Starship Troopers Reboot: Less Violent, More Patriotic

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**SilverMK2**

This makes me realise that I've not seen an 18 cert film for a long while... they need to stop pandering to classifications to try and generate sales and start making good films to generate sales...

Though I guess it is easier to make a meh film with a wide distribution than an awesome film... so that will probably not happen.

**Squigsquasher**

It was a good film. To be honest I thought it should have been an 18, especially with the Caesarean scene.

**Bran Dawri**

Recently producer Toby Jaffe—who was also partly responsible for cutting the satirical chaff from Total Recall, until he got to the Len Wiseman action movie that was always at its center, apparently—reaffirmed to Empire that his Starship Troopers would be more faithful to both Robert Heinlein's original novel and American values by being less violent, "grounded," and way more patriotic.

This is mathemathically impossible.

Also, article comes across as more than a bit sarcastic towards Jaffe & his crew, but maybe that's just me.

In any case, Hollywood should be forbidden to feth with the books I grew up with any longer, at least until they get people who understand irony and the simple concept of quality once more.

**Morathi's Darkest Sin**

Thats why I am hoping Dredd will do well, might finally remind folks in Holywood there are other ratings than 12.

**Slarg232**

Squigsquasher wrote:Not really sure about this. On the one hand, the Starship Troopers film was pretty awful (although saying that, I am slightly biased as I am a misotheist-I believe that if there is a god, there ought not to be) but I did find the satirical side quite funny.

If Hollywood gets their grasping claws on it, it will just be another "America is great!" pile of patriotic, jingoistic piffle.

Get Ridley Scott on it. He will do it justice

I love when non American Flaggers complain about the patriotism in American films. What has Britain put out recently?

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Squigsquasher wrote:Not really sure about this. On the one hand, the Starship Troopers film was pretty awful (although saying that, I am slightly biased as I am a misotheist-I believe that if there is a god, there ought not to be) but I did find the satirical side quite funny.

If Hollywood gets their grasping claws on it, it will just be another "America is great!" pile of patriotic, jingoistic piffle.

Get Ridley Scott on it. He will do it justice

I love when non American Flaggers complain about the patriotism in American films. What has Britain put out recently?

**Frazzled**

The silver jubilee or whatever?

**Jihadin**

Hhmmmm both sides in Exo suits?

**SilverMK2**

Slarg232 wrote:I love when non American Flaggers complain about the patriotism in American films. What has Britain put out recently?

When a film about a fictional state in the future killing space aliens comes out as "America HURRR!" then you are doing something wrong

And a significant amount of a films income comes from non-american sales, so to say it is purely an "american film" when it is for worldwide distribution isn't really looking at the whole picture. Plus, it does get a little wearing when every single fething american film is just spouting the same message.

And we have pretty much cornered the market in gangster movies, and also have a reasonably good low budget horror film industry. Not that it has anything to do with being able to comment on what other people are making, but hey...

**Jihadin**

Ugh its just a spin on the book. If I remember correctly there were two catagory in it. A civilian and a citizen. So what I'm hearing its american MI doing battle with the bugs....with JUMP SUITS...For all we know...they might take it another but similiar direction like the Posleen War

**Orlanth**

I liked the first films premise, like the book it covered the undertones of the fascist state Rico was seemingly unaware he was part of without presenting it nakedly so he would take notice. Its more like 'by the way, we live under an iron fisted junta, now on to our story...'.

I cant see how a remake can be more 'patriotic' as Verhoevens vision showed militant patriotism as it its strongest, and worst a glossing over of a military regime that lurks as a shadow just offstage. Starship Troopers didn't glory in fascism despite the best efforts of its characters, quite the opposite, it showed a vision of fascism turned mainstream, what happens when a junta takes over and media spin goes into overdrive. Those on the inside don't notice, its just business as usual.

More patriotism most likely means patriotism without the political message of the dangers of blind patriotism, more honey and less mustard. Thats a dumbing down straight away. As for less violence i could go with that, there is a detachment is you are an MI in a marauder suit, and the scale of infantry combat is so skewed, a platoon of MI is a challenge for a large number of less adapt combatants over a very considerable area. On a human level the violence is almost absent, until the hammer is dropped. MI carry a lot of hardware for precision or area attack, plus psychological weapons like the talking "I am a thirty second bomb, twenty nine, twenty eight...." designed to induce panic.

