This is Also the Title of the Book Which Continues Enders Story
Needs an extended version
The box-office failure of big budget (110m$) book adaptation 'Ender's Game' doesn't bode well for the future of my favorite movie genre. Writer Orson Scott Card has had many offers since the book release in 1985 to turn it into a film. He rejected many of them because of creative differences and because most Studios insisted on making Ender older (in the book he's 6 to 10 years old). There were plans in 2003 by Warner Brothers to let Wolfgang Petersen have a go at it with a script written by Card himself. Card's script was a fusion of 'Ender's Game' and 'Ender's Shadow'. In 2010 Gavin Hood got attached as director and screenwriter and the script became based on the first book again with plans to make it into a franchise or a TV series if successful. Unfortunately EG made only 112m$ worldwide (although it opened first place in the US with 27m$) so all future plans have been put on ice. It's really a shame because as far as science fiction flicks go this really is one of the better ones. The VFX were done by Digital Domain who also co-financed the film and they look absolutely stunning. This film will a good 4K showcase Blu-ray when they finalize the format at the end of 2014. The film follows the book quite closely but because of the time constraints of the film medium a lot of events had to be compressed and some subplots where eliminated. 113 mins really is too short, an extra 40 mins or so would have let more room to expand on Ender's training etc. Altogether I think most fans of the book will be happy with the end result but it it just lacks the depth the book had to offer. So hopefully they make a 3 hour extended version (depending on how much material they shot) on BD to give the story more time to breathe.
33 out of 43 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
There is no teacher but the enemy.
Warning: Spoilers
In the future Earth is nearly destroyed by an alien race of bug like creatures, but we were saved by a great hero that wasn't Casper Van Dien but Gandhi (Ben Kinsley). Children play video games to see who will become the next war leader. The overly robotic Ender Wiggen (Asa Butterfield) is on the fast track to become that leader, trained by Han Solo (Harrison Ford).
The film is magnificent in its graphics. The characters are fairly dry as in too many science fiction films which are theme driven. Written in 1985 the film looks at the "First Strike" debate. Should you attack your enemy first if you believe you are about to be attacked? This was debated in the 1980's and during the 1930's. It became policy in Iraq and is still debated today, the reason why Hollywood chose to make this film now. The film also touches on population control and structural society for the common good.
The multiple adult themes have been dummy downed for the young target audience who are surely more enthralled by the computer games than any under lying meaning. If "Ender's Game" reminds you of other modern films it is because they copied from it, or the book upon it was based. In that regard this feature is similar to "John Carter." a film that was not as popular as those it inspired.
Worth while viewing for the kids. Adults might find themselves at times bored during the formulaic plot.
12 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Science fiction semi blockbuster
I went into this movie with no preconceptions at all.The only thing i'd heard about this film was the title.I'm so glad i didn't read up on it first because i think this would have spoilt it for me.For the best part of the film its shot in space which credit where credits due is filmed fantastically what with the like of Gravity not long coming out and stealing all the limelight for its display of life in space and hands down it certainly deserves its merits.With that aside Enders Game is a marvel in itself.Great direction and production in this leaves you happy that you took the time out to watch this.A good cast of young actors who lead the movie very well and you can easily bond with these characters they portray.Iv'e given this movie only a 7 because with all its positive ingredients and an interesting plot line it still lacks something that i can't put my finger on.With that aside its still a must see for any science fiction fan.
23 out of 26 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Exploring the nature of the pre-emptive strike
Warning: Spoilers
This is a movie based on a best selling book by Orson Scott Card, and it is interesting that when this particular author is mentioned there is always an outcry against his position on homosexuality. While I am tolerant of homosexuality and will tend not to make statements as controversial as Card may have done, I do feel that the same tolerance that I am showing to the LGBT community is the same form of tolerance that is shown towards Card. In fact it sounds as if the producers of this movie deliberately kept Card away from its production due to a potential backlash from certain groups who are threatened by his views, and this is a man who is a self proclaimed Democrat, communitarian (I note that he does not use the term communist, but his description makes it sound like a less Stalinist version). While I may not agree with his Mormon beliefs, I do not find him anywhere near as objectionable as some people claim him to be (and I assure you that there are worse people out there than Card).
As for the movie, I thought it was brilliant. Earth has been attacked by a race of aliens known as the Formic, and by a bit of luck, were beaten off. However, the people of Earth have decided that they need to act to prevent another such tragedy, and begin a rigorous training program to find a general that will lead them to victory against the Formic and they do this by recruiting children and testing them through the use of games which become progressively harder, and more realistic.
The movie follows the life of a boy named Ender, and the military minds who are watching his progress. It is clear that Ender has an exceptional tactical mind, but it is also clear that he is not a warrior and does not have the mentality of a warrior, which makes it difficult for the military to use him to meet their objectives – which is why they end up disguising the operations as games and military exercises, and why they also work exceptionally hard to hide the truth about his actions from him.
The key to this is the idea where at the beginning of the movie he knocks down a bully, and then proceeds to continue to kick him not to exact vengeance or uncontrolled anger on him, but to prevent him from getting up again. This is an aspect of violence that many people do not understand. When you win a fight, you do not necessarily defeat your opponent, but rather you end up angering your opponent who then looks for the opportunity to seek revenge against you. It is an endless cycle that ends up going nowhere.
However, despite the attitude of Ender in that he only fights to defend himself, it is clear that the Earth military are seeking vengeance. In the final battle Ender notices that the enemy are not attacking, and they only attack when he makes the first move. There are a number of instances in the film where he makes the first move in a simulated battle, however it is clear that this is simulated and the first movie needs to be made. However, in the real battle (which is disguised as a game) this is not the case, however because he believes that it is a simulation he believes that this is a case where the first move needs to be made.
