouldn’t expend nearly as much time, energy or money on fighting against it.

      • John Wojciechowski

        He also agrees with the majority of humans throughout history, including every single one of the Presidents of the United States (even including President Obama up until last year).

      • doctor_robot

        and…….?????

      • John Wojciechowski

        I mean, I guess we can call them all bigots. But if almost everyone in all of human history is a ‘bigot’ on this issue, are we really right to get all crappy about this guy having the same opinion? Are we going to boycott all movies depicting any story written before the American gay agenda surfaced?

      • doctor_robot

        well… i like james brown’s music, but i never bought it, because he beat women. i’ll listen to it on the radio when it comes on or at a party, or whatever… but i didn’t want to give that bag of shit money. that was my choice. i didn’t form a boycott, or anything like that. sometimes that actions of an artist or celeb or restaurant owner… can have consequences. there are a lot of bigots in the world. many different kinds. i have an 8 year old son, and he wants to see this movie. i’m sure we will be seeing it, and i’m not going to have much of a problem with it. but that’s me… whatever. but saying that he’s not a bigot is just wrong… that’s all i was trying to say.

      • Johnny Bubonic

        Did someone call for a false equivalence argument? No? Then why are you talking?

    • Dave Trumbore

      I hate labels as much as the next person, but if the shoe fits. Words have specific definitions for a reason: to help us attempt to communicate with each other. An indecent person acts in an improper and disrespectful manner. A bigot is someone intolerantly devoted to their own prejudices. Sounds accurately descriptive of Card to me. Disagree if you must, that’s your right, but perhaps you yourself have gotten a bit carried away in your rush to label me sensationalist.

      Also, just for the record, it’s Dave, not David, unless you’re my mom…which would make this entire exchange rather strange.

    • ikkf

      Agreed. This site is becoming a repository for polemics. Most of us turn to movies to get AWAY from the politics bullshit but it seems some of the staff just can’t let it go. Not sure if this is by design or if Frosty just isn’t paying attention, but polarizing your readers on a movie news site probably isn’t a great idea.

      • Dave Trumbore

        If you’ve been following the site for a while, you’ll know I rarely have the opportunity or the inclination to dive into political debates this deeply. Personally I’d be happier just talking movies/TV but it’s good to see people so passionate on both sides of a real-world issue.

    • Strong Enough

      shut up

  • Vic Twenty

    I continue to support, as I always have, same sex sports. I believe my voting record reflects that. It may be unpopular and put my life in real jeopardy, but I stand by my position. May the Almighty have mercy on my soul.

  • Nick

    Ooh come on!
    Lining his pocket? What is he going to build a gay destruction machine? So what! The guy has his right to feel homophobic, and as long as he’s not out there spitting on them or beating them up who gives a shit. I’m not a homophobe, but I’m also not a baby so I don’t understand this. Message to the gay.. If you want to be equal, learn to realize that everyone has the right to their views. Those views are every day becoming less effective in your rights to marry. Everyone in the world deals with being viewed in some way. Don’t be gay about :P

    • BatemanBegins

      He’s not going to build a gay destruction machine, but he is a member of the board of directors of the National Organization for Marriage, and could this box office cash could potentially impede the rights of many gay Americans through lobbying in Washington. If you’ve read his comments about the recent Supreme Court rulings, you could sense a level of intolerance and disdain.

      • Nick

        He is allowed to be intolerant. In fact his religious views may promote that.. I don’t know the ins and outs of this guy, but I know he’s entitled and I know boycotting the movie is unreal. Plus, I’m sure he has a ton of money to fund his gay hating committee.

        “Ah Enders Game was a success! Now we finally have enough money to ship the gays to the moon! Muahaha!”

      • BatemanBegins

        http://www.deseretnews.com/article/print/700245157/State-job-is-not-to-redefine-marriage.html Please read if you want to know the full extent of Card’s bigotry.

      • http://thenonessentials.blogspot.com/ Sean Chandler

        On flip side, there’s no shortage of people in Hollywood who fund the equal rights lobby in Washington. If the film bombs over a boycott, some of those people don’t get paid either.

  • http://www.gotham-news.com/ Pietro Filipponi

    Boycotting the movie is misguided. He’s barely making any money from it since his original deal was with WB. Not to mention he’s already a millionaire. He’s not even involved with its production. Boycott all the new Ender’s Game movie edition books instead (7 new titles are being released/re-released), the profits from those DO go directly into his pockets and would send a clearer message. Using the movie (that hundreds of people made and have financial stake in, undoubtably including many LGBTs) as the driving force of this boycott was simply to get more attention.

    • Johnny Bubonic

      It is all of a piece.

  • Jason Richards

    So they’re going to boycott a film adaptation? They do know that the author has already been paid for the rights to his book, right? Boycotting the film does nothing but hurt 100′s of American workers who worked on that film. This reminds me of the peope threatning to boycott Chick-fil-a. You’re boycotting a franchisee who has nothing to do with the corporations beliefs. I’m all for denouncing bigotry, but there’s smart ways of doing things.

  • Andrew Jara

    You know I saw the trailer for this and wasn’t impressed but all this stuff has made me kind of want to see it.

    I think that this is a bit ridiculous. If you want to boycott it fine but don’t blame the movie. The movie isn’t the book. I could see if he was writing the movie as well cause he’s a hateful person but he’s not. So who knows what the movie will be?

    Also for those of you saying you won’t see it because it gives him money, I feel that’s hypocritical. Again he’s not the only one who made this (in fact he is probably least involved with the movie) there are actors, directors, producers, studio people. And when does it stop? FX gives Charlie Sheen a paycheck, will you boycott It’s always Sunny? NBC hired Alec Baldwin will you stop watching that show? Or CBS? Or any station really?

