6 ms·

Then there's Starship Troopers, another Verhoeven masterpiece of layered meaning and interpretation. On the surface it's a jingoistic pro-military recruitment p

by simonh 4y ago

Then there's Starship Troopers, another Verhoeven masterpiece of layered meaning and interpretation. On the surface it's a jingoistic pro-military recruitment poster as movie, full of shallow facile characters. But oh boy, if you read between the lines there's no bottom to how deep that movie goes. Also both movies have Michael Ironside, which is always a plus.

pmoriarty 4y ago
I'd recommend another Verhoeven film, Robocop, over Starship Troopers. And as far as sci-fi movies which are deeper than one might expect, I'd also recommend the original Planet of the Apes and its early sequels.
RustyRussell 4y ago
I read an internet review of Starship Troopers so good that it made me go and watch that (terrible) film again. Took me a few minutes on DDG, but enjoy: https://agapow.net/misc/humour/starship-troopers-a-review/ https://agapow.net/misc/humour/starship-troopers-a-review/
- simonh 4y ago
  That's awesome, you can lead a horse to water... Since the reviewer mentioned it, the fact the characters all come from Buenos Aires is one of my favourite things about the movie. I've mentioned this a few times in conversation with people about the move, and they flat out didn't believe me. Their brains just didn't parse it, or what the implications are at all, because it's just there. It's never called out, or explained, or made a point. There are two sequels and the first is really bad. None of the implied critique, just a straight cheesy SF action C-grade. The third film is actually worth a watch IMHO. It's still nowhere near the level of the original, but it's fun to see Van Dien kicking ass and taking names.
  - darkerside 4y ago
    What's the implication if Buenos Aires?
    - simonh 4y ago
      It's completely indistinguishable from a generic Californian city. The language, culture, it's all utterly homogenous and generic. Not even a trace of anything that made Latin America distinctive is left. That's just how the world is, everything that makes a place or culture unique has been paved over How did that happen? Why? No explanation, no hidden references, no hand-holding to any possible conclusion, no reference to the cost of a social change so complete. Unless you actively engage and critically think through what you are seeing and it's implications, you would never know. In the hands of any other director it could just be laziness. Oh look, he's set it in Argentina, but they're all just like American kids. He couldn't even be bothered to include any local references. He could have at least hired local talent right? Taken advantage of the setting? But no, the fact the setting is this way is the actual point.
      - jl6 4y ago
        I always assumed the Federation is a future fascist America which had taken over the world and homogenized it.
        simonh 4y ago
        That's one possibility, another I've considered is it's just a linear extrapolation of the trend towards global homogenisation, extended arbitrarily into the future. So either it's a critique of their political system (very likely) or it's a pessimistic take on our innate laziness and tendency to conformity. Or both. Overall it another marker for how unutterably shallow and awful all these people and their society are.
        Psyladine 4y ago
        Then you'd read Verhoeven's intent correctly. Heinlein was an unabashed fascist and nationalist, and Verhoeven gave him his future fantasy exactly as he intended it (military glorification, unification, responsibility to the state as the highest virtue), and white-washing away any implications of that life.
kabdib 4y ago
One of the few movies I've walked out of.
- simonh 4y ago
  I can believe that. I think it helps to understand where Verhoeven is coming from. He grew up in Holland during the German occupation, and it's liberation by the allies in the 1940s. He's seen the Nazi propaganda, the show and heroic aura of fascism right up close. He lived inside it. He also saw the bodies from summary executions of civilians lying by the side of the road. They're two very different sides of the same coin of fascism, one shiny and seductive, the other a twisted mirror image of ugliness. A lot of his movies show you the heroic, seductive face of fascism for most of the movie, but every now and then through the movie he twists the coin just a little bit. You get a glimpse of what's on the other side, hinting at how what you think you're seeing isn't at all the whole story. But he leaves you to figure that out, the same way he did.
  - kabdib 4y ago
    I totally get that. But. He could have picked a different franchise (or created a new one) instead of hitching the movie's title to a book with a totally different message and atmosphere. I wanted to see something darker, something about a kid growing up into an officer. I wanted to see Jonnie realize how much trouble he was in and feel lucky for only getting a few lashes, and I wanted to see Zim give him a microscopic bit of comfort just before that sentence. I wanted to see a father and son reunite for 45 minutes at the starport, and the proud father bounce off to his new ship. I wanted an exploration of morality in military service as a mirror for how we guide our own lives in the real world. I wanted to see the stupid powered suits, okay? Instead I got a terrible political commentary with bad acting. He could have done that with his own story (wait, he did). I don't know why the film was called Starship Troopers. Oh wait, I do; it was a money grab. Verhoeven didn't even finish reading the book.
    - Beldin 4y ago
      Movie theory (not mine): the bad acting is intentional on the director's part. He may have intentionally cast pretty faces with little talent as a shoutout to fascist films who did similar.
aqme28 4y ago
I watched it as a child and I wanted to kill bugs too. Then I watched it again as an adult and realized “holy shit, I would have been a fascist. Like all people, I too have that capacity.” It was a seriously enlightening moment. A satire subtle enough that I could see both sides of it at different periods of my life.
- noisy_boy 4y ago
  I loved Ender's Game[0] for the tight story line coupled with well place special effects and the crucial moment of empathy Ender Wiggin shows for the Formics. Its a pity that chances of a sequel are pretty low. [0]: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1731141/ https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1731141/
  - atx42 4y ago
    If you've read the book, the movie is a supreme disappointment. Such good stuff in the book that disappears in the movie.
    - mobilio 4y ago
      Book is masterpiece! So many things, plot twists and characters. Movie is cut-down version of book to fill in 90 mins. Another example of supreme disappointment is "Battlefield Earth" movie. If you're fan of a book - don't watch it!
    - antman 4y ago
      And Ender’s Shadow, a different perspective of what happened in the first book
- GlobalFrog 4y ago
  There is a book by Norman Spinrad called « The iron dream » which can make everyone realizes how easy it can be to not spot extremist and fascist views. For those who don’t know it, it is basically a book within a book, as if in a parallel universe, Hitler had emigrated to the US and become a fantasy writer instead of what happened in our timeline. But of course, his ideas still are present in his novel you read and you read that from the perspective of the hero of the book as he slaughters and « defends » himself and the civilisation from what he feels are attacks from inferior species. The kind of books that forces you to question yourself and how you receive entertainement, News, and how you filter and analyze that, or not, before being influenced by it.
zxcvbn4038 4y ago
Starship troopers gets a lot of flack -- "Based on the back cover of the book by Robert A. Heinlein" was a popular critique, "90210 in outer space" was another, and Doogie Howser (as NPH was them known) wasn't a great casting choice IMO -- but the special effects are flawless and Peter Venhousen really nails underlying themes of the book and the anti-bug propaganda. I don't know anyone who saw the film and didn't want to go fight the bugs - thank goodness he wasn't remaking Triumph of the Will.
- marcosdumay 4y ago
  > I don't know anyone who saw the film and didn't want to go fight the bugs About as likely as someone watching Hanger Games and not getting lost on the reality show history, instead of being annoyed that the movie's history didn't progress. Goes to prove that propaganda works. At least for short periods.

