October 04 2005
Orson Scott Card reviews Serenity.
Stark-ravingly positive review of the BDM by the award-winning sci fi author. OSC even states if Hollywood can't make his book Ender's Game as good as Serenity, he won't let them adapt it!
This thread has been closed for new comments.
You need to log in to be able to post comments.
About membership.
Simon | October 04, 11:23 CET
Additionally, the reviewer hits just the right tone in addressing those who have not seen Firefly:-
1. If you are already a Firefly fan then you're lucky and you've probably already seen this film.
2. If you aren't already a Firefly fan then it's not too late. You should still love this film.
3. If you don't love this film then it's your loss and it may just be because you don't understand it.
Jon | October 04, 11:24 CET
Caroline | October 04, 11:31 CET
This has completely ruined Hamlet for me!
Chirp | October 04, 11:33 CET
Even better the fact that OSC won't let Ender's Game be made into something un-worthy - if there's something I've been waiting for more than Serenity, it's an Ender's Game film.
Luc | October 04, 11:33 CET
Almost.
Hopefully a little of the other sensibilities Joss puts into his work will rub off on OSC as well.
Xkot | October 04, 11:40 CET
Hjermsted | October 04, 11:42 CET
WhoIsOmega? | October 04, 11:43 CET
GrrrAargh | October 04, 11:45 CET
I have to say, after Ophelia died I realized this Shakespeare guy was willing to kill off anyone...it made the climactic swordfight especially tense...
tehipite_tom | October 04, 11:50 CET
[ edited by Danica on 2005-10-04 19:03 ]
Danica | October 04, 12:02 CET
Ah how can I resist warm fuzzies :).
Simon | October 04, 12:12 CET
zeitgeist | October 04, 12:13 CET
EdDantes | October 04, 12:25 CET
Sadly, I know nothing of this guy but exactly that. I will probably forever associate his name with his...views. Wish I could care what he says about Serenity, but this guy so seems like the anti-Joss to me...
Rogue Slayer | October 04, 12:26 CET
I admit I'm the type to drink my half-full glass of milk while wearing my rose-colored glasses but I think in the end, Serenity will be considered a financial success. It's already a critical hit.
Reddygirl | October 04, 12:27 CET
vampire dan | October 04, 12:44 CET
Having heard hints of his rather extreme views on issues like homosexuality before I decided to do a Google search, seeing as I'm sitting ill (flu) at home anyway, without much to do - and yikes! He sure does seem like the anti-joss to me.
I still have one of his books on my shelve here (Ender's Game) and I'll still read it, since it's supposed to be good, but I guess it'll be hard for me to warm to his positive reviews and fictional works now. Which sucks, because a person's views on one thing really shouldn't influence their views on other things. It's just that I can't turn of the association. At least not for a while.
Ah well, maybe I'll get over it, if I just ignore every single political statement made bij OSC ;) Hmm, I now wonder if this constitutes writer bashing. If so: sorry. If anything, he sure knows his sci-fi :)
GVH | October 04, 13:18 CET
Yeah I've had people tell me similar things about other writers whose views I thoroughly disagree with. ("Cerebus"' Dave Sim comes to mind) And while I acknowledge writing talent is unconnected to religious-socio-political views, there is a strong part of me that simply does not want to be too acquainted with work that comes from a mind that also has those thoughts, because certain deeply held views will seep into someone's work even on an unconscious level.And while I may of course agree with him on many other things for all I know, some things are just too fundamentally wrong to me.
Still as I said this is an excellent review, and I'm happy he so enjoyed the movie. It is interesting how many people take to it. And I mean people like writers, critics, etc. Sadly this is not always representative in box office. Anyone remember Chris Rock at the Oscars asking people in the street if they saw some of the nominated movies? Most going "No, I but did see Deuce Bigolow!" (or something)
I still think Serenity should appeal more to the mainstream that the average Merchant-Ivory flic though;-)
EdDantes | October 04, 13:20 CET
zeitgeist | October 04, 13:28 CET
I still think Serenity should appeal more to the mainstream that the average Merchant-Ivory flic though
I'm afraid people from the past that talk funny and wear silly hats are always going to be more popular than, um, people from the future that talk funny and wear silly hats.