This is a film which is about battle and about military tactics, however it also questions the need for a pre-emptive strike. While Ender does make some strikes in this film, it is clear that it is in a battle situation, however there is a different situation where, as is clear in the final scene, or at least revealed in the final scene, that this is not a battle in a war, but it is a final strike against an enemy who has already fallen and is not willing to get up again. This is why Ender is so sickened at the outcome at the end because he is not kicking him to prevent him from getting up again, but taking out vengeance against an opponent that has already been defeated.
24 out of 34 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Ender's Game review
It seems as though all the great sci-fi takes forever to become films. It took over seventy years to give John Carter his big-screen debut. I had a copy of L. Ron Hubbard's Battlefield Earth that claimed that it would become a motion picture soon, but that never happened until almost twenty years later (and many would probably argue that it should not have been made). Ender's Game is another one of the best sci-fi novels I've read, and a film for it has been in development for something like ten years. So, in 2013, I couldn't have been more excited.
Ender's Game is kinda like The Hunger Games set in outer space, only more aggressive, more fantastic, and more original. EG has its fair share of special-effects-laden spectacle, with massive swarms of spaceships and incredible planetscapes filling up the screen. Fortunately, it's not all just action for the sake of action, it is all a direct consequence of the story. When the space battles aren't breaking out, the film still moves very fast with loads of character-driven conflicts.
The film still maintains most of its focus on telling the story, and it does hit up all the necessary plot points that were in the original novel. Some major subplots get cut out, the training/battle scenes are truncated, and various other liberties are taken, but for a two-hour movie, the filmmakers did their best to cover the entire plot, right up to its bizarre ending. A lot of scenes are exactly as I pictured them from reading the book (even the fantasy CGI mindgame scenes, which I always fancied should be animated Pixar style, and it turns out they were!), and the dark aggression of the book is mostly translated well into the film. Best of all, the book's biggest twists still bear some decent weight in the movie's narrative.
Unfortunately, some things are lost in translation. Just as it is with The Hunger Games, the specific nuances of the characters, their relationships, their emotions, and their overall pathos is better conveyed in the narrative of the book than it is on film. Ender's relationships with his friends (and even his enemies) are left at the surface level, and never really reaches the same depths as the novel. Some things remain unexplained or glossed over. Deeper themes are never fully explored. Although one can't expect every single thing in the book to make it into the film, EG falls just a little short in immersing the audience in the characters. It may be easy to root for Ender when he stands up to his bullies and commands a whole fleet, but the film won't leave that much of a lasting impression.
As a film, it looks pretty slick and stylish, with solid photography and editing. Acting can be rather mixed: I think all of the child actors did their jobs really well. Harrison Ford gets the most grief for his role, for he pretty much phones it in, but I still didn't think he was as terrible as other reviewers make him out to be. Ben Kingsley plays it kinda creepily in his role, and Viola Davis is pretty much herself. Writing in this film is okay, but has a rather bad penchant for exposition. This production has some good-looking sets, props, costumes, and special effects. The music score is not bad either.
As usual, the book is better than the movie, but I think the movie still does a good job as an adaptation. I expect that average audiences unfamiliar with the book will think this movie is okay, but might miss out on certain nuances. Book fans might gripe that the film doesn't do justice to certain things. In any case, I think the movie is worth a rent to all dedicated sci-fi fans.
4/5 (Entertainment: Very Good | Story: Good | Film: Pretty Good)
86 out of 138 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Not enough space...
I hesitated to watch this movie for a long time - reason being my endless love for the adapted book, which is my absolute favorite. It is needed to be said in the review, because even with all the effort it is impossible for me to review the movie without influence of the book.
Movie did actually better job than I expected. I liked the cast of the main characters, Harrison Ford and Asa Butterfield. Both did very good job. A big positive surprise for me was the visual aspect of the movie, I liked it actually so much, it is the main reason, why I keep my rating for the movie so high despite the negatives.
The biggest problem of the Ender's Game adaptation is the race against the time. The movie tries to squeeze huge amount of information in a short time and it just does not work. I cannot imagine, how I would feel without having any background information from the book. Even if we can discuss whether the "Earth" sideline with Ender's siblings has to or doesn't have to be in the movie (it does not), there is the main storyline describing Ender's time spend in Battle school and it is handled so shallowly and quickly, it hurts. This story just needs more space. Without it there is almost no character development. No emotions towards side characters, like Bean or Petra or all the others, barely recognizable for the viewer. Even the great ending is ripped of emotions partially because of it. I felt all the aspects of the movie are more handled as trailers to that aspect than actually diving into it. And it is a pity.
It was still a nice experience, seeing the universe come to life.
Remember, the enemy's gate is down!
26 out of 30 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Humanity worth protecting
Warning: Spoilers
Superior FX and intelligent action flick that finds an insectoid race returning to infect Earth. The International Military makes use of talented preteens, including Ender Wiggin (Asa Butterfield), to conjure a game plan to battle the second invasion. The characters are developed well for a syfy film and the action is strongly paced.
An outstanding cast also featuring: Harrison Ford, Hailee Steinfeld, Abigail Breslin, Moises Arias and Ben Kingsley.
6 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
I enjoyed it
I'll begin by saying that I haven't read the book and had absolutely no idea what to expect. I was therefore pleasantly surprised by what is an exciting science fiction adventure.
