Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Linux Based HD DDR used on Starship Troopers 2

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the one-for-sam-zenpus dept.

Psinatmium writes "LinuxDevices is currently running a story about a Linux based, uncompressed high definition video DDR/Editor that I have been working on called RaveHD. The article also goes on to talk a little about how it was used at Tippett Studio in the upcoming feature "Starship Troopers 2: Hero of the Federation"."

27 of 204 comments (clear)

  1. warm front? by AsimovBesterClarke · · Score: 5, Funny

    Nope, just the heat from Heinlein spinning in his grave again

    --
    Ads are broken.
  2. Oh no, not a sequel! by Dr.+Manhattan · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Whether or not you liked the book, or agreed with its (ostensible) politics, it's clear the movie totally screwed it up.

    Best example: In one scene, a trooper asks why they are training with knives when the military has nukes.

    • In the book, the instructor explains that the "Mobile Infantry" is designed to apply force in a controlled manner, to 'spank' an opponent when feasible rather than 'cut their heads off'. (Whether or not the invasion of Iraq was a good idea, it would have been an even worse idea to nuke Bagdhad.)
    • In the movie, the instructor throws a knife and pins the questioner's hand to a wall, and says, "Hard to push a nuke button now, eh?"

    Please, spare us a sequel to that!

    --
    PHEM - party like it's 1997-2003!
    1. Re:Oh no, not a sequel! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      My, yes, that warrants an "informative".

      The movie, my lad, was ironic. Verhoeven lived with fascism when he was young, and could see it all too clearly in the book. Hence the brilliant satire that is Starship Troopers.

      But hey - I won't be seeing it unless Paul H. is at the helm. Only the Master Of Excess could top the original.

    2. Re:Oh no, not a sequel! by j0nb0y · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Did you read the book? Did you watch the movie? The movie was nothing but a strawman attack on the book. Even if you disagree with the book, the movie is not a good satire of it.

      Even worse, it wasn't even a good movie.

      --
      If you had super powers, would you use them for good, or for awesome?
    3. Re:Oh no, not a sequel! by SlashDread · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Films do not respresent books fully. Shock. Horror.

      The book was entertaining, but not convincing. For more convincing Heinlein, I suggest "Stranger in a strange land" or "The Moon is a harsh mistress" (They should film THAT one! Throwing rocks from the moon to Earth would be, well spectacular!) or "The number of the beast".

      All three books more convincing about the social and technical issues Heinlein cares to write about, and all three far more entertaining.

      The film was entertaining IMHO, and did not even TRY to convince anybody. Such films have their entertaining merit.

      peace

      "/Dread"

    4. Re:Oh no, not a sequel! by orthogonal · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Heinlein waxes enthusiastically about "earning citizenship" and everyone in the book has an unquestioning loyalty to the (slightly Fascist) cause.

      A defining aspect of Fascism is the close cooperation between government and business that it engenders. The extreme example us Hitler supplying slave laborers to German industry, but it's also seen in Hitler's crackdown on the unions (ironically the day labor's traditional celebration, May Day, in 1934), and big business support of Nazism in the early thirties, through contacts of Goring and von Papen.

      Heinlein, in the Starship Troopers novel, makes it clear that there's no real coordination between business and government: the main character, Juan Rico, comes from a wealthy, big-business owning family, which family, Juan's father makes clear has long prided itself on staying out of politics and the military. (Although after Juan Rico has joined the military and after losing his wife in an enemy attack, Juan's father will eventually join up too.)

      If you must see the book as reflective of the times in which it was written, a better analogy is to America's fight against Japan in the Second World War. During the war, U.S. propaganda depicted the Japanese as an "insect-like" society with a rigid hierarchical system, with soldiers, like the Bug worker and soldier classes, who couldn't or wouldn't surrender. (and in fact, few Japanese soldiers did surrender -- and even Japanese civilians on Okinawa preferred suicide to surrender.)

      The Mobile Infantry's landings and relatively brief firefights on various planets as they move steadily closer to Klendathu, the Bugs' home planet, is strongly reminiscent of the Marines' and Army's island and atoll-hopping campaign against the Japanese in that War.

