Facism in the book? Huh? RAH was an ardent anti-facist! In his Expanded Universe he goes into great detail about the structure of the society and how it wasn’t fascist at all. His mindset when he wrote the book was that sooner or later all democracies fail, and his goal was to attempt to find a way in which a democracy could survive without failing. His solution was to create a society which required government service of some kind (be it teacher, buerocrat, or soldier) in exchange for the right to vote. His idea was that if people had to earn the right to vote, they might not be so willing to take it for granted and vote for the guy who promised them “bread and circuses.”
Verhoeven had the same thing going in RoboCop (which is, though, a far better film). Both movies are intended to be humorous. But people usually equate action violence with a certain level of seriousness.
I think the connection to the book has given this movie a raw deal. Verhoeven had this film more or less planned out before he acquired the ST license, and he openly admits that he didn’t even finish the book. He wasn’t trying to bring “Starship Troopers” to the big screen. He wanted to parody WWII-style propaganda (he grew up in occupied Holland).
RAH had a very long writing career (and a pretty long life, in general). And during that long career, his attitude and philosophy underwent sweeping changes, as a close observer of his work will note. He was quite the fascist when he wrote Troopers (not that there’s anything wrong with that!), and he had morphed into quite the commie liberal by the time he penned “Stranger In A Strange Land” (not that there’s anything wrong with THAT, either!). I wouldn’t put much stock into his latter-day reconstruction of his earlier works, since he was a very different person by then.
That said, I appreciate his writing from all of his periods, since he states and supports all cases and opinions with cogent and intelligent arguments, both the ones that I agree with, and the ones that I do not. I suspect that Heinlein himself would rather have readers listen to his assertions, and respect his logic and arguments, than have them blindly agree with him on any specific opinion. But maybe that’s just me…Timmy
Because that guy shoved a giant dental tool into that alien with the vagina face! YEESH!!! I try to avoid porn like that and then it shows up in a sci-fi movie!
Oh, and it totally wasn’t like the book.
I cant take the film seriously and that’s why I like it. It’s just a comedy and parody on fascism/militarism to me into which every improbability and bad war film cliche has been stuffed. Its great! I love it when Denise Richards is talking to the rival for her affections, who is in the high school football team and he says he is going off to the Fleet Academy in a few days where she too is scheduled to go. When she arrives, he is her instructor despite having got there maybe a week before her!
If I was seeking a serious rendition of the book perhaps I’d be upset but I never was a fan and it just seemed like tripe when I read it.
THEY SUCKED HIS BRAINS OUT!!!
That so many astute SDMBers are mis-interpreting the movie as anything other than an acidly comedic parody of the source material, so over the top and obvious it smacks you repeatedly in the face with a giant facist rubber chicken, is baffling.
The humans were supposed to be the bad guys, the bugs were the oppressed victims of human aggression. Verhoeven has said as much several times.
Uh, have you read Exanded Universe? Because Heinlein gives the history of writing Stranger in a Strange Land, and he was working on it at roughly the same time he was writing Starship Troopers. As Heinlein details in several of his books, he’d plotted out his “Future History” in advance of his writing. Basically, Heinlein knew at the start of his career where he wanted to be by the end of it.
Heinlein also was quite the Republican by the time he died, so calling him a Commie Liberal is so wildly inaccurate as to defy description.
Oh, I got that astro, and I wasn’t amused. It’s like Armageddon, some people love it, I hate it.
I am amused by the idea the trainee of the Intergalictic Marine Corps got a pool table in their barracks.
An they seem to be trained inside, like somethingot of Rollerball.
O My God.
I’ve never heard this perspective before. i thought Starship Troopers was a very amusing black comedy/almost spoof, whilst the novel was just awful.
I agree about the black-comedy thing for the movie though I still thought I was overcharged at the box-office, it just was too silly. But the novel was completely different.
I would argue that the movie more closely followed a book by John Steakly called ‘Armor’. In fact after viewing the movie, I couldn’t believe (after so much in common with that book) that the producers (or whoever names movies) got away with calling the movie “starship troopers”.