Harrison Ford is the reason I watched this, and he is first rate. It might be argued that Ford is playing to the gruff stereotype he has essayed in any number of recent films, but I like this performance.
The younger members of the cast were unfamiliar to me, but they acquit themselves well. I was drawn into the story and the emoitional journey within.
The visuals are stunning. Even the most cynical or jaded critic cannot deny the movie is beautiful to watch. Worth the cost of a movie ticket.
270 out of 443 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The most lavish morality play ever set to film
Warning: Spoilers
Elsewhere in the IMDb I reviewed Claire's Knee, one of the many "morality" films of Eric Rohmer, at one time considered the master of the genre. Wrong! ENDERS GAME is to Rohmer's work what the Federal Reserve is to an ATM. It is possibly the most elaborate morality play ever filmed, including not only top A-list stars but top CGI effects as well. Plus of course the blessing (and participation) of Orson Scott Card, the author of the original work. Most astonishing of all (to this reviewer) is how the film succeeds in spite of itself. The idea of entrusting children with the future of your planet is both brilliant and counter-intuitive at the same time. And with the sole exception of Asa Butterfield -- who, trust me, has a major career ahead of him if he wants it, he could pass for William Shatner's greatgrandson - the rest of the children are, well, children, and this creates some uncomfortable moments in the film which, I suspect, were NOT intentional. And Harrison Ford was very brave for taking this role because frankly the closeups were not kind -- he is a half-decade younger than the almost-80 Bob Redford (also working these days) but looks older. THE TRUE BRILLIANCE OF THIS FILM, moreso than any other in recent memory, is the way the director allowed it to work simultaneously on the viewer's two natures -- the logical, and the emotional. Through the two hours, your logic tells you that something is amiss and you cannot believe you are tolerating this twisty tale. Yet at the same time, your emotions -- aided by a great sound track, great cinematography, -- and the aforementioned young Asa who more or less carries the entire film on his back -- is having a great old time and really getting into the (completely illogical) story. A very unique work, and one that will not easily be forgotten.
27 out of 42 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Tragedy the sequel was never made
Apparently Enders Game was considered a flop and only just broke even. Hard to understand, because it's a truly excellent movie. The plot is very good, the cast outstanding, the production top quality and even though it's science fiction, it's very believable. And something else; it was very poignant. Overall far better than the Maze Runner and Divergent series. Oh, and Harrison Ford was perfect for the part.
10 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
I don't understand the bad reviews
This movie was actually really good! I thoroughly enjoyed it, the characters were great, storyline was intriguing, and acting was good. I expected a 6.6 movie, but got one way better than that.
15 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
What does it profit a man to save the world and lose his soul? Hood doesn't flinch from dark nature of Card's seminal novel.
Warning: Spoilers
Science fiction started life around the Enlightenment as a conduit for debates about society, about morals and about what makes us human, and what the future might hold, maintaining that same role as our science and technology advanced exponentially over the centuries. Then came its poorer sibling, the sci-fi that was just about the thrills and spills and the effects and action only. The best science fiction of course is a fine blend of the two, of the cerebral and the visceral.
One such novel was "Enders Game" by the Orson Scott Card, which used the familiar sci-fi cliché of the alien invasion of Earth and the pan- national fight back to examine a very real but troubling dilemma which affects any nation that considers itself to be "modern" and "civilized", which is that often in order to protect those very things, we, or those entrusted to defend us, have to embrace the opposite of all our values. The young men and women we take and train to kill without hesitation and mercy, to risk death and injury while taking life, then expecting them to return home and be normal. But to abandon that duty of defence may leave our values and our futures at stake, and so by doing nothing lose everything. Is there even a correct answer to this conundrum, and if not then how can we handle the conflict that arises?
After many years as "an unfilmable novel" it finally arrives as an impressive medium budget movie. Director Gavin Hood, who helmed the mess that was "X-Men origins: Wolverine" 4 years ago redeems himself on the sci-fi front by delivering a film that is at once spectacular looking and narratively flowing and gripping, while at the same time not flinching from the dark, sombre heart of the story.
The plot takes place 50 years after a devastating attack on Earth by highly evolved Ants called "Formics" who were looking for new colonies to deal with their chronic over-population, an invasion repulsed thanks to an "ID4" style manoeuvre by legendary pilot Mazer Rackham. What was left of us evolved into a highly advanced, but highly militarised society with interstellar capability and fleets of high tech space cruisers. The military realised that the best minds for strategy where those of children, who were gifted in intuition and daring thought lost in conventional upbringings, and so train the young at tough military academies, selecting the best for officer command. The brightest star is young Ender Wiggin ("Hugo"s Asa Butterfield) who is targeted by chillingly utilitarian General Graff (Harrison Ford) who subjects him to often horrifying mind games, putting him into conflicts with the other cadets around him, isolating him and putting his back ever further to the wall. The only one to help is psychologist Anderson (Viola Davis) who knows that she is complicit in the warping and destruction of the souls of children even if it is to a greater good. He makes enemies but also friends, chief among which is Petra (Hailee Steinfield) When he shows brilliance at the zero gravity team war games, a fight with another cadet ends in tragedy and Ender turns his back on everything, being especially conflicted by the fact that his unique understanding of Formic thought and culture makes him empathise with the very ones he is to destroy. Using his beloved sister Valentine (Abigail Breslin) as leverage, Ender is given command of a fleet positioned off the Formic homeworld, with Petra and his friends as his team, where a massive military build-up is terrifying the veteran top brass into a strategy of all out aggression. Here he is taken under the wing of Mazer Rackham (Ben Kingsley) himself. As the big attack on Formica approaches, Ender begins to feel some of the Formics are trying to communicate with him telepathically. Can peace prevail, or can only one race be left standing? And even if they win, what will be left of the soul of Ender and his team at the end of it?
