3 ms·
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 diffe
by 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 agoMovie 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.
- simonh 4y agoYep that's fair, a faithful adaptation would have turned out very different. However this is the script the studio green-lit, and Verhoeven worked very closely with the writer to realise his (the writer's) vision. I love it, I think it has merit in it's own right, but sure it's not at all what an actual Heinlein fan would want or expect. It's really more of a satirical commentary on the book.