Please…Armor was a GREAT book. I would be just as pissed if they based Verhoeven’s travesty on Armor as I was that they named it “Starship Troopers.”
“So much in common” with Armor? Inasmuch as there were scenes with great teeming masses of alien bugs, and contained characters that spoke using words spelled with both vowels and consonants, I suppose. Otherwise, one of the more baffling comparisons I’ve seen in quite awhile.
Still, it occurs to me that a “faithful” adaptation of Starship Troopers would be a 3 hour plus epic, in which at least 2 hours would be taken up with long continuous close-up shots of grizzled veteran one-armed teachers giving lectures.
Blasphamy! Starship Troopers is not quite as good as Verhoeven’s other sci-fi classics, Robocop and Total Recall, but I would hardly put it in the same catagory as Wing Commander.
Any movie that stars the powerhouse duo of Freddie Prinze Jr and Mathew Lilliard (or either one separately for that matter) automatically gets two thumbs down.
Starship Troopers is a brilliant, brilliant film, by a director who–you heard it here first, write this down–will someday be acknowledged on a critical level with Hitchcock and Sirk.
Straship Troopers is a vicious indictment of American imperialism; a critique of Bush’s Iraq policy made WAY ahead of its time.
I’ve seen the movie probly 6 times, and just recently watched it again with the commentary track turned on (Director and Screenwriter in attendance), and the film was intended at as cartoonish satire on fascism from its very inception. My suspicion that the film’s style was inspired–practically dictated–by the fascist celebrations of Leni Refenstahl, and the gung-ho propaganda of US pro-war films of the 40s, was confirmed. THe screenwriter and Verhoeven watched a bunch of US propaganda films and Refenstahl films while they were working on ST, and all the dark satire you see in that film is 100% the point.
They quoted a Newsweek review, that said something like, “You might come away from this film thinking that it’s message is ‘War makes fascists of us all,’ but you’d be wrong: it’s just about rocket ships and giant bugs.” But of course, their intended message was exactly and explicitly “War makes fascists of us all”; it’s unfortunate, for whatever reason, that so few people have understood this.
I think it’s reputation will grow over time; it’ll probably have to wait for the French to reconsider it, like they did . . . yep, Hitchcock and Sirk. Hitchcock was seen as a Hollywood hack by America critics, who finally jumped on the bandwagon after the French showed them the error of their ways. It’ll take something like that, but Verhoeven will eventually receive the same reappraisal.
ROFLMAO!!! Omigod! Stop please! You’re killing me! My sides…aidez moi…
This is the movie’s most implausable crime, IMHO:
In addition to the above:
-
No hand grenades smaller than your thigh. Big ass grenades must be kept in an inconvenient rucksack.
-
Body armor that looks like something rejected from “Fallout”. Totally useless against aliens, fails to protect against their own weapons too.
-
So far in the future, everyone walks.
-
Guns go from wimpy sputtering assault rifle immediately to mini-nuke. hello? economy of scale anyone?
I did enjoy the Roughnecks series. That seemed to be written by someone who was more of a fan of the book. (yay! Powered armor!)
The marines from Aliens would have kicked their asses.
Anyhoo… I was a little surprised that the movie quoted the book extensively at times, and then made no effort to explain what was going on. Aside from a single reference to “sovereign franchise” during the oath, the movie left out (or at best vaguely hinted at) the book’s main point: a term of government service as a requirement for the vote.
The movie also went out of its way to alter some elements in order to increase the fascist satire. Making almost all of the characters white, for example, even though the main character in the book was Filipino, played up the “Hitler Youth” aspect. And for some reason, the main characters’ hometown was moved to Buenos Aires, contradicting the book as well as implying that clean-cut white people will eventually push aside Latins.
Verhoeven can claim he’s ridiculing fascist aspects in the book, but it turns out many of those elements weren’t in the book in the first place.
My question…how can a bug aim his assgoo at spaceships that are outside the atmosphere and orbiting the planet? And considering the speed you need to be going to hit exit velocity, wouldn’t the assgoo destroy the bug’s ass?
Anyway, Starship Troopers is a bad, bad movie, but very enjoyable in its badness. It’s a future MST movie.