The special effects are impressive, even if most of the "big battle" stuff is in the trailer. The excellent cast all do justice to their characters and their struggles, and every part from the major to the minor are well filled and directed. The film also updates the sentiments to our current world, not hiding the obvious fact that we are all living out this dilemma right now but without giving simple answers. "Star Trek", which was the modern home of ethical dilemma sci-fi, attempted to grapple with similar questions in this summer's "reboot" instalment "Star Trek into the Darkness", yet did so with all the clumsiness, lack of skill and tracing paper thin profundity typical of what now calls itself "Star Trek". This film on the other hand treats it as the REAL series that Gene Rodenberry created would have. It also evokes thoughts of some of the higher end Japanese Manga and Anime, who use a similar set up and youthful military elite in their dark, ethically troubled tales.
Not the fun, exciting happy go lucky movie for kids that some of the marketing suggests, it is instead a deep, warm, troubling, thrilling, moving, spectacular film that is suitable both for adults (despite the juvenile cast) and for teenagers and children (8+) who will hopefully be introduced to the ideas and questions it raises, and will find themselves stimulated to form their own answers, as they must inevitably do some day.
61 out of 97 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Don't go in expecting typical young-adult fare. "Ender's Game" is an engaging and visually entertaining adaption of a classic sci-fi novel
With a rumoured US$100 million production budget, "Ender's Game" could be written off as one of the latest in a growing line of high-budget young adult flicks, which its co-producing company Summit Entertainment probably hopes it will be. A more interesting fact is that it's also one of the first films whereby one of the other co-producers is James Cameron's special-effects firm Digital Domain, responsible for creating most of the futuristic sets and backdrops. But visual effects, even in a sci-fi movie, can only go so far in capturing audiences. The source material's acclaim far exceeds that of recent YA successes like "Twilight" and "The Hunger Games": Orson Scott Card's sci-fi novel won both the prestigious Nebula Award and the Hugo Award in 1985 and 1986 respectively, and is also recommended reading for the US Marine Corps.
Attempting to give sufficient credit to such a classic novel is director and writer Gavin Hood, best remembered for the unimpressive "X-Men Origins: Wolverine", which received a lukewarm response from critics and audiences alike. This time though, the pieces look to be in place for a box office success. Beyond the lauded source material, he's also got a stellar cast, led by 16-year-old Asa Butterfield, who effectively wields his expressive, bright blue eyes to convey a contradictory mix of childlike vulnerability and a preternatural ruthlessness. These are useful tools for portraying Ender Wiggin, a brilliant boy-genius recruited by the military in a world that is still recovering from the aftermath of an attack by insect-like aliens. The government is somehow convinced that training children barely on the cusp of adolescence in the ways of war will ensure future victory. Employing a combination of relentless physical training, psychological manipulation and social isolation in Battle School, Colonel Graff (Harrison Ford) and Major Gwen Anderson (Viola Davis) are looking to sieve out a suitable leader.
Ender appears to have the ideal traits, a result of both nature and nurture. On the one hand his intellect and tactical instinct are innate gifts. On the other, a troubled family background consisting of ambivalent parents, a psychotic older brother and a compassionate sister creates a detached demeanour and an understanding that mercy must be shelved in exchange for a thorough victory. Graff, convinced that Ender is 'The One', pulls no stops in his training and quickly puts him in command of his own platoon.
The inter-team battles resemble laser tag in a spherical zero-gravity court, lit in blue neon and dotted with blocks. Ender establishes himself as a leader worth his salt; crushing enemies along the way and swallowing the resultant guilt until an ill-fated showdown with a belligerent team leader Bonzo (Moises Arias) one day throws him off- course. Questioning whether the toll on his psyche is worth all this training to ultimately become a killer, Ender quits, only to change his mind after a rather brief talk with the one person he loves most in the world, his sister Valentine (Abigail Breslin). He moves on to advanced training in Command School under revered war veteran Mazer Rackham (Ben Kingsley). The script takes on a more existential tone after this point, leading up to the climactic final "game" where the theme of morality / oppression in war takes centre-stage.
The pacing may be slightly uneven but the film moves fast enough to retain your attention throughout. Visually, most scenes are filtered with bright electric blue lights and warm amber hues set against black space, which feels familiar and reminiscent of "Tron: Legacy" – both films share the same production designers, Sean Haworth and Ben Procter. Coming on the heels of Alfonso Cuarón's astoundingly beautiful "Gravity" doesn't do "Ender's Game" any favours. That's not to say that it isn't aesthetically impressive on its own; the glossy and clinical sets are believably futuristic and highly pleasing to the eye.
Acting-wise, Ford leverages on his grandfatherly gravitas in portraying a man who is convinced that the end he has in mind will justify any means. Alongside him, Butterfield ably holds his own, following his adorable turn in "Hugo" with another praiseworthy performance and creating a tense dynamic with Ford that hits the boiling point in the concluding scenes. Abigail Breslin, unfortunately, is underused. Movie adaptations of books invariably result in the loss of certain elements: While Ender's siblings are keenly-developed and complex characters in the novel, the lack of screen time and development in the movie render them as mere placeholders.