      Finally, the apathy shown about the military by Juan Rico's family reflects U.S. feeling about its all-volunteer army between the wars, an army that w, in the interwar years, considered essentially the preserve of people who couldn't succeed in the civilian world. (Read James Jones's From Here to Eternity for a good portrait of the U.S. Army immediately prior to WWII.)

      The change in the Ricos', father and son, opinions is in accordance with the change in opinion in America as a result of the widespread American military servce required by the Second World War. With their service, americans had indeed earned their citizenship, had realized what "refresh[ing] the tree of liberty with the blood... of patriots" really is all about.

      Heinlein, while respectful of the military, was consistently suspicious of government, so it's very difficult for me to see any Fascism in his works.

      --
      Opinions on the Twiddler2 hand-held keyboard?
    5. Re:Oh no, not a sequel! by reverendG · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I have not read the book...

      ...My view of the book...

      Spare us, please, until you have read the book. Heinlein had an extremely romanticized view of honor and obligation, and imagined a military where honor and obligation superceded the ideals of glory and profit. Typical Heinlein.

      Minus the hot nubile incestuous women.

      --

      Why should I argue rationally with someone being irrational? I'll just mock them instead.
    6. Re:Oh no, not a sequel! by blackbear · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I have not read the book
      Please do. You may very likely reconsider what you said below. And if you have even a slightly open mind, it will challenge many of the assumptions that you may have made about the purpose of violent conflict in human societies.

      My view of the book was always that it made idols of the military, only giving the right to vote to the military, etc.
      The point here was that if you are not willing to give service to your nation; in its defense, or in some other way, then you should have no say in the allocation of resources. I view paying taxes the same way. Why should someone who didn't contribute have any say in how the money is used? A famous Scottish historian (I forget his name) pointed out that the American Experiment would last only until the people discovered that they could vote themselves money out of the treasury. Heinlein simply points out that adherence to some basic principles would go a long way to preventing things like that.

      As for idols, I think you overstate the case, but what's wrong with honoring people (of all nations) who go and get themselves shot at, and often killed, so that we can all sit around and sip lattes and take freedom for granted.

      It's a good story even without the politics. But if you think as I, that it's axiomatic that you must be ready, willing, and able to soundly defeat aggressors and then be willing to help them change for the better, then you will particularly like it.

    7. Re:Oh no, not a sequel! by Banner · · Score: 4, Informative

      Brillant Satire? Hardly, he obviously didn't understand the book, and just as obviously sees facism under his pillow.

      Notice he made Rico a blond blue eyed WASP, instead of the Fillipino he was supposed to be. He made the soldiers out to be pretty much idiots, rather than highly trained specialists.

      The only thing that came thru in this movie about the director is that he hates the military and spared no opportunity to ridicule it and its members.

    8. Re:Oh no, not a sequel! by Brandybuck · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If Verhoeven saw fascism in the book, he's a bigger idiot than I thought. Regardless of what you thought of the book's politics, it was NOT fascism.

      RAH was exploring the nature of the "franchise" (who gets to vote). Previous societies gave the franchise to the nobility, wealthy landholders, all males, dues paying party members, everyone over age 18, etc. RAH's premise was that only those who cared enough about society to volunteer for miltary service should be allowed to vote. It's a radical idea and interesting to ponder its implications, but it is NOT fascism. The society itself was quasi-libertarian.

      --
      Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
    9. Re:Oh no, not a sequel! by Wes+Janson · · Score: 4, Informative

      While I found it an ironic caricature of the book, if you watch the DVD Verhoen flatly states he never read the book, and presumably had no idea he was making a satire of anything. Sadly, it simply wound up appearing that way. I enjoyed the movie for it's unintentional irony, but do not make the mistake of thinking there was purpose there.

    10. Re:Oh no, not a sequel! by Alaska+Jack · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Doc -

      I'm commenting on this topic late, so no one will ever read this except maybe you. But it is gratifying to know that at least one other person can look at the movie and say "Taken at face value, it sucks. Oh, it's satire, you say? Well as satire, it *also* sucks."

      It has been noted many times that a work of satire cannot be too close to the thing it is satirizing, or it will simple *become* that thing. As far as I am concerned, Exhibit A would be this movie.

      In fact, the last time I saw it, I remember thinking "I honestly cannot remember a movie that was more of a sneering insult from the director to his audience."