Verhoevens work was more 40K Imperial Guard than Starship Troopers both in how they were armed and what they were fighting, so it wasn't to Heinleins specifications either, but the more patriotism sounds off putting. I am expecting a double helping of syrup on this one. And patriotic to whom anyway, to humanity or a fictional future state, that wouldn't work without a message undertone, to the US? The Federation was global and Rico was from Buenos Aires, Verhoeven got that bit right.

**Frazzled**

I forget, on the ground, what did the bugs fight with again?

**Jihadin**

Claws...flaming pasma balls out of but....throwing asteriods....zerg tactics

**Frazzled**

Jihadin wrote:Claws...flaming pasma balls out of but....throwing asteriods....zerg tactics

I meant in the book. For some reas0n I never caught how the bugs actually fought, other than 1 trooper was worth more than a 1,000 bug casualties (so maybe that would be 'they fought poorly).

**Ahtman**

The real question is if we are going to see the Skinnies.

**Jihadin**

Read the book lol

**purplefood**

Slarg232 wrote:
I love when non American Flaggers complain about the patriotism in American films. What has Britain put out recently?

An English actor (Jude Law) and an English director (Guy Ritchie)...
That was a pretty big film IIRC...

**Frazzled**

Jihadin wrote:Read the book lol

I did. its been a few decades however and it wasn't particularly entrancing when I read it.

**Orlanth**

Frazzled wrote:
Jihadin wrote:Read the book lol

I did. its been a few decades however and it wasn't particularly entrancing when I read it.

Bugs had advanced energy weapons, the average bug drone was a good evolutionary grunt but unfit for the modern battlefield. They had to resort to using tanks and bunkers and lots of them.

Mi were not more powerful per se, they could fight asymmetrically grossly asymmetrically. If a company fans out it doesnt' cover a few hundred metres it covers a few hundred miles, yet remains mutually supporting.

**Coolyo294**

purplefood wrote:
Slarg232 wrote:
I love when non American Flaggers complain about the patriotism in American films. What has Britain put out recently?

*Snip*
An English actor (Jude Law) and an English director (Guy Ritchie)...
That was a pretty big film IIRC...

That's a really good movie.

**Jihadin**

Read Armor to. Another good one

**Ahtman**

Sherlock Holmes (2009) had an international cast, and was produced and distributed by a multinational corporation. It isn't anymore British then it is American.

**Laughing Man**

Jihadin wrote:Read Armor to. Another good one

Shame Steakley died before he could finish the sequel.

**mattyrm**

Out with the satire and the violence and in with PG-13 and well rounded characters?

I'd rather watch my house burn down.

**SilverMK2**

Ahtman wrote:Sherlock Holmes (2009) had an international cast, and was produced and distributed by a multinational corporation. It isn't anymore British then it is American.

I think that was kind of the point

**Manchu**

:/

I had no idea that the subversive content of Total Recall had been cut out for the remake. Now I'm not sure if I care ...

**Mannahnin**

Excellent (but LONG) article/webpage about Starship Troopers.

http://www.kentaurus.com/troopers.htm

Debunks the myths, shoots down the spurious, and even corrects Heinlein in a couple of places where the master apparently misremembered what he put in the book.

A taste of the intro:

Robert Heinlein's Starship Troopers

Introduction and background

Since its debut in 1959, Robert Heinlein's novel Starship Troopers has been one of the most popular -- and controversial -- works of science fiction ever published. Written in a few weeks as a response to a proposed nuclear testing moratorium and other issues, it has been interpreted and misinterpreted, praised and excoriated. It recently generated hundreds of "reviews" on the Amazon.com website -- not bad for a book published 38 years previously!

Long on philosophical discussions about citizenship, government, and sociology, this is a book that can be read on several levels: classic coming of age story, political commentary, and science fiction adventure. It virtually defined the powered armor subgenre of military science fiction.

It also generated an awful lot of mail, most of it negative.