    I haven’t read what he said and I don’t care. He sounds like a bigoted idiot. But don’t blame everyone else. It comes down to the Crazy Christians boycotting Da DaVinci Code. Did they have the right? Absolutely but I would rather see if the movie is good and base it on it’s one merits than punish countless other people cause the writer of the source material is a jackass. That’s ridicioulous.

  • I AM A BANNANA!!!! FEAR ME!!!!

    If I can separate Roman Polanski’s horrible personal life from his films, I can do the same for this.

    • Jason Richards

      Well, lets not compare Roman Polanski with Card. Polanski engaged in sexual intercourse with a child and provided that child with alcohol. Card, while he may have some personal distaste for gay marriage, is not a child molesting monster. I get what you’re trying to say, but lets make that distinction.

      • Walter White

        He wasn’t making that distinction at all. He’s simply saying that personal lives of the artist shouldn’t be the biggest concern of the art itself.

      • Queen Freedom

        I think he was just comparing the situation, not the artist.

      • Fubeca

        But in Hollywood it is ok to molest children, just don’t stand up for traditional marriage cuz then you are EVIL!!!!!!!!!!! LOL! oh the double standards from Hollywood amaze me! And guess what I still see movies!

      • Johnny Bubonic

        You really don’t know anything about Card’s anti-gay ACTIVITIES, do you?

      • Jason Richards

        Being anti gay is not the same thing as molesting little kids. Comparing the two is just incredibly stupid.

      • Johnny Bubonic

        No it is not the same and I did not compare the two. Card’s intolerance is not just about freedom of speech. He absolutely has the right to not like gay people and say that he does not like them. However, it goes way beyond that. Do your research.

  • I Love Lamp

    NONE OF THIS CHANGES THE FACT THAT I LOVE PIE!

  • http://thenonessentials.blogspot.com/ Sean Chandler

    These types of boycotts are remarkably naive. Every time you go to a movie, money will go to someone who you disagree with who will spend the money on something you’re against. Every time you go to Walmart your money will end up funding something you’re vehemently opposed to.

    We’re all perfectly fine paying money which will eventually fund things we oppose so long as we’re not directly acknowledging it. It’s all very arbitrary.

    • http://thenonessentials.blogspot.com/ Sean Chandler

      Likewise, there’s no shortage of people in Hollywood who fund the equal rights lobby in Washington. If the film bombs over a boycott, some of those people don’t get paid either.

      To make this all about where one person sends their money is a remarkably simplistic way of viewing a complicated issue.

  • ikkf

    Mr. Trumbore, do you have any links to evidence of Card’s alleged bigotry? I hadn’t heard about this until recently.

    • Troy Otts

      “But homosexual “marriage” is an act of intolerance. It is an attempt to eliminate any special preference for marriage in society—to erase the protected status of marriage in the constant balancing act between civilization and individual reproduction.

      So if my friends insist on calling what they do “marriage,” they are not turning their relationship into what my wife and I have created, because no court has the power to change what their relationship actually is.

      Instead they are attempting to strike a death blow against the well-earned protected status of our, and every other, real marriage.

      They steal from me what I treasure most, and gain for themselves nothing at all. They won’t be married. They’ll just be playing dress-up in their parents’ clothes.

      The dark secret of homosexual society—the one that dares not speak its name—is how many homosexuals first entered into that world through a disturbing seduction or rape or molestation or abuse, and how many of them yearn to get out of the homosexual community and live normally.”

      —Orson Scott Card, “Homosexual ‘Marriage’ and Civilization,” 2004

      “W]hen government is the enemy of marriage, then the people who are actually creating successful marriages have no choice but to change governments, by whatever means is made possible or necessary… 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….”

      —Orson Scott Card, The Mormon Times, 2008

    • George Shapiro

      What, just because you haven’t heard of it that doesn’t make it true? That makes sense.

      • ikkf

        And where did I say it’s not true? Lighten up, you fucking drama queen.

  • Dick

    Just because Card is not a fan of gay marriage (his right) or the gay lifestyle(again his right) does not make him a racist, or whatever else the writer wants to call him. The writer of this articles statement “Card’s lack of human decency aside” is certain a vicious and opinionated statement(his right). Not believing in gay marriage is anyone’s right and the opposite is true as well.

    • WhereDidYouTrain? ON A FARM?!

      And we also reserve the right to call Scott an asshole who is stuck in the past and thinks the world should convert to his views on life.

    • Dave Trumbore

      I’ll give you “opinionated” but “vicious”? Was it deliberately cruel or violent? Or did it give you the sense that I was wild and dangerous? Then again, you thought I called him a racist for some reason so I’ll just let this go entirely.

      • Al

        Its vicious dude. You’re attacking a mans character and you work for a film site. A good many hollywood people have terrible values that they are entitled too, and while I don’t agree with them, if you treat Card this way, you should treat them this way.

        Now then, I wouldn’t want you too. Because if you were to gave them the same treatment, collider would become nothing but celebrity bashing, instead of entertainment news. As others have pointed out, the 800 pound Polanski in the room. I expect every Polanski article from now on to be laced with “despicable child rapist Roman Polanski..” before diving into the actual piece. Not because thats a respectable way of conducting your business, but because thats apparently the way we do things at Collider now.

      • Dave Trumbore

        I’ll happily give my thoughts on Polanski if and when I ever write an article on him, though people seem to be particularly peeved when someone provides a personal opinion while writing for an entertainment news site.

        I’m not attacking his character, merely laying out his beliefs and comments and defining his behavior by his actions. If you really had a problem with character attacks, your earlier use of “moronic” certainly clouds that logic. Glass houses and such.

      • Al

        I had a problem with character attacks from a film/entertainment site. Besides, ‘moronic’ is really digging. I’ve seen people curse at you and such, moronic isn’t close to anything hurtful and if you were really taken aback by it, I apologize.

