5 ms·
I remember it being a not very good film, mostly because it's way too on the nose. I like my irony with a little subtlety. But since our current POTUS has kille
by js2 6y ago
I remember it being a not very good film, mostly because it's way too on the nose. I like my irony with a little subtlety. But since our current POTUS has killed irony[1], maybe it works better now. I haven't seen it in years. I'm willing to give it a rewatch.
[1] "We will not allow anyone to divide our citizens by race or background. We will not allow them to foment hate, discord and distrust" as just one recent example.
- godelski 6y agoThis is why people put it in the "bad movie" category. It is very campy. But if you like bad movies, Starship Troopers is great. That said, I also love The Room and Birdemic.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- free_rms 6y agoIf you were told the gag before you watched it, it might seem too on the nose. But check the reviews when it came out -- most of our enlightened, educated cultural critics missed the gag.
- xsmasher 6y agoI'll admit I came in expecting "Aliens" and was deeply disappointed. Even in retrospect, the movie might be good commentary, but it doesn't have good characters or good storytelling.
- free_rms 6y agoThe bad characters are part of the gag. Mindless attractive teens in this horrific society. You even wind up with the two most vapid characters, after having found love elsewhere, winding up together because why not, those other, better people died. It actually works really well as an unconventional character arc that the actors may or may not have been in on.
- godelski 6y ago> The bad characters are part of the gag. This is why I like the movie. This is also why I call it a "bad movie" too. It can be bad and good. I'm learning that a lot of HN users don't know what the bad movie genre is. See https://www.reddit.com/r/badMovies/ https://www.reddit.com/r/badMovies/
- uniqueid 6y ago> It is very campy The movie satirizes wartime propaganda. The kitsch is intentional.
- chongli 6y agomostly because it's way too on the nose You say that and yet so many of its critics at the time did not get it. It is among the most blatant of all satires (right up there with Idiocracy) ever made, yet it still flew over the heads of critics like Roger Ebert [1]. Ebert claimed to have memorized the novel as a child. Right out of the gate, he calls it "true to its source." No, it's completely antithetical to its source! Verhoeven hated the source novel so much he turned his adaptation into a farce intended to depict how banal and juvenile he thought Heinlein's idea of a militaristic society was. Now, plenty of people disagree with Verhoeven and love the novel, but it's completely incorrect to call the movie a faithful adaptation. The film was simply operating on a level that people were not prepared for at the time. Today, it's a different story. Of course, it borrows heavily from Huxley's Brave New World which itself is terrifyingly prescient (and also faced criticism at the time). Some stories might just be ahead of their time. Over-the-top satires of contemporary society seem to be particularly vulnerable to this phenomenon. [1] https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/starship-troopers-1997 https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/starship-troopers-1997