53 out of 91 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Engaging Science Fiction
Warning: Spoilers
"Ender's Game" (2013), directed by the South African Gavin Hood, is a military science fiction film based on Orson Scott Card's cult novel of the same name from 1985. It's a film that is more complex than it initially appears, the exposition-leaden opening thankfully not an indicator of what is to come, with Hood using cinematic techniques to tell the story rather than using any trite narrative clutches such as voice-over. Instead, the script (also written by Hood), introduces the figure of Ender, played by a marvellously cold Asa Butterfield, and his submergence into a future world of complex military strategy. The presence of many other child actors, even the Oscar-nominated Hailee Steinfeld and Abigail Breslin fail to make much impact. Yet this isn't a downside as much as it appears; Ender is supposed to be isolated and withdrawn, and it is appropriate for a film seen through his eyes that we scarcely get to known anything more than the broad strokes of personality from his compatriots in "Command School".
The older members of the cast though, disappointingly, don't register as much as they need to. Harrison Ford's Colonel Graff is rather one-note, only Ben Kinsley's unconventional character Mazer Rackham being memorable. The script fairly abandons them all to the sidelines and favours Ender above all else; thankfully, Butterfield is more than capable to meet that challenge, delivering an excellent child performance for a none too likable character. He's the film's strongest point.
The direction is good, even exhilarating in the scenes of stimulated zero gravity battle. The $110 million budget has been well used, credibly creating orbiting space stations and ships. The future imagined isn't so far from are our world, the suspension of disbelief on the part of the audience not so great. It follows the path of films as diverse as "2001: A Space Odyssey" (1968) and "Minority Report" (2002) that realised the future is made more plausible by having ties to the present.
Unfortunately, the ingenious twist ending, which probably works better on the page than it does on the screen, has, by necessity, almost to mould the movie in reverse leaving a curious sense of distance and lack of tension to the climax, while the epilogue goes into a bizarre realm which feels out of tone with the rest of the film.
The film is still an enjoyable science fiction movie, professional and well-made, but it suffers from the feeling it may have even been better had it been braver in adapting the source novel and not felt so obliged to try and translate aspects of it that don't work on the silver screen.
88 out of 152 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Very enjoyable movie that doesn't do justice to the book
As a fan of the book, I really wasn't sure I wanted to see this movie. Great books hardly ever adapt into good films. But my friend wanted to see it, so I agreed to tag along on opening night.
I have to say, as a movie, it is genuinely enjoyable. The visuals are starkly entrancing without being distracting. The casting is pitch-perfect - Harrison Ford and Asa Butterfield, in particular, do a great job. The ending is particularly well done (don't worry - it wasn't really spoiled by the trailer).
The problem is, it's really just a caricature of the book. The drama in Battle School moves too quickly, the characters of Peter and Valentine are almost completely absent, and even Ender's video game is sadly underdone. I'm not usually a fan of splitting books into multiple movies, but this is one where two films would have done it justice. Also, the kids are just too old - there's an ironic moment in the movie where two officers talk about how conscripting kids under 15 "used to be illegal", yet all the actors playing the kids look 15 or older!
Still, it's a fun ride, and if you hadn't read the book these flaws really wouldn't be apparent. Definitely see it in the theater if you can - the battle room scenes are best on a big screen.
223 out of 339 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Internals Revealed
tedg 27 March 2014
Warning: Spoilers
I do dimly recall the first couple books of the series. They were engagingly written. But more importantly, they used a device that probably won't work today.
The books were powerful because they focused on Ender's internal mind. The second book folded this into Ender's own book a what it wrought. A very clever structure. The first book was imagined second, and had to use a different folding device. The solution was games.
This wouldn't work today because games have become more prescriptive and in the world. In the eighties, they were vastly more abstract, closer to the imagination than to furniture.
See, the thing is that winds of the mind are ephemeral. You have to describe something else to convey the shape of them. This is why, for example, something as invisible as love is conveyed through stories of war or political upheaval.
Card's war was only an excuse for the exclusive focus on war gaming, which could stand in and illuminate his internal emotional forces. These were suitably simplified for a teen audience, so the match could be well made. But in the book, the genius is that reader invented what the games looked like, being a cocreater of the world. The pathway through the games then segued to a pathway for the alien creature. Not sure why so many of these alien creatures are insect- like.
The movie has most of the same story, but none of this folding. The war is real. The games are as real as the real world (with one exception). So what we are stuck with is having to get Ender's emotions from the face of a weak child actor.
Nothing to say about Harrison Ford. He has a rough enough life.
11 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Does the impossible: captures an unfilmable book
I like 'Ender's Game' as a book, but I love what was done to convert it into a film.
I almost think the adaptation should've been a tv series, as the film ellides over certain book plot points, and combines material, meaning some emotional beats and logical connections don't get fully developed, but on my second viewing I can't help but think Hood as screenwriter and director achieved the impossible.
Much of that is through a brilliant understanding of the themes of the book: empathy for the true alien other (a problem we humans really fundamentally have in 2020!), compassion, control of our violent tendencies, patience and tolerance, and most importantly, communication (boiling down to a willingness to just wait and listen to those we assume not at all like us), but another factor is the cast.
Just about every actor is either utterly skilled, or directed with care for the overarcing trajectory of the film, or the footage has been so cleverly edited with such insight and nuance. Ford and Butterfield, and the compellingly problematic relationship between their characters, are real standouts. I've never seen Ford this good in anything, apart from 'Witness', and I love him in everything I've seen him in. But it's that he's toe-to-toe with Butterfield: you can just sense the respect, the teamwork between them - it's just magic to watch. Though (as a Kiwi) I baulk at the use of tau moko on Kingsley, I can only assume it was sanctioned and approved of by Maori experts (I would LOVE to see the specific meaning of Rackham's ta moko: every line has import and relevance), and (as a Kiwi) I loved his Noo Zeelund accent. I would've loved to have seen more of Davis's Anderson, but I'm like that about her in everything she appears in! Steinfeld's Petra is also a standout, as is the magnetic Valentine from Breslin. And a cast of wonderful diversity, reflecting humanity's inevitable future: a range of cultures, ethnicities, creeds and disbeliefs is how we look now, and how we'll look very soon from now.