      • Dave Trumbore

        All good. Much appreciated. (And yeah, I’ve been called way worse and survived, haha)

  • John Wojciechowski

    Have we really come to a point where someone can’t disagree with homosexuality and still be considered a regular person? Is every society in all of history really filled with billions of bigots and, only now, we’ve finally discovered that the entire human race’s opinions for thousands of years was not just flawed – but such an atrocity that we won’t even listen to anyone with this opinion? Will we disregard thousands of years of literary work because the majority of people in history have held the same opinion as Card seems to have? Let the guy have his opinion.

    • Jessica

      He can have his opinion and I can still have mine. The guy’s an ass.

      • John Wojciechowski

        We are certainly all entitled to our own opinions.

      • Joey Balls

        Opinions are like assholes. Everybody has them. Only difference here is Scott is also an actual asshole.

      • John Wojciechowski

        Says someone who has never met him…

      • Starfox210

        I met Card about 10 years ago. I helped organize a public panel discussion for him and several Sci-fi historians. He was rude to the assistants, made sexist slurs, made outrageous demands about the FREE service we provided for him and was late every night.

        No, he is an asshole.

    • goop

      Letting him have his opinion does not mean that everyone should move aside and make room for it. He has a right to his opinion, and he also has the right to lose money because of it. Is that not fair?

      Also, the term “regular person” was confusing. Not to harp, but I just don’t know what you mean by that in this context.

      • John Wojciechowski

        Yes, that is fair. I agree. When I said “regular person,” I just meant that the author of this article (and many in mainstream media) makes it sound like Card (or anyone) is a horrible human for simply disagreeing with homosexuality and working to stand against it. Card is not evil for his opinion. In fact, he stands with the majority of human history.

      • Dave Trumbore

        I’d just like to point out that you used the words “horrible” and “evil,” though I did not.

        Also, the majority of human history holds that women are property, as are slaves, and neither has the right to vote. I’ll just leave that fact right here and when you want to join us in the 21st century, we’ll welcome you!

    • Nathaniel Haywood

      I totally understand your point. Everyone is entitled to say what they want in this country. Card can express his anti-gay opinions, and pro-gay people can express their dislike of him. All fair game. But it is getting to the point where you can’t express an anti-gay opinion without being viewed as a monster…I truly understand why that may seem unfair for the well-meaning people who are just trying to express their beliefs. But from the other point of view, it would be like saying “why are people crucifying me because I’m against interracial marriage or black people having equal rights?” We accept those as being totally socially acceptable NOW, but in the 60s I’m sure people were saying “why am I being crucified because of my honest beliefs that interracial marriage is wrong? Or that black people shouldn’t have the same rights?” People truly believed in those things – both in a hateful way and in a these-are-just-the-beliefs-I-grew-up-being-indoctrinated-in-so-I’m-sticking-with-them-but-I-don’t-hate-you way. You know what I mean?

      • Dave Trumbore

        There’s a difference between expressing an opinion and actively working to infringe people’s rights. Thankfully, we have overcome a laundry list of such prejudices throughout history: abolition of slavery, women’s suffrage, civil rights equality and now LGBT marriage rights. Regardless of your beliefs, history sides with change. It’s interesting to note that the people fighting FOR a cause tend to win out over those who fight AGAINST it.

        As far as I’m concerned, Card is not a “monster” as has been thrown around here, but he is an indecent, misguided bigot. And while we’re on the topic of words and what they mean, if any anti-gay protesters have literally been crucified, I must have missed that particular sensational headline.

      • Nathaniel Haywood

        Relax – obviously crucifixion is a practice made popular by the Romans and hasn’t seen widespread use in millennia. I like to use colorful language. But in all seriousness, I think it’s hard to deny the fact that we’ve reached the point where even expressing a reasoned OPINION against homosexuality draws vehement opposition and that person is often viewed as a bigot. I see it all the time. While I disagree with those views, a lot of people who think that way are earnest people expressing their deep seated beliefs (often religiously based). I just think the knee-jerk reaction that many people have to denounce them can be counterproductive. I grew up in that kind of religious community, but I didn’t change my views because someone denounced me as a bigot. It was through discussion and meeting and befriending gay people. So I guess my point is that things do need to change and while the extremists need to be dealt with differently, not everyone is an extremist and they shouldn’t all be treated that way…but sadly that is the trend. Sorry if that was off topic.

      • Dave Trumbore

        Outspoken people on both sides of any issue are equally accused of being extremist and, as you say, those knee-jerk reactions are counter-productive. “Colorful language” only exacerbates this. It’s part of the sensationalist culture we live in. Rather than react to what the word “bigot” actually means, people respond to what they think it means and automatically get defensive because they’ve been conditioned to react that way. It eliminates any chance at a productive discourse, as is evident by the surrounding comments.

      • Nathaniel Haywood

        It’s hard for me to tell if you are acknowledging my point (which I felt like I did a decent job of not being crazy about…if that is an okay word to use) and then making a further observation or just being condescending and belittling. Trouble with pure text interaction. I’m overwhelmingly used to the latter on this site, but since I’ve never interacted with you before. I will assume the former. I agree that misinterpretation and overreaction is a large cause of strife over subjects like this, which hopefully came through in my comments. Bold subject to tackle. Kudos..

      • Nathaniel Haywood

        (Sorry for the thoughts were incomplete – I was typing them on my phone before/after watching Pacific Rim in the theater…not the ideal format for that. Ultimately, I like what a few others have said – Ender’s Game the film has nothing to do with LGBT rights, and boycotting it really hurts no one except you for not seeing the film. Well, enough of that I suppose.)

      • Dave Trumbore

        Yep, I acknowledged your point and attempted to do so respectfully. It is tough to get a handle on tone with text only, but if you’re civil with me, I’ll be civil right back, as we’ve both been, I think. These subjects are touchy and unfortunately people come into them with preconceived notions and don’t bother reading before speaking/typing. Thankfully your comments were well-reasoned and mature, something I appreciate quite a bit on this site!

