A personal favorite of mine was Charles Bukowski’s last novel before he died. Pulp was a cheesy Spillane parody. And when you opened up the book the inside cover read, “Dedicated to bad writing”.
Hah!
Fermat’s Last Theorem. I don’t think he had actually found a remarkable proof at all. Sure, it turned out there was one, but I don’t think Fermat had it.
Dianetics and Scientology
I mean… DC8s?!
[QUOTE=Strain of Thought]
Also, I just mentioned this in another thread, but hardly anybody seems to realize that Paul Verhoven’s Starship Troopers is a parody of American and Nazi war films. The bastardization of Heinlein’s work was deliberate satire, not hollywood hamfistedness.
[/QUOTE]
[Gingerly dips toe into can of worms] I think that the movie of Starship Troopers was a lot more faithful to both the story and themes of Heinlein’s novel than most book-to-movie SF adaptations. The first time I read the book I figured that the neo-Fascism espoused in the book was itself a whoosh, and that Heinlein was himself pointing out the political dangers of fetishising the military: then as I read more about Heinlein, I came to figure that he was apparently serious. Verhoeven’s movie isn’t a satire, in that all the militarism and extreme violence of the movie was already present in the book: Verhoeven is merely holding a mirror up to it. [/Gdticow]
Nostrodamus,keep it vague ,keep the suckers coming in to give you money.
You know Gene Simmons? (Not the one from Kiss, the one who did the gay aerobics instructor thing)?
Its all an act. His real name is Derrick Armstrong. I met him once a couple of years ago. We went elk hunting together on his ranch in Montana. I saw him gut and skin an elk with his buck knife. Heck, he killed the elk with his buck knife. At 100 yards.
He was dating twin Japanese schoolgirls at the time.
Heck of a man.
[QUOTE=Scissorjack]
[Gingerly dips toe into can of worms] I think that the movie of Starship Troopers was a lot more faithful to both the story and themes of Heinlein’s novel than most book-to-movie SF adaptations. The first time I read the book I figured that the neo-Fascism espoused in the book was itself a whoosh, and that Heinlein was himself pointing out the political dangers of fetishising the military: then as I read more about Heinlein, I came to figure that he was apparently serious. Verhoeven’s movie isn’t a satire, in that all the militarism and extreme violence of the movie was already present in the book: Verhoeven is merely holding a mirror up to it. [/Gdticow]
[/QUOTE]
If that were so, Verhoeven would have had to have read the book, which he didn’t.
Starship Troopers was a satire, as are many of Verhoeven’s works. So, I nominate the entire career of Paul Verhoeven. Verhoeven’s MO is to take a genre or idea that he dislikes and then produce it with a straight face and by taking it to an extreme, running it into the ground. As often as not, people enjoy the result on its own merits, not noticing or caring about the satire. It backfired in Robocop, most viewers enjoyed its ultraviolence, crashed and burned in the infamously unpleasant Showgirls, and became a focus of geek rage in Starship Troopers mostly because it ruined the chances of seeing a proper adaptation of that novel on the screen.
The Protocols of the Elders of Zion?
[QUOTE=Paul in Saudi]
You know Gene Simmons? (Not the one from Kiss, the one who did the gay aerobics instructor thing)?
Its all an act. His real name is Derrick Armstrong. I met him once a couple of years ago. We went elk hunting together on his ranch in Montana. I saw him gut and skin an elk with his buck knife. Heck, he killed the elk with his buck knife. At 100 yards.
He was dating twin Japanese schoolgirls at the time.
Heck of a man.
[/QUOTE]
Ummm- Richard Simmons, and it was 200 yards, and he gutted & skinned the elk with his teeth…
and the Japanese schoolgirls were triplets. One of them was just home sick that day.
[QUOTE=Menocchio]
If that were so, Verhoeven would have had to have read the book, which he didn’t.
Starship Troopers was a satire, as are many of Verhoeven’s works. So, I nominate the entire career of Paul Verhoeven. Verhoeven’s MO is to take a genre or idea that he dislikes and then produce it with a straight face and by taking it to an extreme, running it into the ground. As often as not, people enjoy the result on its own merits, not noticing or caring about the satire. It backfired in Robocop, most viewers enjoyed its ultraviolence, crashed and burned in the infamously unpleasant Showgirls, and became a focus of geek rage in Starship Troopers mostly because it ruined the chances of seeing a proper adaptation of that novel on the screen.
[/QUOTE]
You know, Verhoevan has been wanting to do a Jesus movie, based on the work of the Jesus Seminar.
[QUOTE=FriarTed]
Japanese schoolgirls were triplets. One of them was just home sick that day.
[/QUOTE]
Pregnant I heard.
this post is deleted as redundant.
[QUOTE=Paul in Saudi]
Pregnant I heard.
[/QUOTE]
With their twelveth boy… He’s starting a tribe of elk-killing, hooch-brewing, home-schooled boys who will all wed Japanese schoolgirls or Nordic co-eds.
BTW, it isn’t Gene Simmons who has a 7-inch-long tongue. It’s Jean Simmons.
[QUOTE=RealityChuck]
The only intended satire in Starship Troopers was the costume design, and I doubt Verhoeven realized even that (he has shown no penchant for satire, and very little sense of humor). The rest was straight adventure. The “satire” rationalization came long after the film came out as a way to fight back against the general (and generally correct) impression that it was a godawful movie.
The conversation probably went like this:
Studio executive 1: That was awful. What can we do to make it seem like it was done deliberately?
<Long pause>
Studio executive 2: I know! Let’s call it satire!
Studio executive 1: Great idea. It’s a satire.
Paul Verhoevan: What’s a satire?
[/QUOTE]
Are you whooshing us, by pretending to know practically nothing about Paul Verhoevan even as you vilify him? If not, rent Flesh and Blood, listen to the director’s commentary track, then come back here and admit that Verhoevan not only understands satire, but understands European history in a way you do not.
However, your scenario may actually apply to Michael Bay and Armageddon; I’ve actually seen that giant piece of crap defended as being clever satire.
There was a man, in NYC and I think around 1800 he pulled this prank. He was well known and he talked up the idea that Manhattan Island is sinking. The southern tip had to be cut off and dragged to the northern end of the island, and he would personally lead the workers. Just show up tomorrow and bring your shovels and saws and ropes.
People showed up. A lot of people showed up.
Several hundred people showed up with shovels and saws and ropes and picks.
Removed potentially libellous - but completely true - revelation about Hillary Clinton.
[QUOTE=FriarTed]
You know, Verhoevan has been wanting to do a Jesus movie, based on the work of the Jesus Seminar.
[/QUOTE]
Hahaha! Awesome!
Is this true or a whoosh?
I hope it’s true.
-FrL-
[QUOTE=Frylock]
Hahaha! Awesome!
Is this true or a whoosh?
I hope it’s true.
-FrL-
[/QUOTE]
VERY TRUE!
I’m pretty sure that The Astronaut Farmer is a movie in the same genre as Scary Movie and Date Movie, but directed at movies like Armageddon, and everyone who didn’t realize that was completely whooshed.
There’s no way on earth a screenwriter seriously puts to paper
(Billy Bob is taking his kid out of History Class)
Teacher: what are you doing?
Billy Bob: You’re teaching him how to read history. I’m teaching him how to make it.
I refuse to believe that was written down earnestly. Not the greatest whoosh of all time, but a well-whoosing, nonetheless.