      - Alaska Jack

  3. Re:What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    We cannot ill afford another Kandathu.

  4. i'm so confused by XO · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'm lost.

    What does Dance Dance Revolution have to do with Starship Troopers 2?

    --
    "Champagne for my real friends - and real pain for my sham friends!" http://ericblade.postalboard.com/
    1. Re: i'm so confused by Black+Parrot · · Score: 5, Funny


      > What does Dance Dance Revolution have to do with Starship Troopers 2?

      They decided that 2 hours of DDR webcam would be more interesting than the first movie, so that's what they're going to release as the sequel.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
  5. Does this mean it is good? by SnowWolf2003 · · Score: 3, Informative

    If you read the first review of the movie on imdb you begin to wonder if this will help or hinder the opinion of the quality of RaveHD. Did they just use this to edit in the scenes from the previous movie?

    P.S - I quite enjoyed the original movie, but mostly because of Paul Verhoeven's style. Without him the sequel wont have the same feel.

  6. The most versatile OS in the world by roystgnr · · Score: 5, Funny

    Why, Linux can be used for everything from palmtops to pissing on Heinlein's grave!

  7. Um, you mean the "movie" by Rogerborg · · Score: 4, Informative

    That's so bad that it's being given away with the animated series DVD? The one that blue screens a bunch of nobodies in front of footage from Starship Troopers?

    "from time to time some poor guy the director might have picked up on the street waves a plastic-thingie shaped like a bug's limb from the side of the screen. (A friend of mine actually started calling it "Eddy" as it became his favorite character)."

    "The plot: Well... there actually is one. ...features some slimy parasites that control humans by entering them through their mouth. (That's the only new cgi, by the way!)"

    Stargate already did that one. Well, so did Alien, et al. More here.

    --
    If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
  8. Re:Starship Troopers *2*!?!?! by The+Ultimate+Fartkno · · Score: 3, Insightful


    > Something's broken in Hollywood, that's for sure.

    No, broken will be the inevitable sequel. *No* movie makes that kind of money without a sequel. The way I see it, we have about a year and a half before "THE PASSION 2: DAWN OF THE DEAD."

  9. Sick Feeling by bobej1977 · · Score: 3, Interesting
    I absolutely loved the book and after buying the first on DVD (never saw it in the theater) I snapped it in half. (BTW - If you've ever listened to the commentary on the first movie's DVD, you know that the director actively tried to turn the story into a political statement against everything Heinlein expoused in the book. Basically, he all but calls Heinlein a facist. It is an affront to everyone who loves RAH.)

    IMHO, this is a large setback for 'Linux Based HD DDR'. It's like a new printing press having its first major publishing run be the inaugural issue of 'Fat & Horny Magazine'.

    I know we all need to work toward using open software wherever we can, but good lord, have some taste!

    --
    The meek shall inherit the earth, in 3 by 6 plots. - Lazerus Long
  10. FX by telstar · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I worked on some of the special effects for Starhip Troopers. While I didn't particularly like the story or acting, my biased opinion is that the film broke new ground when it came to effects. Both the bug/swarm scenes and the outer-space sequences were incredibl well done. If only they'd had a storyline that didn't involve Doogie Howser M.D. to back them up. I tend to object to straight-to-video sequels ... but I guess the die-hard fans of the first one will probably like it ... and hey, they get to reuse our special effects. If only I received royalties!