  • Queen Freedom

    Whether you’re a fan of the book/ film or not, paying to see this film still results in a rather vicious and delusional homophobe to receive a ridiculously large paycheck, that he may or may not use to further his ignorant cause.

    You wouldn’t buy an apple from a KKK member would you? No matter how delicious it may be. And I can’t believe people are actually using the “Opinions” excuse to defend this piece of shit. His “Opinion” is still an ignorant assault towards a large group of people that deserve to have their rights be protected. This is a man that is stuck in the dark ages and can’t accept that his religious don’t run this country.

    If you really want to see this movie, pirate it!

    • John Wojciechowski

      I boycotted ‘National Treasure’ because those dirty constitution writers disagreed with homosexuality too.

    • http://www.gotham-news.com/ Pietro Filipponi

      Coco Chanel and Hugo Boss where Nazis. Guess all their employees should suffer for their archaic, bigoted, idiotic views too.

      • Blue Power Ranger

        Actually, yeah, they probably should…

    • SnakeInMyBoot1256

      For once, piracy does seem like a valid solution…

    • Nerdgasm

      Queen Freedom is an idiot. I like that people yell hark on this. People see RED and don’t see anything else around them. People realize that this movie gave jobs to thousands of people who needed it. Thousands of people who worked hard and it needs to make money so that those people can get another job with the sequel. because one person says soemthing like this which is their right you want to ruin other innocents in the process? you are the real bad guy here sorry. But you are an idiot.

      I am sure that TONS of movies that are made there is atleast ONE person on those movies that hate gays and want to them wiped from the earth. but you are still going to see those right?

      • HydrogenChaos

        Those people already got paid when the movie went into production, and even if it bombs like no tomorrow the people behind production will still be able to find work.

        I know people who worked on Waterworld for fuck’s sake that are still finding steady work…

      • HydrogenChaos

        So everyone should see every movie ever made because people worked hard on it and deserve to work afterwards? And if it’s a piece of shit (As the trailer certainly suggest) they deserve to make another piece of shit… because they worked so hard?

        I’m sorry I didn’t see Bucky Larson then, they looked like they worked “Really hard” on that too and that should justify them making a sequel.

  • Grayden

    Pretty sure social conservatives who hate “Liberal Hollywood”, and all it stands for, go to the movies on a regular basis. You don’t hear them screaming about boycotting the overtly socialist agenda showcased in Hollywood films. Time to grow up people. Card can have his opinions and beliefs and we can all go see a film that has nothing to do with said beliefs.

    • Jessica

      No, you just hear them complain about movies are too violent and that’s what’s responsible for all the shootings in this country…

    • ZeldaGuideMe

      No, it’s time to grow up and stop brushing off this type of ignorance like it’s nothing and to stop tolerating these ignorant assholes

      • Jason Richards

        Speak for yourself.

      • Jessica

        Pretty sure she was…

  • Bryce Forestieri

    BOTTOM LINE:

    CARD’S RIGHTS: Is Card entitled to say whatever horseshit comes out of his stupid reactionary mouth and to spend his money in whatever lobbying (another form of freedom of speech) or organization (another one in the bill of rights) he pleases? ABSO-FUCKING-LUTELY!

    ANYONE ELSE’S RIGHTS: Are people allowed to say whatever shit they think of Card as a person based on his idiotic views? ABSO-FUCKING-LUTELY! Are people allowed to react however the fuck they please based on Card’s outdated views and to do whatever the fuck they come up with -this includes talking shit about Card as a scum of the earth, and try to boycott ENDER’S GAME, and try to get others to boycott ENDER’S GAME- based on his imbecilic ideas? ABSO-FUCKING-LUTELY!

    Great country to live in! I commend COLLIDER for participating in the discussion!

    • ZeldaGuideMe

      Is he allowed to force his religious views on other people? ABSO-FUCKING-LUTELY-NOT!

      Is he allowed to harm the rights of a large group of people because his religious beliefs disagree with them? ABSO-FUCKIN-LUTELY-NOT!

      The country is great, it’s just the people who are horrible. I commend COLLIDER for taking a stand!

      • Nerdgasm

        He’s not forcing anyone to believe in anything. I always find that argument funny. Even if in some INSANE way that he actually gets something passed that does regulate sex (Laughable) that still doesnt force anyone to take his views. views are your own no one else’s. No one can actually force their views upon you…they can talk about it which they are allowed to. I am not religious and I dislike many institutions that are. I don’t enjoy it when someone tells me I am living in sin and that I am a horrible person for not allowing jesus christ into my heart. but that’s their right to try and recruit. It’s my right then to act like I am possessed by the devil and repeatedly tell them that the Devil is telling me to eat their heart unless they walk away from me. how ever it is not my right act upon my joke…but it is my right to say it. So calm down. He’s not forcing his views. he’s jsut talking.

      • Walter White

        But he is in a position of political power and profits he receives could go towards some sort of law. And it doesn’t if your views differ, if something becomes law you’ll have a hard time expressing the freedom of your own individual views.

  • Guest

    I’m planning on skipping it because it looks vapid and dull.

    • DeadMenTellNewTales

      Seriously. There’s chance this film could bomb for all we know. The trailer was far too underwhelming. And if it does, people are just going to forget this controversy ever happened after two weeks.

      • Dave Trumbore

        Honestly I just wanted a good adaptation without all of this extraneous noise. It looks like I’ll be disappointed all around.

      • I Love Lamp

        It is from the director of X-Men Origins: Wolverine…

        People seem to forget that. =l

      • Dave Trumbore

        Also directed Tsotsi though, which I haven’t seen but I’ve heard good things.

