And a spaceship equipped with nukes.
I love the way Heinlein fans get so worked up about this, it only took four posts for someone to have a go at Verhoeven.
I come from the other side, the film is a modern classic and the book is one of the worst written pieces of drivel I have ever come across.
Well, it’s difficult when an FTL spaceship moving one direction and an amazingly FTL ROCK hitting it straight on appear to maneuver toward each other at about 5 feet per second.
Heinlein can go fuck himself, although in his case that isn’t so much an insult as it is a lifelong goal. I don’t care much about the book. I don’t like the movie because I think it’s crap.
As regards Aliens, the mission WAS supposed to be a cakewalk the Marines were kept ignorant of what was happening. The drop-ship was also on station about 30 seconds then grounded well away from any expected danger. I think the tactics in Aliens were sound, for the expected threat. The actual threat? Well that’s a different story.
I think the Starship Troopers movie is crap. Pretty, shiny crap but still crap. I love the book and think it deserves the accolades it got. Sure it has flaws and has aged poorly, but what hasn’t?
How about not keeping your starships grouped so closely that they bang into each other when aliens throw rocks at them? Dodging the rocks would be a big bonus as well.
Verhooeven actually made a deliberate point not to read the novel, because he didn’t want any of its influence corrupting his vision. I’m still not clear on why he claimed to be basing anything on the book at all.
To answer the question about better tactics, we’d really need a much higher-level view of the long-term strategic goals. Other than “kill some bugs!” there’s not much strategy there.
The movie has always left me thinking that the bugs are much more sophisticated than we are lead to believe. In some instances, this is stated outright - like the heavier-than-expected anti-ship fire on Klendathu. In other cases, it’s implied, like the fact that bugs can throw asteroids at Earth, but Earth never mentions the capability to do the same in return.
So you could sort of fan-wank a whole lot of back story that orbital bombardments don’t work because bugs have defenses for that. It isn’t a big stretch from what we do know.
This, at least, justifies sending down the mobile infantry. Of course, there’s no justification for having them be so lightly armed and armored, for not using real ground tactics, for having no support weapons, etc. In a lot of ways, it feels like the script was written using Heinlein’s technology and then a last-minute decision was made to eliminate the tech without modifying the script to match.
Despite all of its flaws, I really can’t dislike the movie. Maybe it’s just the soundtrack that sells it so well, but the movie is just plain enjoyable to me.
It’s the only way to be sure.
Also sonic electric ball breakers.
Remember how in cop or cowboy movies the good guys gun never runs out of bullets?
Thats how I feel on Starship Troopers in the opening battle scenes you see them blasting away on full auto but never switching out a clip. Its only the final scene where they run out of ammunition.
The book is indeed flawed, but the movie is crap. I’ve categorized it before:
Producer one: This is godawful. How are we going to market it?
Producer two: I have no idea. We’re going to lose our shirts.
Producer one: I can’t think of . . . wait a minute! We can call it satire!
Producer two: Satire? Yes, that just might work!
Paul Verhoeven: What is satire?
I got the idea that exterminating the bugs was no more the goal in the movie than finding WMD was in Iraq. The Bug War was a pretense for some greater, unstated, political goal. Sending readily-killed humans created droves of martyrs in hideous fashion. How could the general public NOT become enthralled and outraged?
Like dracoi points out, the bugs were clearly not merely simple bugs. It seems likely they were more advanced than humans and were thus seen as threats to the powers governing humanity. Hell, they may have held the secret to living nirvana and utopian peace while simultaneously being able to defend themselves. It’s not hard to think of a backstory that would lead certain human powers to want to demonize and eliminate contact with such a species at all costs.
“Expected”? They brought along a subject matter expert who more or less told them what to expect. Maybe not to that scale, but their tactics certainly were not appropriate againt a hoard of the type of creatures Ripley described. Off the top of my head:
-Leaving the Sulaco abandoned in orbit, rendering any possible support (e.g. the spare dropship) useless. Fortunately Bishop just happened to be able to remote pilot it from a transmitter that just happened to still work.
-Not securing the dropship LZ.
-Keeping the APC too far away from the infantry to serve as anything but a mobile command post.
-Sending in the entire platoon into an unknown situation with no effective weapons (was the atmosphere processor really so delicate that small-arms fire would damage it).
-No real plan for what to do at contact with the enemy beyond “let’s rock!”
-No contingancy plan in case SSgt Apone lost contact with Lt Gorman.
Basically they got cocky and blundered into a hornets nest.
I don’t care what anyone says. Vorhooven’s take on Starship Troopers is clearly a tongue in cheek parody and commentary on militarism. The Federation videos are shot for shot remakes of WWII propoganda films, the costumes and architecture are designed to evoke Nazi Germany and the over the top violence and humor is consistent with other films of his like Robocop. You may disagree with his approach, but it is definitely intentional.
In keeping what that theme is a main reason why the Mobile Infantry are portrayed as arrogantly overconfident, poorly trained, ill equiped and fighting in an inhospitable location with questionable strategic value.
Back to the tactics…
The main problem as I see it is you have an endless supply of enemy bugs. They live underground so nukes will be marginally effective. And don’t forget some of them fly too. So it’s not like you can use aircraft with impunity.
Even if you managed to land the Mobile Infantry with artillery and armore support or even power-suits, why wouldn’t it just be more of the same? Killing more bugs maybe, but ultimately with the same outcome of eventually getting overrun by shear number.
At least drones or unmanned sentry gun towers would reduce human casualites.
I realize that for the purposes of discussion we’re supposed to forget about that nasty, awful book and concentrate on a movie that may fall anywhere between completely uninfluenced by the nasty, awful book and being some kind of pantingly faithful interpretation of the nasty, awful book, but…
…one of the few things about the book that’s almost beyond debate is that the bugs are supposed to represent communists, and the deep certainty that we could not share the planet with them. It was us square-jawed lovers of freedom, or those twelve-by-twelve marching brainwashed hordes.
Which the movie picked up unchanged and never thought about again.
Preach it brother.
Movie directors somehow manage to select the worst possible strategies for their characters in all situations and *Starships Troopers *is a great example. Broke my, heart it did.
Well, small arms fire did damage it, enough that it went boom… and that was just the smart guns (and a shotgun).
Comparing ST to Robocop does the former no favors. Robocop had satire and great action and real characters with relatable human drama, while all ST has was satire, and frankly, it wasn’t nearly as sharp and subtle as that in Robocop.
“Satire” after-the-fact, when the movie bombed. It was sold as a straight-forward adaptation of the novel. I WAS THERE when his casting people recruited fans at World-Con for the crowd scene at the ball game in the beginning of the film. They showed test footage of the bugs and assured us that, even though there wasn’t going to be power armor, the movie was going to respect the book and author.
Lies, every word.
Robocop is an awesome film. It works on both levels - straight action, and subtle satire.
I have this theory that Verhoven intended to make it more like ST but failed. That he intended to mock his audience in it, too. So he tried extra hard to make sure you understood he hated you in ST and Showgirls.
Wasn’t part of the point that Earth at the time was the kind of authoritarian militaristic society that might have welcomed a high-casualty war? Not arguing, just asking.