On release, the last section of the film made me cry like a drain - some 'thing' so computer generated has never really had that effect on me - but on my second screening now, seven years later, those scenes still get to me. Kudos to all involved - you should be proud that this production will stand the test of time, and will 'get to' thoughtful kids just like Ender when they discover your gorgeous film.
9 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Well realised, and enjoyable
Warning: Spoilers
Following a war with insect-like aliens called Formics, won only narrowly, a training programme is instituted whereby young people are hothoused for military command in order to bring on tactical abilities at an age when minds are most agile. Ender Wiggin is a promising trainee, and the film follows him from boot camp into battle school.
I have not read the book, but this hard sci-fi movie was very well made and enjoyable to watch, and provided some food for thought. Much of the story appears inspired by Robert Heinlein's Starship Troopers - a war against insect-like aliens and following a recruit through training are common - but the course of Ender's training and the philosophical issues are quite different.
The performances are all good - Asa Butterfield continues to impress, with a performance of depth and emotion. Harrison Ford, having phoned in performances for a considerable number of years, shows some commitment here. And Moises Arias as venomous fellow trainee Bonzo Madrid is excellent (in fact, all the young actors are good). The effects, both physical and CGI, are excellent.
I thoroughly enjoyed this - it is my sort of science fiction.
14 out of 24 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Very entertaining Sci-Fi story.
Warning: Spoilers
My wife read the book and after we saw the movie, on Blu-Ray, she said the basic story was consistent with the book, just a lot of stuff in the middle had to be shortened to make a movie less than 2 hours.
It is somewhat in the future and the apparent overall theme is to defend remaining Earth from an alien species that had attacked at some time earlier. It builds on the idea that the present day and future warriors will be the younger generation, the guys and girls who grew up playing video games. Their vision and coordination can give them the superior skills necessary to defeat an enemy.
But there is another theme, relating to whether it is ethical to strike the perceived enemy in a pre-emptive manner, to destroy them before they have the chance to strike you again.
The story focuses on Asa Butterfield (of 'Hugo' fame) as Ender Wiggin. He is one of a number of kids who have been selected for their potential, but they still have to go through a tough training and weeding out sequence. Most of them wash out at some point, but Ender keeps showing that he has skills and insights that make him a leader, such as being put in charge of some misfits who eventually work their way to the top of the class. He eventually is chosen as "the one" who will lead the military force against the enemy.
Harrison Ford is Colonel Graff and Ben Kingsley is Mazer Rackham. Both of them appear to be top guys in the military planning, I was never sure which one of them was the top, but probably Graff.
Four of us watched it, and found it to be a really good story and the movie was interesting all the way through.
SPOILERS: After having a bad failure in an advanced training exercise, Ender's group was given one last "exercise" to see if they were ready, and they took a very unusual approach to sacrifice some of their space ships to protect the main ship and destroy the alien planet. Immediately after he learned that it wasn't an exercise, they had actually destroyed the civilization, of an intelligent species that looked like giant ants and communicated via thoughts. Ender felt great empathy for them because it was done not in defense and he thought trying to communicate would have been a better approach. In the end he meets with one of the queens and takes an egg, determined to find them a planet where they could continue their race.
6 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
A rushed sound-bite movie - a disappointment
I have no problem with movies based on books if they are done well.
For me, doing them badly involves quoting a couple of pages near verbatim then tearing out and ignoring the next twenty. In my view, this is what has been done in adapting Ender's Game, the remnants have been stacked together as a bunch of sound-bites and run at fast forward speed, leaving no time for character progression and the growth of friendships that is the mainstay to the original story.
It may be that, like Philip Pullman's Dark Materials Trilogy, this was an unmakeable film so we should perhaps thank them for their brave effort that didn't quite make it.
In failing, the film is a testament to the writing of Card that he could cram so much story into just 350 paperback pages that it couldn't been captured in 2 hours on the screen.
And finally, Ben Kingsley's performance, what a shocker! Think we'll see more of Asa Butterfield though.
239 out of 433 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5 things that would have made this movie better
When I first heard this film was coming out, I decided to read the two books on which the movie was based (Enders Game & Enders Shadow). I really enjoyed the books and was confident that with a bit of thought they could make a decent screenplay that would be true to the story in the books as well as being entertaining to watch. Like many others, I was incredibly disappointed with the movie. Here are 5 things that would have improved it greatly:
1) Show the passage of time: Whilst I understand that it would be tricky to show the 5 years or so Ender is in battle school, having him writing an email saying 'we have been studying for months' doesn't really cut it. Everything moves so fast that you get the impression he has only been there a few weeks. This prevented something essential to most movies, character development.
2) Show Battle School as a school: Much of the book is about how the battle room games shape and define Enders character as a person and (eventually) a leader/commander. This is barely touched on the movie with the few battle room scenes being very disappointing and Ender becoming both an expert in the battle room and leader of an army within what seems like a week! Also, in the books there are a few hundred children at battle school, a lot more than the sparse 50 or so we see in the movie. Even classic Star Trek gave the impression of a large crew on the Enterprise by having extras walking in the corridors, how hard can it be to copy that?
