Stone holm Posted November 3, 2013 Posted November 3, 2013 I've read a lot of Asimov and was never disappointed in any of it, unlike Card. Asimov considered himself a humanist and atheist not sure why you'd consider him any kind of Mormon.If you read some of Asimov there are themes about God being a human, of course there are also ones about God being a robot. Asimov wrote a rather lengthy commentary on the Bible which is very interesting. I would consider most humanists who may be atheists prime candidates for conversion. It is very common amongst converts to find people who have previously rejected organized religion as either deficient, having strayed from the actual teachings and social emphasis of Christ, or as being inherently evil.
Yirgacheffe Posted November 3, 2013 Posted November 3, 2013 If you read some of Asimov there are themes about God being a human, of course there are also ones about God being a robot. Asimov wrote a rather lengthy commentary on the Bible which is very interesting. I would consider most humanists who may be atheists prime candidates for conversion. It is very common amongst converts to find people who have previously rejected organized religion as either deficient, having strayed from the actual teachings and social emphasis of Christ, or as being inherently evil.Seems like wishful thinking, seeing everyone who explores ideas about God as a Mormon, even those who don't believe in God at all.
Stone holm Posted November 3, 2013 Posted November 3, 2013 Seems like wishful thinking, seeing everyone who explores ideas about God as a Mormon, even those who don't believe in God at all.Yeah I tend to do that at times, But
awyatt Posted November 3, 2013 Posted November 3, 2013 Thought it was a good movie. Actually, I thought too much about it to post it all here. So I wrote a blog post about my reactions and review. Bottom line: Go see it. Then read the book if you haven't. -Allen
Stargazer Posted November 4, 2013 Posted November 4, 2013 Card in the Enders series was heavily influenced by Asimov who I consider to have been a dry Mormon. The Prentice Alvin series was his most original work. Now THERE'S a comparison I've never imagined. Asimov a dry Mormon? Please elaborate why you would think so -- Asimov was one of my favorite sci fi authors.
ERayR Posted November 4, 2013 Posted November 4, 2013 Now THERE'S a comparison I've never imagined. Asimov a dry Mormon? Please elaborate why you would think so -- Asimov was one of my favorite sci fi authors. I like Asimov but in MNSHO he was far from the best.
Stone holm Posted November 4, 2013 Posted November 4, 2013 I like Asimov but in MNSHO he was far from the best.No possibly not, but he added a new distinctive twist to Sci-Fi
Stargazer Posted November 4, 2013 Posted November 4, 2013 I like Asimov but in MNSHO he was far from the best. A "Grand Master" was far from the best? One of the Big Three? Your opinion on this is very idiosyncratic, with all due respect.
Stargazer Posted November 4, 2013 Posted November 4, 2013 No possibly not, but he added a new distinctive twist to Sci-Fi Yep. He added real science.
Anijen Posted November 4, 2013 Posted November 4, 2013 Just got back from watching it. I agree it was a very good movie.
Nofear Posted November 4, 2013 Posted November 4, 2013 Saw it Saturday. I thought it was fantastic. Excellent visuals and storyline. Two criticisms: 1) They didn't allow for evolution in the battleschool for Dragon Army. It was like 1 game = win!2) Not enough time was allowed for processing the emotional gravitas of the destruction of the Buggers/Formics Both of these might be resolved by a directors cut. As it was, the beginning of the movie was a bit better paced then the second half.
Stone holm Posted November 4, 2013 Posted November 4, 2013 Saw it Saturday. I thought it was fantastic. Excellent visuals and storyline. Two criticisms: 1) They didn't allow for evolution in the battleschool for Dragon Army. It was like 1 game = win!2) Not enough time was allowed for processing the emotional gravitas of the destruction of the Buggers/Formics Both of these might be resolved by a directors cut. As it was, the beginning of the movie was a bit better paced then the second half. It was pretty good -- you can't convey all the information and nuances when going from a book to a movie -- they had to condense the Lord of the Rings even though it was true to the original, and they made some alterations in the Harry Potter series...the test is whether they totally botch the transition like they did with the movie version of "Eragon".
altersteve Posted November 4, 2013 Posted November 4, 2013 I agree with the two above points, and I also wish they had elaborated on the relationship between Ender and Peter a bit. It plays a hugely important role in the book.
ERayR Posted November 4, 2013 Posted November 4, 2013 A "Grand Master" was far from the best? One of the Big Three? Your opinion on this is very idiosyncratic, with all due respect. In my "idiosyncratic" opinion Frank Herbert is much better. 1
Calm Posted November 4, 2013 Posted November 4, 2013 In my "idiosyncratic" opinion Frank Herbert is much better.I like Asimov for the plots and ideas and humour, but his emotional creation is very dry and thus I tend to not get invested in his characters all that much. At least not his human ones, did get involved in wondering what would happen to Daneel but even that took decades over several books. Herbert was better with the emotion and character development, imo, but wasn't as consistent as Asimov.