Lest anyone later accuse me of having a hidden agenda, let me make my agenda public at the outset: Starship Troopers might just be my favorite book of all time. This web page was inspired in large part by the degree of misinterpretation, false statement, and outright character assassination I have recently witnessed concerning Robert Heinlein in general and Starship Troopers in specific, ranging from people on the internet who obviously felt that they didn't have to read the book (or read it thoughtfully) before condemming it, to the hypocritical statements of those responsible for Paul Verhoeven's Starship Troopers.

For a specific example of such misinterpretation and falsehood, I recommend Don D'Ammassa's recent "review" of Starship Troopers printed in April 1998 issue of Science Fiction Chronicle. [D'Ammassa 1998: 48] Mr. D'Ammassa uses same tired old technique of making what he claims are statements of fact regarding the society described within the book which are simply not supported by the text, then condemning the book based on these inaccurate claims. (To see my letter to the editor of Science Fiction Chronicle, and any further details of the resulting corespondence between Mr. D'Ammassa and myself, please click here.)

I have no problems with people disliking or even condemning the book for its contents; it is a controversial work, and while I personally think that "polemic" is a little extreme, I can see why someone might describe it that way. What I do not accept, though, is condemning the book on the basis of willful ignorance or poor reading comprehension.

This is not to say that Starship Troopers doesn't have its flaws; it can be preachy and with a narrow focus, thus giving rise to the impression (incorrect, I believe) that Heinlein was only focused on the military. (More about this below.) To further complicate matters, Heinlein occasionally makes contradictory statements about the society portrayed in the book. While I disagree with Heinlein on a number of issues (including the one that prompted him to write the book in the first place), I do agree wholeheartedly with his take on citizenship; that with rights come responsibilities, and that many if not all of the major problems facing the western democracies today -- especially the United States -- are the result of people having forgotten that simple fact.

**azazel the cat**

Frazzled wrote:I forget, on the ground, what did the bugs fight with again?

They had energy weapons, and I seem to recall that the Lieutenant in charge of the Roughnecks gets hit directly with a missile, though I may be misremembering that.

In any case, the bugs are described as technologically advanced; they were only bugs insofar as their social constructions worked. Militaristically, they were generally on par with the Terrans. I remember thinking the bugs from Starship Troopers book were a lot closer to the Bugs from District 9 than they were to the bugs in the Starship Troopers movie.

**Lux_Lucis**

I've always read the basic political premise of the book to be thus: you have to earn the right to vote, to prove that you care enough to actually think about the issues involved in politics and not just think about yourself.
Heinlein used the military as the method through which one proves themselves so that you recognise the right to vote is not a universal right (and thus treat it with respect, since you've worked hard to earn it) and also'give' yourself to a greater purpose. No-one could be barred from the military in the book, anybody had the right to try and earn their full citizenship.
I thought that was pretty well explained in those sections of the book which dealt with the system (in the citizenship class, whatever it was called and the officer training school).

That's my interpretation anyway. I personally wouldn't say it was fascistic, if compared to actual fascist regimes.

**KingCracker**

azazel the cat wrote:
Frazzled wrote:I forget, on the ground, what did the bugs fight with again?

They had energy weapons, and I seem to recall that the Lieutenant in charge of the Roughnecks gets hit directly with a missile, though I may be misremembering that.

In any case, the bugs are described as technologically advanced; they were only bugs insofar as their social constructions worked. Militaristically, they were generally on par with the Terrans. I remember thinking the bugs from Starship Troopers book were a lot closer to the Bugs from District 9 than they were to the bugs in the Starship Troopers movie.

District 9 was a strange yet good movie

**Kanluwen**

azazel the cat wrote:
Frazzled wrote:I forget, on the ground, what did the bugs fight with again?

They had energy weapons, and I seem to recall that the Lieutenant in charge of the Roughnecks gets hit directly with a missile, though I may be misremembering that.

You are. The Lieutenant was hit by a rocket fired by a Skinny.

In any case, the bugs are described as technologically advanced; they were only bugs insofar as their social constructions worked. Militaristically, they were generally on par with the Terrans. I remember thinking the bugs from Starship Troopers book were a lot closer to the Bugs from District 9 than they were to the bugs in the Starship Troopers movie.

It's also important to remember that the bugs aren't that technologically advanced. They were a race which was very symbiotically enmeshed with the race which humans had dubbed "Skinnies", to the point where the humans decided to go after the Skinnies first to cut off the Bugs' weapon manufacturing, etc.