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