      • I Love Lamp

        True. Soooo 50/50 chance then?

      • Dave Trumbore

        Eesh…that’s generous. We’ll have a better handle on things as more material starts to be released. Not holding my breath though.

  • Why Bother Anymore?

    The people who continue to make “The opinions excuse” for this type of behavior are the reason why we are not moving forward as a culture. It’s like we’re BEGGING for a brand new Dark Ages defending Card’s comments.

  • Dustin Philipson

    Where are all of you supposed “human/equal rights” advocates whenever the new Roman Polanski film hits the art houses?

    Oh you are first in line… in the front row, applauding his genius?

    You cast your vote for him for the best director Oscar?

    You write impassioned essays defending the unique appetites of the
    artist, and how it is the artist who pushes the sexual norms in every
    generation?

    You hypocrites.

    You frauds.

    You single issue voters.

    May shame rain on you all.

    nuff’ said.

    • Lex Walker

      Do you realize how bad a comparison that is? Most of Polanski’s films only make an average of $1-3 million dollars in the US, with rare exceptions making $18 million, and the rarest (The Pianist) making $32 million. Most of his films make about 90%+ of their profits outside of the US. So it looks like no, the human and civil rights folks of the US are not hypocrites, frauds, or single issue voters, because pretty much no one is seeing Polanski’s films in theaters.

      • Al

        Yeah, Polanskis bad morals are okay because he isn’t a millionaire.

        Wait…thats dumb.

      • Lex Walker

        Way to miss the point. I brought up box office takes not to indicate whether Polanski makes a lot of money, but to refute the point that huge amounts of people are going to see his movies and are thus hypocrites for boycotting Ender’s Game. Even with his rare film that makes $32 million domestically, at $8-$10 a ticket that means only about 3.5-3.2 million people in the country saw it, and that’s his biggest film and most people saw it because of all the Academy Awards talk, not because it was an arthouse flick.

      • Al

        I didn’t miss your point at all. A rapist has less money, there for less sway, there for we shouldn’t boycott his film….yeah, got it.

      • Lex Walker

        Clearly you don’t got it, as you just reaffirmed you didn’t grasp the point. It’s not about how much money either of them personally makes, it’s that box office receipts show us that clearly very few people in this country are seeing Polanski’s films in theaters, therefore to call people boycotting Card’s film hypocrites for going to see Polanski’s films is an unsupported accusation. Almost no one in the US is seeing Polanski’s films.

      • Al

        Oh okay. You’re finally making your argument clear. Because there aren’t enough people who watch Polanski films in theaters for us to care about his rape-ier activities.

        I don’t care about boycotting! Its the idea that everyone is so worked over someones beliefs. I don’t need that to manifest as a boycott in Polanski’s case. Its the lack of rage, and quite frankly, the opposite of it, with regards to Roman the Raper that is the hypocrisy. Its the fact that people are pretending they give a damn about decency from the people who make our entertainment, when really its picking and choosing.

        Roman. Polanski. rapped. a. little. girl.

      • Lex Walker

        Well no one’s arguing the man didn’t rape a girl (but she was 13, a teenager not a “little girl” – semantics, not defending it). It’s just that claiming people are hypocritical for not boycotting his films because he’s a statutory rapist is ridiculous because no one sees his films anyways. He’s so outside of the American popular mentality because he’s literally outside of America and the only time we ever hear from him is when he releases a film that no one in America bothers to watch anyways.

        And there was plenty of outrage at the time and he’s still not welcome in the US. What more can the American public do in that regard? He’s outside of our reach, so we can either waste energy fuming over a rape that happened 36 years ago, or we can accept that the man is essentially banned from American cinema or exiled to its most obscure corners. Meanwhile, Card is front and center and still very much in the spotlight. In fact, at this point, it would be hypocritical not to get angry with him as we set the precedent with Polanski that what an artist does outside of his craft should affect his public perception.

        Besides, Polanski’s rape victim Samantha Geimer says she forgave him 16 years ago.

  • tobias

    when did we become a country of pussy’s and cry baby’s? so whenever someone speaks their mind or has something to say that others don’t agree with….” racist, bigot, anti-inflammatory, prejudice” etc…. that’s the response????? imagine if everything anyone here on this website says and each and everytime some terd decides they don’t like it and cries out. we have become a nation of crybaby’s and winers. WAY TOO FUCKING MANY LIBERALS!!!!

    Steve Weintraub- u should be ashamed!!!!!! Liberal eliteist hack!!!

    Ur rich because of us! Remember that when u censor free speech!!!!

    • BatemanBegins

      This isn’t about free speech, and I don’t think any of us ‘Liberal elitists’ would argue that Card should have full right to say whatever he wants in this country. However, when a very wealthy man uses his position to impede social equality, that’s a display of tyranny. This movie, if a success, should bring greater awareness to his works, enhancing his wallet size, and allowing him to greater fund his efforts to lobby his views on Congress. Here’s an article written by him http://www.deseretnews.com/article/print/700245157/State-job-is-not-to-redefine-marriage.html If you actually take a semblance of time to read it, you’ll learn that this isn’t just a case of crazy Liberals being crazy Liberals.

      • Northern Star

        He’s one man with one vote like anyone else, how is that “a display of tyranny”… do you get this upset when mega-wealthy liberal donors like George Soros and many in Hollywood contribute to organisations that literally harass, bully, browbeat, boycott, and intimidate those who disagree with them?

        Tolerance is a two-way street and what progressives call “social equality” others – like Card and this writer — call an orchestrated and well-funded effort to destroy the Judeo-Christian ethos of western civilisation because some militant homos don’t like God’s position on their indecent and immoral lifestyle…

        …and if this post makes you angry, you should question WHY it does, and hopefully look your own personal bigotry in the eye, if you can…

    • Dave Trumbore

      It actually pains me that your vote counts just as much as mine.

