Enders discussed

The movie version of Enders Game has caused so much discussion, partly because of the author's strident and conservative views on homosexuality, partly because Harrison Ford has apparently been acting as grumpy and difficult as ever in interviews, and (possibly) because it is sort of a hard novel to imagine being well filmed.  

I see that the movie has received some reasonable reviews, and some poor ones.

But I liked this article from Salon that, while treating the novel more seriously than I am sure it deserves, does make the point that story is, well, ridiculous, even by the standards of young adult science fiction:

In this respect, “Ender’s Game” is less about the ethics of total warfare than it is about wanting to be a hero and a victim at the same time. Is there anything sillier than the idea that the entire planet would entrust its survival to a 10-year-old boy? Despite Card’s narrative bushwa about them being somehow more adaptable to warfare, children are simply developmentally incapable of exercising the judgment required to command an army. Only a kid would find the idea of one doing so even remotely credible, in the same way that only as a child did I find it thrilling that Aslan let Peter and Edmund Pevensie (about the same age, or younger, than Ender) strap on armor and take up swords to defend Narnia. Even those people who are so depraved as to use child soldiers do so because children can be completely dominated, not because they make good leaders.

I read the novel only a few years ago, and came away completely puzzled as to why it is held in high regard by anyone.    

I thought it was poorly written, with the psychology of the characters poorly developed, sadistic in tone, and the action in the training sequences exceedingly dull. 

The Heinlein juveniles were great literature in comparison.  While Heinlein movies have a poor record of good translation to the screen, I would much rather see some of those stories updated and on the screen instead of this dross.