Caroline | October 04, 13:29 CET
You wouldn't happen to be Dutch, would you?? :~P
Rogue Slayer | October 04, 13:30 CET
Even with his views on homosexuality (which I certainly do NOT agree with), I wouldn't place him among the gay haters who have done terrible, dispicable things. He simply believes they have no place in his Church (which is certainly the right of a private organization) and no place for special benefits of partnership under the American Government (which I fundamentally cannot agree with). I've seen enough out and out gay haters in my lifetime to draw a strong line between them and the comfortably ignorant (where I'd place OSC on this issue).
CG-Realms | October 04, 13:37 CET
1. OSC is a devout mormon.
2. His conservative politics are informed by the beliefs of mormon doctrine.
I am a left-leaning, progressive, euro-socialist who LOVES OSC's sci-fi/fantasy novels. I highly recommend everyone read Ender's Game, Speaker for the Dead, Treason, and the Alvin Maker series (in order!). His stories, in my mind, reflect an exploration of informed humanism, libertarianism and, yes, even progressivism all of which do seem to be at odds with his personal views on life and politics.
Mostly, I avoid reading his opinions about pop cultural phenomenon. They just make me frustrated with how much of a lunkhead this brilliant writer can be. But he is certainly entitled to his opinions.
Hjermsted | October 04, 13:37 CET
Oh, wait. Yes I am.
How cool is that?
Also, just as a provocation, I thought I'd post a link to John Kessel's essay critiquing Ender's Game and the morality expressed therein. I don't necessarily agree with all of Kessel's points, but it *is* thought-provoking.
bobothebrave | October 04, 13:59 CET
Oh, wait. Yes I am.
Hello? Zardoz? Best Sean Connery in nappies in the future movie ever.
Simon | October 04, 14:22 CET
1) the "aliens" in Ender's Game are called "buggers".
2) they are considered the be "evil" in the beginning of the novel.
3) at the end of the novel, the conflict between humans and buggers turns out to be due to misinterpreting each others behaviour. Said behaviour caused by the fundamental biological differences between the species.
4) love (emotional) and understanding ensues between Ender and a "bugger" queen
Interesting...
[ edited by redfern on 2005-10-04 22:08 ]
redfern | October 04, 14:27 CET
I will point out: in the newest batch of novels from the Ender-verse, OSC renamed the aliens "Formics". The word "Bugger" mysteriously disappeared from the new books (which parallel the first quadrilogy but are told from a different character's perspective).
Hjermsted | October 04, 14:46 CET
Just re-read my post and had a chuckle over the last two words of point 4. I swear to Goddess that was NOT intentional
redfern | October 04, 14:54 CET
I've read the first book, Ender's Game, so I thought I was safe, I didn't want to learn point #4 that way and I'm guessing there are others who feel the same.
[ edited by bravegal on 2005-10-04 22:11 ]
bravegal | October 04, 14:58 CET
Definitely at the Oscars, hehe. But hey, there weren't that many silly hats in Serenity! Right? Probably a good idea not to have Jayne regularly wear his orange knit cap.....;-)
And after reading Sim's essay on women, I don't care how many people say Cerebus is good, I'm not touching it with a ten-foot pole....
EdDantes | October 04, 15:08 CET
redfern | October 04, 15:10 CET
By that I guess you mean he will drop out of the Church of Latter Day Saints and worship Joss instead?
FaithFan | October 04, 15:12 CET
I thought your spoiler point #1 really added to the discussion of whether OSC's views have leaked into his writing. Food for thought.
bravegal | October 04, 15:16 CET
redfern | October 04, 15:21 CET
Serenity now (or last weekend).
bobster | October 04, 15:22 CET
And he is right about Seinfeld....great show, but no real sense of community, and the characters were all jerks in their own way. It was a very cynical show.