by simonh 4y ago

pmoriarty 4y ago

I'd recommend another Verhoeven film, Robocop, over Starship Troopers. And as far as sci-fi movies which are deeper than one might expect, I'd also recommend the original Planet of the Apes and its early sequels.

RustyRussell 4y ago

I read an internet review of Starship Troopers so good that it made me go and watch that (terrible) film again. Took me a few minutes on DDG, but enjoy: https://agapow.net/misc/humour/starship-troopers-a-review/ https://agapow.net/misc/humour/starship-troopers-a-review/

simonh 4y ago
That's awesome, you can lead a horse to water... Since the reviewer mentioned it, the fact the characters all come from Buenos Aires is one of my favourite things about the movie. I've mentioned this a few times in conversation with people about the move, and they flat out didn't believe me. Their brains just didn't parse it, or what the implications are at all, because it's just there. It's never called out, or explained, or made a point. There are two sequels and the first is really bad. None of the implied critique, just a straight cheesy SF action C-grade. The third film is actually worth a watch IMHO. It's still nowhere near the level of the original, but it's fun to see Van Dien kicking ass and taking names.
- darkerside 4y ago
  What's the implication if Buenos Aires?
  - simonh 4y ago
    It's completely indistinguishable from a generic Californian city. The language, culture, it's all utterly homogenous and generic. Not even a trace of anything that made Latin America distinctive is left. That's just how the world is, everything that makes a place or culture unique has been paved over How did that happen? Why? No explanation, no hidden references, no hand-holding to any possible conclusion, no reference to the cost of a social change so complete. Unless you actively engage and critically think through what you are seeing and it's implications, you would never know. In the hands of any other director it could just be laziness. Oh look, he's set it in Argentina, but they're all just like American kids. He couldn't even be bothered to include any local references. He could have at least hired local talent right? Taken advantage of the setting? But no, the fact the setting is this way is the actual point.
    - jl6 4y ago
      I always assumed the Federation is a future fascist America which had taken over the world and homogenized it.
      - simonh 4y ago
        That's one possibility, another I've considered is it's just a linear extrapolation of the trend towards global homogenisation, extended arbitrarily into the future. So either it's a critique of their political system (very likely) or it's a pessimistic take on our innate laziness and tendency to conformity. Or both. Overall it another marker for how unutterably shallow and awful all these people and their society are.
      - Psyladine 4y ago
        Then you'd read Verhoeven's intent correctly. Heinlein was an unabashed fascist and nationalist, and Verhoeven gave him his future fantasy exactly as he intended it (military glorification, unification, responsibility to the state as the highest virtue), and white-washing away any implications of that life.