3) Show that Ender is truly on his own: In the book, Ender doesn't have any friends as such, he has to earn respect by becoming the best in the battles, then people start to follow him. When Ender arrives, Graff says that Ender has to feel alone, but from then on he always has someone to help him or be his friend.
4) More Bean, less Petra: Petra is a great character in the books, because she is a bit of a b**ch! Yes, she helps Ender with shooting practise but she is fairly ambivalent towards him the rest of the time. Bean is the person who Ender eventually trusts the most, and even confides in. In the movie, far too much emphasis was put on Petra's relationship with Ender (she didn't even seem like the 'real' Petra to me) whereas Bean is just a face in the crowd.
5) Show Ender getting tired: Even if they failed in all the other areas, they could at least have made Ender look tired from all the battle games! His exhaustion is what drives him to 'quit', again this doesn't come across at all in the movie. How hard could it be to show that?
I could write more, but in summary this movie was an epic fail with very few redeeming qualities. The sad thing is, it could have been one of the greatest sci-fi movies ever, but instead they traded the 'soul' of the book for a few flashy effects and a lightweight story. Somewhere in the process the real Ender's Game got lost.
143 out of 253 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
What was the Editor's Game?
Warning: Spoilers
Unfilmable, he said. OSC said that his "Pre-teen Sociopath Commits Genocide On Unfortunately Named Space Ants In Space" novel was unable to be filmed simply because the majority of the content takes place in Ender's head. His feelings, the complexity of dealing with his siblings, his resentment and burden of duty. So what best way to apply this cerebral sci-fi to celluloid?
Just ignore the thinky bits.
Ender's Game, The Movie certainly cracks along at quite a pace, you're not left looking at your watching and wondering how long before things wrap up. And the acting is solid enough, complaints there. What doesn't work is the adaptation itself, and the editing.
Anyone who's read the books before going into the cinema will recognise the framework of the story, but will wonder where all of the plot went. Peter appears for all of one scene, solely to show that, yes, he's a violent dick. Valentine appears more often, but mostly as a plot device more than anything character driven. Valentine is nice, Ender likes Valentine, Ender misses Valentine. Locke and Demosthenes? Never heard of them, they don't exist in this version of events. The Mind Game, the one that Ender plays throughout EGTB and mirrors his mental state and thought process? Reduced to a two minute Flash game on an iPad and a sequence of foreshadowing for later in the movie. The series of battle games between the armies that slowly erode Ender's resolve as Graff systematically changes the rules to break Ender down? One 2 v 1 match. Characters are blurred together and virtually written out (notably, neither of the kids Ender beats the hell out of die, assumedly to garner audience empathy - and all the characters are at about twice the age of the ones in the novels, maybe to stop people having to see a 6 year old boy murder another kid in the showers...) and the end result is very different to the novels.
And the editing. It's all over the place - when watching this movie you will feel that it's an edited for TV version and that someone cut out the wrong scenes. The first battle room scene ends abruptly, with not even a discussion of what happened in it. Ender goes from being in Salamander army to being given the name of a new army, to having a whole new army who almost instantly respect him. Worst of all is Ender wanting to quit the program, whereas in EGTB it took place over time and was caused by Graff's increasingly gruelling changing of rules, in EGTM it happens after one game, and the sudden jumps in narrative make Ender look at best like a petulant child and at worst like a schizophrenic:
Graff: "Wake them up early for a game!" Ender: "It's 3am, we're playing a game!" Ender's Army: "It's 2 v 1!" Ender: "Graff's changing the rules! We can still do this, follow my instructions." Ender's Army: "We won using a combination of sacrifice and improbable formations that probably won't foreshadow anything later in the movie at all, hooray!" Ender: "Everything is awesome!" Bonzo: "I am named after a dog and therefore hate you, let me beat you up." Ender: "Oh no, I fought back and hurt him, but he is DEFINITELY still alive. I hate you, Graff, everything is terrible and I'm running away to Earth!"
Although the film as a whole moves quickly, the story itself lurches in patches of ten minute sequences, followed by jumps to the next patch. Perhaps due to the nature of the novel, if you take out the internal narrative and subplots this is what you get, but it seems strange that on one hand the movie would take such liberties with the source material, but on the other hand follow the set pieces so slavishly that it would disrupt the flow of the story.
As a sci-fi film in a vacuum, it's competent - for some reason it reminded me of Stargate, with elements of The Hunger Games - but flawed in places and has a very uneven and badly edited narrative flow. As an adaptation of EGTB... it's a bit of a Bugger.
48 out of 85 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
One of the most appallingly lazy scripts I've seen in years
Warning: Spoilers
Visually stunning, well performed, but my oh my.
As a small example, Ender's emails home to his sister, with whom he has a string emotional rapport and which he reads aloud, read like a dry, cold shopping list of what's just happened and what's about to happen. Like so much of the dialogue, they serve the purpose of informing the audience, and *no effort whatsoever* has been made to make it fit in with the story. It's so unbelievably appalling it actually makes you feel like the makers have a personal grudge against their audience.
What's more, the movie is brimmed with premises that make no sense - and it relies heavily on these to function. For example, the essential premise that the Formic's "can't talk" and so humanity has never attempted communication - yet they a have huge, industrial-sized and highly technical army, that invades far-off planets - so it's clear to everyone from the start that unless they spontaneously do the same thing at the same time, then it's obvious they communicate with one another, and have done so for thousands of years. I'm not kidding - the notion that they communicate *at all* only occurs to Ender right at the end of the movie, in a somewhat forced scene that was thrown in to make the end make sense - and this fact, or the failure of mankind to realise it, is absolutely pivotal to the plot! His commander even denies out loud that it's possible for Formics to communicate - fifty years *after* they launched an invasion on planet earth!