[ edited by pat32082 on 2005-10-04 22:29 ]
pat32082 | October 04, 15:27 CET
Orson Scott Card's work rarely if ever seeems to support his viewpoints, thus I continue to buy his work.
Dave Sim however... It's amazing how incredible his work is most of the time, but his viewpoints are peppered throughout his epic. So while I would easily praise Cerebus for it's "frequent" intelligence, I can't recommend it to anyone.
I think Joss Whedon and Neil Gaiman are the only two writers whose opinion would matter to me in the least.
rabid | October 04, 15:38 CET
I was just making a little joke there, and my sarcasm detector is usually pretty strong, but it's possible I got that one wrong. I guess the "Friends" thing just through me off (I never cared for it much). And of course there was no community (well not one you'd want to be a member of) in "Seinfeld", that was kind of the point. If you watch "Curb Your Enthusiasm", you can see just how pessimistic his work is.
[ edited by bobster on 2005-10-04 22:50 ]
bobster | October 04, 15:48 CET
zeitgeist | October 04, 15:49 CET
The four main characters seemed on the surface to be a group of friends and a semi-weird family, but they didn't even like EACH OTHER much, never mind the society around them. The only reason they seemed to hang out with each other is because they all had similiar weird hangups and liked to make fun of people.
Whereas with Serenity's crew, you have nine very drastically different people who may seem on the surface like they don't or shouldn't get along, and yet they are a real family, who would have each other's backs when push came to shove.
pat32082 | October 04, 15:57 CET
Nancy Boy hair Gel | October 04, 16:03 CET
And, btw, I love Friends as well. The sense of community and soapy elements appealed to me. Plus, Matthew Perry tends to crack me up. So sue me :-p.
Rogue Slayer wrote:
You wouldn't happen to be Dutch, would you?? :~P
Whoops, yeah, that one slipped by me it seems ;-)
GVH | October 04, 16:07 CET
Ik hou van...um....Nederlanders....
Ik spreekt geen goede Nederlands...obviously! :~P
(sorry for mangling that, my hubby will beat me about the head when I get home...)
Rogue Slayer | October 04, 16:34 CET
On the political front, as some here may have noticed, Joss and I are not eye-to-eye (Adam and I, maybe, if I have a big box to stand on.) Hasn't kept me (or my wife) from being a fervent Buffyvangelist (which includes all things Joss, of course.)
Chris inVirginia | October 04, 16:38 CET
Simon | October 04, 16:46 CET
As someone who for many many years didn't own a TV, pop culture references sometimes do fly over my head...
I liked Seinfeld somewhat, and am amused by Curb Your Enthusiasm, but I agree they're both pretty cynical shows that lack in either community or heart. One friend once described Seinfeld as "NY humor' that was all about sarcasm and making fun of everyone else whereas Frasier was "west coast humor" that was all about him making fun of himself. i thought it was an interesting point....
acp | October 04, 17:04 CET
Ik hou van...um....Nederlanders....
Ik spreekt geen goede Nederlands...obviously! :~P
(sorry for mangling that, my hubby will beat me about the head when I get home...)
LOL. No, that was great, actually. Okay, well, you made errors in that second sentence there, but I've been known to mess up in english from time to time as well. Not to mention other languages ;) So very impressive as far as I'm concerned.
Chirs inVirginia: I agree about the politics thing, it should not be that big an issue in general. My best friend here in Holland is a member of the biggest right-wing party, whereas I am a member of our Green party. And we get along just fine. But there are some things that're just a little bit too much for me, and OSC's views on homosexuals are one of those things. Maybe it's because we don't get to hear those particular views over here much, so I'm simply not used to hearing people argue them. But it just rubs me the wrong way. I'd have a real problem being a big OSC fan with him saying what he's saying. Enjoy what he puts out, maybe, I still haven't read any of his books (although, like I said, Ender's game is on the shelve waiting for me). But become a fan like I have with Joss? Not likely.