      • tobias

        Awww. sour grapes…. I know it’s tough for you liberals when others who don’t agree/believe in the bullshit your spewing out, actually have a retort.. right???? no surprise there. Whats the matter??? The great messiah Obama shown his true colors??? people have finally caught on??? liberal media can no longer carry the water??? democrats finally getting their heads out of their asses????you and goldberg should be a perfect match together. everyone who reads this site KNOWS what i’m talking about. Remember- liberals like u, goldberg, weintraub etc… have noone to blame but yourselves. Karma is a bitch!

      • Dave Trumbore

        I was actually just talking about your grammar. I will quite literally tutor you if you want. Or we can just hug it out over a pint.

  • chris

    so stupid. hes being bullied cuz hes Christian. Theres not enough LGBT’s to damage the success of the movie. So stupid

    • HydrogenChaos

      Actually, Card’s a Mormon.

      Do your research.

      • VOR

        Mormons are Christian.

        Do your research?

      • I Fucked a Jawa

        Oh no no no no no no no they are not. You call a Mormon a Christian and them and 6 wives will kill you.

  • Dan

    Wow. What is intolerance now???? “I will tolerate you as long as you agree with me”? The man has a right to his religious (or non-religious) beliefs. So does everyone else. I’m not a Mormon – I think they are wrong. But I’m not going to call him a hate monger because he believes homosexuality is wrong. Just because you disagree with what someone does and chooses doesn’t mean you hate them. What hypocrisy in this politically correct tyrannical culture. The double standard is obvious and ridiculous.

    • HydrogenChaos

      He doesn’t just think homosexuality is wrong, he wants to wipe all homosexuals out and tell them that their marriage and love are insignificant.

      Pretty sure that’s a hate monger…

  • Daniel O’Reilly

    You know what? It’s okay to not be pro LGBT. We have freedom of speech and freedom of religion. Remember? Anyone?

    • Dave Trumbore

      There’s no place for logic here, silly.

      • Al

        Yup, not on a comments board for your piece.

    • Jessica

      We don’t have the freedom to discriminate though

  • Pingback: New high-resolution still from @EndersGameMovie featuring @AsaBFB (Ender) and @HaileeSteinfeld (Petra) | Page to Premiere

  • Rose

    what’s all the noise about and where is a man’s right to free speech, thought and belief? if you don’t want to watch the movie, by all means don’t. But to tell other people what to do or not to do, because the man disagrees with you is downright wrong. it’s about time gay people sat up and realized that they are not protected species and at liberty to trample on the rights of everyone else.That said,I will definitely watch this movie!

    • Dave Trumbore

      So “telling other people what to do or not to do because the man disagrees with you is downright wrong,” unless it comes to Card lobbying against the marriage rights of LGBTs? Did I understand you correctly? And where do LGBT rights trample yours again, for clarification?

      • tobias

        sooo…. it’s okay for the LGBT Community and anyone who proudly supports them to discriminate against those who don’t believe or agree with them ,but if those who do disagree with them are then called bigot’s, racist, by the LGBT, it’s okay???? So when Jamie Foxx said he did Django becuase he got to kill white people, and that was acceptable by you???? How about if Eastwood, Heston, Willis, Schwarzenegger , etc…said I did this movie because I got to kill blacks, or kill gays ,etc… u gonna scream and shout???? Can’t have ur cake and eat it too trumbore!

      • Dave Trumbore

        Everyone has the right to boycott an event, just as everyone has the right to voice their opinion and, yes, even support legislation in favor of their views. Is it right to call someone a bigot because I disagree? No. Is it right to call them a bigot if they’re exhibiting bigotry? Yes. It’s a definition, after all. (Calling Card a racist in this case makes no sense.)

        If a studio puts out a statement against an Eastwood/Heston/Willis/Schwarzenegger movie, then you’ll have my response. (How many people were killed during the filming of the fictional Django Unchained again?) Until then, I’ll eat this here cake. I sure do love cake!

      • tobias

        u really think a studio is gonna back a few conservatives????

        no f’n way. ur point is moot. everyone knows Hollywood and the media love to ostracize anyone who is not leaning left – u and everyone else @ collider panders to the studio. ain’t gonna bite the hand that feeds ya! no such thing as journalistic integrity anymore. Bought and paid for…. sleep tight trumbore.

      • Dave Trumbore

        Are you getting this from a script? I swear I’ve read this cut-and-paste rhetoric before. But you do make one salient point: Yes, I do indeed have a boss to answer to. As long as you’re a member of the working class, I assume you do as well. If you work for yourself, I suggest getting back to your business and stop wasting time on an entertainment news comment section. (Oh and journalistic integrity? I write about cartoons and comics books…)

      • tobias

        Funny I don’t remember telling you my job status…

        So by your assumption I must be an out of work, free loading, govt cheese eater??? is that your opinion David???? Better yet.. what if i am an unemployed black male in a urban city????? still feel the same????

        Who the FUCK are you to tell me what to do with my own personal business??????

        You write for an Entertainment blog/gossip site- No more, No less!

        Be careful when u talk shit David.. never know who might be from Philly!!!!

      • Dave Trumbore

        Nice! I’m from outside of Philly originally. Where at? If you’re unemployed, I feel for you because this economy sucks and I could then understand why you’re so angry. Best of luck, Tobias!

  • Dave Trumbore

    What’s most profound about this particular debate is Orson Scott Card’s foresight in ENDER’S GAME about how net-based discussions can influence and sway opinions in a population, leading to political change. Not that Collider has a fraction of the influence that Demosthenes and Locke do, just saying. Now, shine on you crazy diamonds!

    • George Shapiro

      I do think it’s rather funny that somebody keeps taking the time to dislike EVERY single thing you post. Funny, and a little sad.

