Live data from Hacker News

Starship Troopers: one of the most misunderstood movies ever

theatlantic.com

51–60 of 140 posts

Re: Starship Troopers: one of the most misunderstood movies ever

#51
This movie isn't misunderstood or clever at all. It was originally exactly as dumb as people think it is (working title: "Bug Hunt On Outpost Nine), but the studio realized they could get the license to Starship Troopers for free.

Verhoeven didn't even read Starship Troopers-- he skimmed a few chapters, decided it was depressing and that Heinlein was a fascist, and made the movie a parody of the book, and a lazy parody at that.

When people call this movie dumb, they're completely right, albeit not for the reasons they may think.

Re: Starship Troopers: one of the most misunderstood movies ever

#53
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Watch it again.. the bad guys are not some random street thugs, it is OCP, a mega corporation that produces the robots and is essentially a government organization (since that world is a "corporatocracy").

More specifically, "the bad guys" and OCP were actually in cahoots. The CEO of OCP has the main villain kill a junior OCP executive after the executive humiliates the CEO. There is also a subplot where OCP is deliberately working with street gangs to drive up the crime rate and gather public support for demolishing the entirety of old Detroit and building the corporate-owned "Delta City" in its place. The movie does…

Vice-President, not CEO, is working with the gangs.

Re: Starship Troopers: one of the most misunderstood movies ever

#54
I'd like to like Starship Troopers more but I can't.

Starship Troopers had a couple smart things to say but said it through a shit movie. Turgid dialog, horrible acting, repugnant characters and general cheesiness. I know the writers wanted to say all these people are idiots but society doesn't go astray because everyone is an idiot – you have to show how smart characters are caught in situations that constrain them to be idiots or at least a have few characters that realise the ridiculousness but are overridden or sidelined. You can't just write a bad movie and blame the characters for being stupid.

My standard rule is that to properly satirise or ridicule something, a story must simultaneously be a good example of target being parodied as well as having a strong parody element.

Starship Troopers tries to parody the military machine but it fails because its a terrible military action movie. To be a good parody of the military (and the political and social machine around it), it must also be a good military action film – both levels must work for the film to be good.

I like to give Galaxy Quest as a good example of a film that's both excellent parody and an exemplar of the genre being parodied. It absolutely pillories Star Trek, bad sci-fi writing, unbelievable monsters, magic science, red-shirts, ridiculous sets with no purpose and humanoid aliens-of-the-week but at the same time it has likeable characters, excellent acting, a properly scary villain and has a real sense of "earning" the ultimate victory at the end.

Starship Troopers has none of this and tries to use cheesiness and parody as an excuse for failing to make the movie better. Sorry, I have to evaluate a film based on more than its satirical message.

Re: Starship Troopers: one of the most misunderstood movies ever

#55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

More specifically, "the bad guys" and OCP were actually in cahoots. The CEO of OCP has the main villain kill a junior OCP executive after the executive humiliates the CEO. There is also a subplot where OCP is deliberately working with street gangs to drive up the crime rate and gather public support for demolishing the entirety of old Detroit and building the corporate-owned "Delta City" in its place. The movie does…

>>The movie does criticize the establishment, it just stops short of criticizing the actual street cops. That is what I meant. Contrast that to Starship Troopers, where the military (the organization the main characters are a part of) is spared no criticism.

The central characters in Robocop were treated empathetically, the scathing social satire and black comedy were not central to the main storyline of heroes and villians, so there was still an engaging film even for those viewers lacking the social awareness needed to appreciate irony.

In Starship Troopers, every character was disposable, hence the gigantic 'whoosh'.

I recommend 'Hollow Man', Verhoeven's last, and largely forgotten Hollywood film, released in 2000. It's even more subversive, and the subversive message is even more subtle. So subtle in fact that I doubt even the film's producers were aware of what was going on. It's either a terrible B-grade hollywood sci-fi thriller, or brilliant black comedy, depending on whether or not you latch on to the subtext.

Re: Starship Troopers: one of the most misunderstood movies ever

#56

I'd like to like Starship Troopers more but I can't. Starship Troopers had a couple smart things to say but said it through a shit movie. Turgid dialog, horrible acting, repugnant characters and general cheesiness. I know the writers wanted to say all these people are idiots but society doesn't go astray because everyone is an idiot – you have to show how smart characters are caught in situations that constrain them…

> My standard rule is that to properly satirise or ridicule something, a story must simultaneously be a good example of target being parodied as well as having a strong parody element.

The obvious counterexample that leaps to mind is Catch-22, which isn't a good war novel at all but is a brilliant antiwar satire.

Re: Starship Troopers: one of the most misunderstood movies ever

#57
I love Verhoeven and the long running joke he played at the expense of Hollywood (mostly with Starship Troopers, Robocop, Basic Instinct and Showgirls - Flesh + Blood is great but not as sarcastic as his later american movies).

Starship Trooper, the novel, is hilarious on its own, with its hawkishness and interesting political views (it's less creepy than Ender's Game in that aspect though). But Heinlein is a much better writer than Card and Stranger in a Strange land makes up for the juvenile tripe he wrote earlier. I guess Vietnam had to happen for some people to reflect on the Rah-rah-rah kind of military Sci-Fi.

(I know there's a cult of Heinlein on HN - I've always wondered if there was an intersection with the Cult of Rand and the Cult of Card)

Edit: as a thought experiment, it would be interesting (as in "depressing") to imagine the exact opposite: an adaptation of Old Man's War by the current Hollywood industry.

Re: Starship Troopers: one of the most misunderstood movies ever

#60
post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know about that. Heinlein seems pretty keen on his notion of citizenship through military service, albeit perhaps as a means of preventing "unnecessary" wars rather than enabling them. Either way, it's a pretty terrible political philosophy. That aspect of serious advocacy is completely absent from the movie.

Serious advocacy of citizenship through military service? One soldier was there just so she should could have children. (Gotta listen during the shower scene.)

He's talking about the book, not the movie.
Post reply on HN