Oh, and Simon, allright, I'll give you the 'Serenity Now!' thing. That was, and still is, funny :-)
GVH | October 04, 17:04 CET
Thank you Nancy. This is the tone I'd prefer here as well.
What say ye all?
Anna von Ovonov | October 04, 17:34 CET
This is a good review of Serenity, but OSC also loved Firefly, you can find his review of the series in the archive.
rabid | October 04, 17:49 CET
It's what I love most about Joss, in his work and his personal life, he's tolerant of everyone. His tent is open to all.
Rogue Slayer | October 04, 18:22 CET
And once again, as I have to do every time he's mentioned here, let me say this: Orson Scott Card is not a homophobe. He doesn't approve of gay marriage or gay relationships, but that doesn't make him a homophobe. Please refer to the comment I put on the Librarian in Black website on this very issue. (The name it's under is Mason Cole.)
Mods: I thought we didn't allow personal attacks on authors. Is calling him a homophobe, and saying something along the lines of "his history of hateful homophobic remarks," kosher?
BAFfler | October 04, 18:57 CET
orphea | October 04, 19:27 CET
There are places that are considered very progressive, but where filmmakers have been murdered for expressing unpopular political opinions. IMO the freedom to openly discuss politically-charged beliefs -- through art or otherwise -- is what helps keep disagreements from boiling over into violence.
Hmm, I'm not sure that was as on-topic as I'd meant it to be. ... Great review!
wrinkled time | October 04, 20:41 CET
But I'd have to say that 'decent man' and 'homophobe'(in its generally accepted understanding) are both value judgments everyone has to make for themselves.
There are places that are considered very progressive, but where filmmakers have been murdered for expressing unpopular political opinions.
If you mean Theo Van Gogh, I'd say it was a very non-progressive person in a progressive place who killed him. And the political/religious opinions were unpopular with a small(but growing...) group. Of course, if that's who you're talking about, you already know that! :~)
Rogue Slayer | October 04, 21:19 CET
[ edited by Rogue Slayer on 2005-10-05 04:20 ]
Rogue Slayer | October 04, 21:19 CET
[ edited by Rogue Slayer on 2005-10-05 04:21 ]
Rogue Slayer | October 04, 21:20 CET
Frankly, I'd never call someone like that a homophobe since technically that word should mean that he's afraid of gays. Which is hardly the issue. (Not even getting into the fact that 'homo' just means 'man') The issue is that whenever someone says: "Because of my personal religious beliefs, I feel that certain people who are different from me should not have the same rights as me. Like marrying the person they love", I personally find that utterly and completely reprehensible on any moral level. And I can say that quite easily without name calling...
But then like GVH I was born and raised in Holland (in the US now) where gay marriage is quite legal, and was made legal without any fuss, and lo and behold, our society continues to function just fine! Imagine that! Straight people still get married too and actually manage to see their marriages as whole and valuable. Yeah I don't know how we do it either....;-)
EdDantes | October 04, 21:45 CET
As long as I'm not being sermonized on a particular life view or beaten rigorously about the head and shoulders with a philosophical tenet, I can enjoy anything of quality.
And I must admit, I love that review. It gave me those oft mentioned warm fuzzies.
Rank Amateur | October 04, 22:06 CET
However, whatever anyone's personal opinions of Card's politics or literary skills may be, I think we can all agree that he is seen as one of the foremost minds in contemporary science fiction. So to have him praise Firefly and Serenity in such glowing terms is really a feather in JW's cap, and something we can all take some pride in. Had we not backed this BDM, it would never have been around to become the best sci-fi film ever.
