Huffington Magazine Issue 59 | Page 33

RICHARD FOREMAN JR SMPSP/© 2012 SUMMIT ENTERTAINMENT, LLC. Voices filmmakers distance themselves from Scott Card’s opinions, they doubtless paid a lot of money for the rights to adapt his book. This isn’t really a surprise — the Hollywood Hills are pretty, but those sure aren’t moral high grounds. Should the studio have refused to do buy this script, because some of the money would be going to someone who might donate it to anti-gay causes? Maybe. Scott Card’s cut was probably small in comparison to the movie’s budget, but still substantial in itself. The ethics of capitalism are complex at the best of times, and it seems relevant to point out that the filmmakers seemed to want to make a movie that wasn’t bigoted (as far as I’m aware, though other interpretations are likely available, and I haven’t seen the movie yet.) To be honest, I feel that merely asking these questions, and highlighting how objectionable Scott Card’s views are, are themselves a bigger net positive than if no studio had dared go near the book for fear of a hypothetical backlash about the man. As a result of the campaigns and statements about him, a lot of people primarily now seem to know the author for his ANDREW LOSOWSKY opinions. Without a movie billboard to hang it on, “old author has ugly views” wouldn’t nearly get so much attention. * Boycotting the movie makes a statement. Kind of, but there are a couple of issues here. First of all, there’s no talk yet about making a second Ender’s Game mov