      • Dave Trumbore

        Agreed! But hey, I can’t let Goldberg have all the fun!

      • I Am Not Bruce Campbell,

        I think you just won back a lot of people with that comment.

      • tobias

        oh… look another liberal kissing another liberal’s ass… hmmmm…

        maybe u 2 could congratulate each other on killing unborn babies.. better yet…. high five each other on the death of our brave men and women fighting the wars in afghan and iraq???? feel better liberals??? all snug and tucked in???? ready to spew more hate to appease your master Obama?????

      • I Am Not Bruce Campbell,

        1.George Bush was the one who sent the soldiers to their death in 2 meaningless wars.

        2.Congrats! You’re another asshole denying women’s rights and telling women what they should do with THEIR bodies!
        3. Do you REALLY need that many question marks???????

        4.Dave, if you end up losing people like THIS as your readers, think of it as brushing dandruff off your shoulder.

      • tobias

        good thing ur not B.C….. BTW… How’s Obama working for ya??? Do I need this many ????????? Damn Skippy liberal. Did I mention Bush???? No u did. Why??? Because that’s ur and every liberals only excuse!!! getting old after 4 1/2 years…no one told women what 2 do w/ THEIR bodies.. remember everyone is responsible for THEIR OWN CHOICES… NOT YOU!!!!

        You can always tell when a liberal has been proven wrong…they go to the hate speech, curse words, rhetoric, nonsense etc… love it..HA!!! get over it… you Fuckers ruined this country in 4 years. So deal with it. You made ur bed .. now sleep in it.

        BTW… Since u mentioned Bush…. I love how u liberals blame
        Bush for everything… Just FYI… THE DEMOCRATS CONTROLLED CONGRESS FROM 2006-2010 = FINANCIAL COLLAPSE, FANNIE MAE, FREDDIE MAC, WALL STREET,
        Should I go on….????????

        Pat yourself on your back and enjoy the ride… There’s a special place in Hell for liberals… Gotta love that!!!!!

      • George Shapiro

        Did a conservative really just make an ass kissing joke? How about you back to blowing lobbyist or senators in an airport bathroom.

      • tobias

        AWWWW…. Did the poor little liberal get his feelings hurt??? Maybe you’ll go cry to Al Sharpton????? MSNBC???? Better yet… Anderson Cooper?????

        U Fucktards are so predictable and transparent!

      • George Shapiro

        Did your trailer tip over and you hurt your head and that’s why you keep holding down on the question mark? Good thing you have that FREE OBAMA CARE to fix your injuries or else you’d be praying to Ronald Reagan to have it fixed. You’re the predictable one, using the grammar of a 5 year old.

        Now I know you hate rhetoric because you did horribly in school (Clearly) and George Bush didn’t leave you behind even though you still weren’t ready for the 2nd grade (You’re still not), but I’m to go very slowly and list the reasons why you’re a horrible person and a complete dumbass. Now I know you hate facts too, even more than rhetoric, but it’s for the best to make sure all of this sinks into that broken peanut size brain of yours.

        1.You brought up the war in Iraq and Afghanistan and claimed the liberals and Obama were responsible. You know why he brought up Bush? Because he’s the one who started those wars. Not Obama. And they began MORE than 4 1/2 years ago, so now what’s YOUR excuse? It’s the conservatives that have those soldiers’ blood all over their hands.

        2.I see now your back peddling on the abortion issue. Yeah, first you brought up all the unborn baby killings we liberals masturbate to all the time. But once someone brought up the fact that they are abortions and the choice is on the woman who might be in need of it. Not the liberals, not the conservatives, the woman. When someone brought that up you quickly piggybacked on their claim that women can whatever they want with THEIR bodies. I commend you for it, even though you probably did it out of fear that if you ever knocked up your cousin again you didn’t want to raise another child.

        3.I know your small words probably devastate your cousin/ wife, but that’s cute you think they might be considered clever here too.

        4.Congrats on knowing what MSNBC is! You know of a tv network that isn’t Fox News, Spike or TLC. I mention TLC because I assume Honey Boo Boo is your sister/ daughter and that’s the only way you can check up on her since conservatives like you can’t get on a plane to fly over and see her because the gun you always carry sets off the metal detector. I know you carry it just in case that Tyler Perry poster you drive by on the way to church comes after you.

        5.If we hadn’t bailed those companies out of the financial collapse that REALLY began when your lord and savior Reagan was in office, we would’ve experienced another depression instead of a recession. I know you probably would’ve liked to have seen them fail. You can’t get tickets to watch executions so this is the best you could do. I know people like you don’t help others unless it can also benefit you. But don’t worry, I’ll help you without asking for anything, that’s why I’m doing this! =)

        6. And finally, Hell doesn’t exist. It’s just what the priest made up so you wouldn’t rat on them or all the midnight skinny dip confessions.

  • Pingback: You Know Whaaa! » Lionsgate Responds to Orson Scott Card’s Anti-Gay Comments Over Upcoming ‘Ender’s Game’ Film

  • Redjester

    I am 100% for the LGBT cause. That said, I believe in separating the artist from the art. Just as I still look heavily forward to each and every new Roman Polanski and Mel Gibson offering, I still love reading Enders Game and I am equally enthusiastic about the film.

    • Dave Trumbore

      Well said! Thanks for being level-headed!

  • Steve Nash

    I’m sorry, but I just can’t agree with any arguments for a boycott of the film because of Card’s views. For two reasons: one, it seems pretty important in this country that everyone is entitled to their view, and their right to their view, however ludicrous and bigoted that view is. So Card is entitled to his opinion. He’s wrong, in my opinion, but again, that’s just a difference of opinion. He has as much right to his as I do to mine. And two, if we start boycotting films because the political or philosophical viewpoint of someone who worked on it differs from our own, where do we stop? Do we know the opinions on race, gender and sexual equality and rights of the director? The sound guy? The extras? The guys at the studio? The people who own the multiplex? The people at Coke whose drink you are imbibing while watching? The guy serving you popcorn? I realise this is hyperbolic, but it is absolutely impossible to have everyone who worked on a film have the same opinion on the world as you. If the message of the film was anti-gay or anti-equal rights, then maybe a boycott is somewhat justified (although he would still be entitled to his opinion), but it’s not. It’s a science fiction film.