Equally bizarrely, the Formics' motivation for invading Earth is that they are about to "breed themselves into extinction" (sic). I can barely imagine how lazy and ignorant you have to be to surmise that because overpopulation = bad, therefore overpopulation = extinction. Give it half a moment's thought, heck, even do a little cursory research - it's just not a bright conclusion to reach, is it?
Throw in some really uncomfortable lines - you know the ones - establish a strong character for Ben Kingsley (he always shines at these, I think rather he established it for himself) , then give him some throwaway line that serves no purpose except to inform the audience what's going on (again)... oh God, stop it, it hurts!
As the final image faded to credits, I actually muttered "f*** you" under my breath, because that's truly how I felt. Kind of violated.
Do yourself, and the film medium, a favour - TAKE YOUR MONEY ELSEWHERE
109 out of 191 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
A Surprisingly Deeply Emotive and Substantive Sci Fi Action Thriller
31 October 2013. Curiously enough Starship Troopers (1997) and Star Trek (2009) have similar parallels in plot outline and action sequences, yet with a huge difference. The dichotomy between even younger cadet students, the focus on younger, more pliable, but creative, out of the box minds and the older, aging generation of warriors offers a fascinating psychological and moralistic interplay. The emotive and deeper substantive emotive and philosophical, humanistic issues at play here provide a much more solid and meaningful foundation making this movie pertinent and relevant to a mass audience.
Three minor weaknesses appear in this movie that don't really diminish the overall impact of the quality of this movie: Below average set designs and special effects especially at the beginning of the movie, the less than convincing training of the Dragon Team, and less than emotionally compelling and appealing huge change of Ender's mind in the movie. However, there is a wonderfully interesting and strangely emotionally riveting shot of a world in transformation at the end of the movie that speaks powerfully, much more than a transformative planet scene from an earlier Star Trek movie.
Ender's persona is one of the most fascinating to be presented on screen and depending one's perspective this maudlin and politically correct movie or perceptively astute middle way movie that contains an especially sharp edge to both its violence and compassion, usually lacking in most action, adventure movies and reserved for theatrical dramas for the screen. When Orson Scott Card wrote the original novel upon which this movie was based in 1985, it was among the leading edge of sci fi and the fusion of creative ideas of space warfare and alien communication (or perhaps the "apparent" lack of it) taken from this book and incorporated into this movie remain fresh and excitingly potent.
There is a unique sci fi bench mark set in this movie in terms of sci fi psychology and the human psyche as The Matrix (1999) set in terms of virtual reality and Avatar (2009) and Inception (2010) in terms of visual effects or even Star Trek: The Motion Picture (1979) in terms of a revealing hard core sci fi alien plot element. Ender's Game might be compared to the youthful version of Gerard Butler's Gamers (2009), a hard-edged futuristic, high-tech, new wave sci fi movie, some resemblance to a less hard-hitting 2002 sci fi movie adapted from the classic juvenile book A Wrinkle In Time or a sci fi version of the parallel fantasy movies The Chronicles of Naria: The Lion, The Witch, and The Wardrobe (2005) and The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian (2008) which is also based on C.S. Lewis books which focus on deeper humanistic issues.
6 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Formics have No Mouths but still must Scream
Basically, you can't make some of these books into Movies. Lord of the Rings? At roughly 12 and a half hours running time for all three extended versions, there is STILL so much left out. And so much changed, but despite that so much of it is exactly as I imagined it when I first read it. Lord of the Rings, that is, I have never read "Ender's Game" and I'm glad I never have.
The same goes for Ender's Game. We know we are getting a simplified story, so I choose just to accept it as it is. Even Orson Scott Card says they stuck to the basic book - So if the Author thinks that, then I can deal with it as well.
So - Asa Butterfield, aka "Hugo" is in another film with his Hugo Co- Star Gandhi, aka Ben Kingsley. And Harry Ford is looking OK just shy of what, 70? And ready for another Star Wars adventure, I think.
What I liked about this film was the mixing of Child Actors and the older actors, who we've seen over and over, so there is a lot to anchor on here- We see these kids, in "Battle School" and we see their Teacher Colonel Graff, so I can handle the Unknown Kids factor much better.
Most astonishing is the appearance of Abigail Breslin as "Valentine" being the exact same little girl she was in "Signs" - She becomes the way the "Buggers"/"Formics" can get into Ender's Mind.
The other total standout here is Hailee Steinfeld, who I thought was a better Mattie Ross for True Grit than the original actress in the John Wayne version. Her Petra is perfect for this film, I don't think anyone else could have done it as well.
And this is the big MacGuffin of the film and of the book - Ender thinks he has stumbled into a Game loaded into his school "iPad" - But his "Game" is more related to what is really happening in his universe than what Graff and later "Mazer Rackham" (Kingsley) are telling him.
And he has to figure this out, but he is being tricked, as we are being tricked by the clever underlying story of the book.
In fact, during the first battle with the Formics, Mazer had learned something important, something which Ender is learning through his Game. In fact, Mazer is tricking Ender into playing His game, while Ender is being shown the Real Game in his device.
When it comes down to it, we can either blow up our enemies into molecule sized chunks and obliterate them forever, or we can find a way to talk to them, even if they do not have Mouths and cannot Scream.
5 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Source: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1731141/reviews/
0 Response to "This is Also the Title of the Book Which Continues Enders Story"
Post a Comment