ERayR Posted November 4, 2013 Posted November 4, 2013 I like Asimov for the plots and ideas and humour, but his emotional creation is very dry and thus I tend to not get invested in his characters all that much. At least not his human ones, did get involved in wondering what would happen to Daneel but even that took decades over several books. Herbert was better with the emotion and character development, imo, but wasn't as consistent as Asimov. I liked the way Herbert could weave plots within plots and the way he led you into involvement with his characters.
Stone holm Posted November 4, 2013 Posted November 4, 2013 I like Asimov for the plots and ideas and humour, but his emotional creation is very dry and thus I tend to not get invested in his characters all that much. At least not his human ones, did get involved in wondering what would happen to Daneel but even that took decades over several books. Herbert was better with the emotion and character development, imo, but wasn't as consistent as Asimov. Asimov was good at the trick the reader stuff, which Card used in Ender's Game.
Stone holm Posted November 4, 2013 Posted November 4, 2013 I liked the way Herbert could weave plots within plots and the way he led you into involvement with his characters. Agreed, Asimov and Herbert were both Grand Masters of Sci-Fi
ERayR Posted November 4, 2013 Posted November 4, 2013 Agreed, Asimov and Herbert were both Grand Masters of Sci-Fi True
Kevin Christensen Posted November 5, 2013 Posted November 5, 2013 Shauna and I got back from the Pittsburgh Mills iMax and Ender's Game. While of course, the book has scenes and details that I miss, I was impressed. Intensely human and personal performances... Many years ago, after watching the first film of Dune, I thought it could be described as Great Moments from Dune illustrated. Ender's Game came much closer to capturing essence of the book. I would have liked more battle school, but I loved what they gave us. The essence of what makes Ender interesting as a character comes through. The need to understand an enemy well enough to love them, which is utterly contrary to normal practice of creating folk devils, and Rene Girard's scapegoating mechanisms. I thought that come across very well in the show down with Bonzi, and the aftermath, which of course, was essential to set up the final scenes. I loved the Mind Game. I didn't expect to see it. FWIW Kevin Christensen Bethel Park, PA 2
Stone holm Posted November 5, 2013 Posted November 5, 2013 Shauna and I got back from the Pittsburgh Mills iMax and Ender's Game. While of course, the book has scenes and details that I miss, I was impressed. Intensely human and personal performances... Many years ago, after watching the first film of Dune, I thought it could be described as Great Moments from Dune illustrated. Ender's Game came much closer to capturing essence of the book. I would have liked more battle school, but I loved what they gave us. The essence of what makes Ender interesting as a character comes through. The need to understand an enemy well enough to love them, which is utterly contrary to normal practice of creating folk devils, and Rene Girard's scapegoating mechanisms. I thought that come across very well in the show down with Bonzi, and the aftermath, which of course, was essential to set up the final scenes. I loved the Mind Game. I didn't expect to see it.FWIWKevin ChristensenBethel Park, PAI didn't think they did a good job with the first Dune movie.
california boy Posted November 5, 2013 Posted November 5, 2013 I didn't think they did a good job with the first Dune movie.I hated the Dune movie. It seemed like the completely gutted the book. However, the SyFi channed redid Dune and it was like night and day. Much better. If you haven't seen that version, and you love Dune, check it out. I think Netflix has it. 1
Stone holm Posted November 5, 2013 Posted November 5, 2013 I hated the Dune movie. It seemed like the completely gutted the book. However, the SyFi channed redid Dune and it was like night and day. Much better. If you haven't seen that version, and you love Dune, check it out. I think Netflix has it. That's why I said "first".
EllenMaksoud Posted November 6, 2013 Posted November 6, 2013 Well, it looks like the anti-Mormon bigotry of SSM supporters is ramping up to a fine head of foam with the movie release of Ender's Game, based on the novel by Orson Scott Card. As some may be aware, Card has been targeted by SSM supporters with a significant amount of vitriol simply because he has been public about his opposition to SSM. Here's a link from Meridian Magazine about some of the stuff that's going on. This, to me, is another clear indication of how the church and it's members are really going to be treated should SSM become the law of the land. It's all there for anyone with eyes to see and ears to hear to figure out where this is headed. There are good and valid reasons, other than the purely religious ones, for opposing SSM. Those have been discussed in detail on this forum; SSM supporters consistently simply dismiss those reasons out of hand, telling us that our fears about the negative consequences of SSM are unfounded - even as those negative consequences continue to unfold before our very eyes. I don't find anything particularly hateful about what Card has said. Instead, there's a willingness on his part to address the hard realities of the consequences of the kind of social experimentation that SSM entails. However, because of his opposition just to SSM, he is labeled a bigot and homophobe. It's pretty sad for our society that the McCarthyism of the past that we were able to stamp out has reincarnated itself in the guise of entrenched political correctness, where it becomes fashionable and desirable to persecute people for their religious and political viewpoints. Interesting times ahead.I think the actions of the haters are completely despicable. It is a movie, and a good one that I will likely see again and buy the dvd. I could not possibly abhor the actions of these plunkers more. I learned that he produced a trilogy with Ender's Game as the beginning and I am looking for the other two now in ebook format so I can magnify the print.
Recommended Posts