  • VOR

    Not seeing a movie based on the views of the guy who wrote the book upon which it’s based is one thing. Organizing or participating in a boycott is another. One is a defensive reaction to someone trying to hurt you (or your friends), while the other is an offensive mob style beat down the guy who you disagree with. Orson said it in his interview with EW: you guys won, I lost. I DISAGREED with you. Past tense, it’s over. If you are better than he is prove it. Go see a (hopefully) great movie based on an even better book. Bury the hatchet, let it go.

  • Ryan D

    Personally I don’t care what Card believes in, he is entitled to his own views. While, I may not agree with his views, I think this movie looks very interesting and I probably will see it.

  • andi

    wow. this comment section is a perfect example of the dialogue of this country and now it’s preventing the movement forward in etiquette, morality, and history. “God,” whatever that means, is only as honest as one’s intelligence, which explains the vengeful, foolish, and nasty prevalence of the vocal right (wing). Additionally, I’ve never been so dumbfounded by a straight person’s obsession with another’s private life. Perhaps you should get out more…and by that I mean get OUT more….

    andi

  • Dave Trumbore

    Added a bunch of Card’s quotes from over the years, along with citations for each one. Check them out, learn what you can and feel free to continue this debate. Card makes a lot of decent points about viewing homosexuality from the perspective of his religion, but he’s just do damned aggressive about changing everyone to his viewpoint that I’m forced to stand by my earlier characterization of him.

    • VOR

      Tbh I had no idea that card wrote stuff like that. He’s definaitely more conservative than I realized. He’s this old guy who told us stories when we were in middle school who turns out to have some wacky, offensive, not cool ideas. But the boycott is total crap. Why hurt all the people involved in a film just so you can stick it to one old guy you disagree with?

      • I Fucked a Jawa

        If the movie turns out to be crap I’m not going to waste hard earned money seeing it whether I agree with him or not…

  • who cares?

    yawn.. boring..

    i’m going to see it… what ya gonna do about it?

    • I Love Lamp

      Have a slice of pie and wait for honest trailers and cinemasins to make fun of it.

  • Drake

    God forbid we allow someone to speak his mind. In my book its perfectly fine for Card to speak his mind as it is for Ellen to speak hers. Everythings all good when somoeone speaks out for gay marrige but take the opposite stand and everyone looses their mind…hypocracy

  • brNdon

    Let me start by saying I support the LGBT agenda. I live in the thick of it here in San Francisco. But the one thing that bothers me the most about it is the intolerance towards people who do not support it. It is the same kind of hate you are against. You can’t just expect everyone to be okay with something they were raised to think otherwise. And Card hasn’t come out and said absolutely hateful things about the community.
    It would be the same if a gay filmmaker made a film or wrote a book and straight people boycotted it. Which I’m sure has and will happen, but it is never as open as when the opposite occurs.
    All I’m saying is that boycotting this movie is kind of hypocritical. It is intolerance towards intolerance

  • Pingback: HI-RES Image of Ender and Petra | Ender's Ansible

  • Voltron

    The thing that frustrates me with this boycott movement is that I automatically become labeled either as a homophobe or a champion of gay rights depending on what I buy or don’t buy.

  • Al

    Believing that marriage is between a man and a woman doesn’t necessarily mean you have a problem with gay people. Its believing that marriage is a religious definition and that to be between someone other than man of woman would make it not marriage.

    I DO NOT agree with that sentiment, although I recognize that people are allowed to have it. There are plenty of people who are against for purely bigoted reasons, but there are also plenty who just believe that marriage should only be opposite sex, just because they believe thats what it is.

    And although I disagree, theres a difference between such a disagreement, and blind hatred.

    On a side note, im surprised Matt didn’t write this article….come on collider. Stahp.

    • Al

      Also is Dave stepping down, or getting fired? I’m taking bets.

      • Dave Trumbore

        I’m in. What’s the vig?

      • Al

        haha, not as bad as the goldberg pool.

      • Al

        big*

        whoops

  • Pingback: Shelf to Screen | New ‘Ender’s Game’ Still With Asa Butterfield and Hailee Steinfeld

  • Yurine

    At least we know a sequel won’t come out.

    • HydrogenChaos

      The movie hasn’t even come out yet. No reviews, no box office, no merchandise or home video sales.

      That was a very stupid thing you just said.

      • Yurine

        Sure but with all the prolems going on a sequel doesn’t look to be on the horizon.

      • HydrogenChaos

        Oh yeah, because production problems determine a movie’s success. I’ll make sure to tell Jaws and World War Z that.

      • Yurine

        I hope they respond soon.

  • Phil

    If taking a stand for your beliefs makes you a bigot in this society, well, sign me up. I’m a bigot too.

  • http://modmyi.com/forums/iphone-4-new-skins-themes-launches/740147-neurotech-hd.html#post5637502 Jay

    Political correctness is disgusting. So the man is anti-homosexual – so what? Like you don’t have groups of people you detest, you hypocrite.

  • http://www.beatific-design.com Beatific

    I think this is the most comments I’ve seen for a Collider article.

  • Pingback: The Sunday Round-Up: Kawaii Pac-Man Edition | Teh Pwn Shop

  • Pingback: ENDER’S GAME Images and IMAX Poster. ENDER’S GAME Stars Asa Butterfield and Harrison Ford | Collider

Click Here