BAFfler | October 04, 22:11 CET
http://archive.salon.com/books/feature/2000/02/03/card/index.html
[ edited by orphea on 2005-10-05 05:18 ]
orphea | October 04, 22:18 CET
[ edited by rabid on 2005-10-05 07:42 ]
rabid | October 04, 22:31 CET
BAFfler | October 04, 23:18 CET
[ edited by Rogue Slayer on 2005-10-05 06:42 ]
Rogue Slayer | October 04, 23:41 CET
No argument there indeed. He is not afraid of them. He feels it should be legal to fire them just for being gay among other extremely pleasant views, but he is not afraid of them.
Well I never read his work so I can't comment on the quality. I've also never come across him before the earlier articles on Wehdonesque, but I'm sure he's quite prolific and I am indeed happy with anyone like that praising 'Serenity'.
(Can't help but wonder what he made of Inara's lesbian scenes in Firefly. Perchance he was expecting her to be flogged in S2;-)
Due to this thread I've read some more articles and interviews on OSC (including one where the interviewer is a lesbian fan who finds out during the interview what his 'views' are. He doesn't find out she's a lesbian though) and I'm afraid I can not only easily rank him with Dave Sim, he's actually approaching Phelps levels. So I'm afraid I will still not go near a single one of his books. I realize this is my fault as I can't shake this association loose from his works, but I'm sure I'll get by.
EdDantes | October 04, 23:43 CET
Rank Amateur, I agree. I have no idea what Mozart's or Shakespeare's position on abortion or gay marriage or gun control was, or would be today. Nor do I care, when it comes to enjoying their art.
Rogue Slayer, yes I was referring to Theo van Gogh. Trying to determine who was more "progressive" in that scenario is fruitless, imo; everyone was tagged as some sort of "phobe" or other. The fact that after his murder TPTB refused to let his film be shown only added insult to (lethal) injury.
wrinkled time | October 05, 00:56 CET
Hmm, not sure how you mean that. From my understanding, Theo directed a film based on a script by an ex-Muslim woman regarding the treatment of women in Islam. And a Muslim man killed him(shot him, slashed his throat and stabbed him, to be exact) for making that film. I'm not sure I could ever classify the murderer as progressive, as that's kind of been the way of the radical, extremist Muslims for thousands of years. Unless you're implying we as a society should progress to the point that people are murdered in the street over directing a film...Then I guess that murderer is progressive. I'm not sure where 'phobe's come in there, as Theo felt women were treated poorly and the word should get out, and the murderer felt he was disrespecting Islam by making the film.
And yeah, not showing the movie is kind of making his death really in vain. Of course, I hear it's available for download...
[ edited by Rogue Slayer on 2005-10-05 08:40 ]
Rogue Slayer | October 05, 01:37 CET
Simon | October 05, 01:42 CET
You are, of course, right Simon.
But I cannot leave this thread without saying that for anyone to argue against OSC's homophobia by trying to redefine the generally accepted use of the term seems petty and ignorant - and marks them as homophobic themselves.
crossoverman | October 05, 03:21 CET
Keith G, why don't you look up the word in the dictionary? It's definition will be something like "the irrational fear of homosexuals." I realize that there are many people on this board who would call Card's views on gays and lesbians, and I count myself among them. Fired for being gay?! But the man is certainly not afraid of them. It's not my fault that activists have gradually stretched the definition of homophobia so far as to deprive it of all meaning whatsoever.
Your response, however, is equally offensive--and childish. What do you expect me to do? Say "No, I'm not" or "Some of my best friends are gays" or "This one time, I gave a gay person a ride" or "I voted NOT to ban civil unions in my state" or something like that? (All of those are true enough, not that that's relevant.) It's the easiest thing in the world to respond by saying "Clearly, this person is intolerant" when you have no idea if they are or not, and you're just trying to score a cheap point. Maybe, as an English teacher, I just have an appreciation for the correct use of words. Anyone who can't use their own language correctly should take a long, hard look at who they're calling ignorant.
BAFfler | October 05, 06:33 CET
Yes you can. The both of you can conduct your debate via email.
Simon | October 05, 06:53 CET