3 ms·
Knowing that the movie was coming prompted me to read the book first, having seen it discussed fondly. I enjoyed the book, but was surprised by its unfashionab
by gojomo 13y ago
Knowing that the movie was coming prompted me to read the book first, having seen it discussed fondly.
I enjoyed the book, but was surprised by its unfashionable celebration of martial values: in particular a viewpoint about the necessity and inevitability of war. They couldn't possibly get that into a modern mass-market sci-fi action flick, I thought.
But Verhoeven did! And he managed to work in overlapping layers of both respect and criticism for the militaristic source material. He makes the jingoism and quasi-fascism alternately seem attractive, clownish, revolting, and necessary.
Preserving some of the book's rhetorical case for warmaking, even though Verhoeven also simultaneously mocks that case, is a subversive achievement as interesting, and in a way as faithful to the book's ideas, as a film featuring more of the "super suits" and infantry-tactics would have been.
- wobbleblob 13y agoVerhoeven said in an interview that he never read the source material, only the screenplay. (sorry, no source online) Fair enough - he was making a movie, not a book report for Heinlein fans.
- gojomo 13y agoVerhoeven may have said that. Whether it's true is another matter; he could have been trolling the book's fans. For a project that supposedly started as another entirely unrelated movie, by a director who hadn't read the book, it managed to fit in a lot of the book's particular rhetoric and plot points.