kabdib 4y ago

One of the few movies I've walked out of.

simonh 4y ago
I can believe that. I think it helps to understand where Verhoeven is coming from. He grew up in Holland during the German occupation, and it's liberation by the allies in the 1940s. He's seen the Nazi propaganda, the show and heroic aura of fascism right up close. He lived inside it. He also saw the bodies from summary executions of civilians lying by the side of the road. They're two very different sides of the same coin of fascism, one shiny and seductive, the other a twisted mirror image of ugliness. A lot of his movies show you the heroic, seductive face of fascism for most of the movie, but every now and then through the movie he twists the coin just a little bit. You get a glimpse of what's on the other side, hinting at how what you think you're seeing isn't at all the whole story. But he leaves you to figure that out, the same way he did.
- kabdib 4y ago
  I totally get that. But. He could have picked a different franchise (or created a new one) instead of hitching the movie's title to a book with a totally different message and atmosphere. I wanted to see something darker, something about a kid growing up into an officer. I wanted to see Jonnie realize how much trouble he was in and feel lucky for only getting a few lashes, and I wanted to see Zim give him a microscopic bit of comfort just before that sentence. I wanted to see a father and son reunite for 45 minutes at the starport, and the proud father bounce off to his new ship. I wanted an exploration of morality in military service as a mirror for how we guide our own lives in the real world. I wanted to see the stupid powered suits, okay? Instead I got a terrible political commentary with bad acting. He could have done that with his own story (wait, he did). I don't know why the film was called Starship Troopers. Oh wait, I do; it was a money grab. Verhoeven didn't even finish reading the book.
  - Beldin 4y ago
    Movie theory (not mine): the bad acting is intentional on the director's part. He may have intentionally cast pretty faces with little talent as a shoutout to fascist films who did similar.

aqme28 4y ago

I watched it as a child and I wanted to kill bugs too. Then I watched it again as an adult and realized “holy shit, I would have been a fascist. Like all people, I too have that capacity.” It was a seriously enlightening moment. A satire subtle enough that I could see both sides of it at different periods of my life.

noisy_boy 4y ago
I loved Ender's Game[0] for the tight story line coupled with well place special effects and the crucial moment of empathy Ender Wiggin shows for the Formics. Its a pity that chances of a sequel are pretty low. [0]: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1731141/ https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1731141/
- atx42 4y ago
  If you've read the book, the movie is a supreme disappointment. Such good stuff in the book that disappears in the movie.
  - mobilio 4y ago
    Book is masterpiece! So many things, plot twists and characters. Movie is cut-down version of book to fill in 90 mins. Another example of supreme disappointment is "Battlefield Earth" movie. If you're fan of a book - don't watch it!
  - antman 4y ago
    And Ender’s Shadow, a different perspective of what happened in the first book
GlobalFrog 4y ago
There is a book by Norman Spinrad called « The iron dream » which can make everyone realizes how easy it can be to not spot extremist and fascist views. For those who don’t know it, it is basically a book within a book, as if in a parallel universe, Hitler had emigrated to the US and become a fantasy writer instead of what happened in our timeline. But of course, his ideas still are present in his novel you read and you read that from the perspective of the hero of the book as he slaughters and « defends » himself and the civilisation from what he feels are attacks from inferior species. The kind of books that forces you to question yourself and how you receive entertainement, News, and how you filter and analyze that, or not, before being influenced by it.

zxcvbn4038 4y ago

Starship troopers gets a lot of flack -- "Based on the back cover of the book by Robert A. Heinlein" was a popular critique, "90210 in outer space" was another, and Doogie Howser (as NPH was them known) wasn't a great casting choice IMO -- but the special effects are flawless and Peter Venhousen really nails underlying themes of the book and the anti-bug propaganda. I don't know anyone who saw the film and didn't want to go fight the bugs - thank goodness he wasn't remaking Triumph of the Will.

marcosdumay 4y ago
> I don't know anyone who saw the film and didn't want to go fight the bugs About as likely as someone watching Hanger Games and not getting lost on the reality show history, instead of being annoyed that the movie's history didn't progress. Goes to prove that propaganda works. At least for short periods.