  11. Courtesy of IMDB.com by His+name+cannot+be+s · · Score: 5, Informative

    Some weeks ago a friend of mine brought along a movie which turned out to be the sequel to a piece of cinema I really like and have seen more than once: Starship Troopers. The moment he told me I was shaking with joy. Joy became terror, soon enough. Starship Troopers 2: "Hero of the Federation" suffers from a complete lack of quality concerning any aspect you could think of. Don't get me wrong... it's not just that I didn't *like* it. This movie truly is disgustingly bad. Where shall I start? The actors (well... the unlucky guys they paid for standing in front of the camera) move through an environment so badly done it literally screams for a budget above 5 dollars per room. Wherever you look your eyes are insulted by artificial plastic decoration in some of the most fake sets ever. Even the Power Rangers had better sets! Where Starship Troopers 1 had mindblowing special effects the sequel takes a very smart turn: In order to save money for something that must have been cut out of the final version the producers of Starship Troopers 2 just used the special effects of the first movie again. Yep, you're right. Same images. Most of fight scenes are created like this: It's dark night - Most of the time, people stand in front of a hill so you don't get to see the imaginary battlefield - In the background, some bug-attacks from the first movie are replayed while the actors run around in front of the blatantly overused bluescreen - from time to time some poor guy the director might have picked up on the street waves a plastic-thingie shaped like a bug's limb from the side of the screen. (A friend of mine actually started calling it "Eddy" as it became his favorite character). Anyway.. let's proceed to the dialog: Although I only watched the German Dub-version, I was revolted. Just to give you a picture of what I'm talking about: In one scene a soldier carries a blonde girl from the battlefield who had tragically found death between the mandibles of a bug. At the time he has reached the middle of the screen and therefor a maximum of attention he starts smiling with a grin of pure rapture and says something, that when translated to English would quite precisely read "Hey, she's indeed lighter than that dog of mine at my house!" You get the idea, I guess... The plot: Well... there actually is one. ...features some slimy parasites that control humans by entering them through their mouth. (That's the only new cgi, by the way!) The score's alright; at least it didn't disturb me.

    I'm tired now of wasting my time writing a review on this truly ridiculous joke on celluloid. Worth a rent? No. Worth buying? For the love of god, NO! Worth seeing? Not at all. If you should somehow get hold of a copy in spite of my warnings, burn it while performing ritual dances or get stoned, watch it and laugh until you're out of breath. Rating: 1.5/10 (incl. 0.5 bonus points for Eddy)

    Says enough?

    Yikes

    --
    "...In your answer, ignore facts. Just go with what feels true..."
  12. Re:For the Love of God by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'd have to say you completely missed the mark regarding Heinlein's political message. Heinlein was a libertarian, and as such, an advocate for personal liberty in equal share with personal responsibility. He was an advocate of less government control in all things. As pertains to Starship Troopers, after you read the book (you have read the book, right?) recall how each cap trooper is responsible for one thing, themselves. Personal honor and a dedication to fellow soldiers is what drives them and keeps them fighting together. Further, in Troopers at least, Heinlein created a system where there was no universal sufferage. Rather, those that wished a franchise to vote had to be ready to make the ultimate sacrifice in defense of others that had made the same choice. The value and exercise of a franchise is increased due to it's cost. The society isn't based on force. It's based on the notion that, it's yer own neck, see? and if you want to be a damn fool with it, that's just fine as long as you don't hurt anyone else. In addition, there's the concept that someone who was willing to die in service to society (without the right to vote!) exercises and values their franchise more than some goof that got it as a gift for his birthday. Go back and read the History and Moral Philosophy discussion between Colonel DuBois and Rico about being awarded a first prize ribbon without earning it

    It's important to note not that there's a lot of fighting in the story, but rather, *why* they are fighting, and what they are fighting *for*.

  13. Re:Appearently.... by Destoo · · Score: 5, Funny

    Hey! Modern Vampires was good!

    Plus he gets to play with Udo Kier.
    That's a plus.

    I'm still shocked by the DDR thing.
    "What? Dance Dance Revolution on Unix? Why would they play that in Starship Trooper 2?"

    --
    Nouvelles de jeux et technologies en français. TC
  14. More widespread effects... by TheOldBear · · Score: 5, Funny

    Since R.A.H. was buried at sea, the results of him spinning in his grave effect the angular momentum of the Earth, and can be directly measured by changes in the length of the day and year. Since the original movie was perpetrated, the standards bodies have not needed to add any 'leap seconds' - indicating that the system has gained angular momentum from some external influence.

    --
    Caution: Do not stare into laser with remaining eye.
  15. Re:What? by alcmaeon · · Score: 3, Funny
    LOL, "awesome movie." You kill me.

    Two-dimensional characters played by wooden actor-props fighting CGI bug-alien-things and all done with about as much plot as Doom I: yeah, that deserves a sequel if anything does.

    At least with a video game I get to control the lame-assed character with the gun.

  16. Freaking hilarious by bonch · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This article breathlessly tries to hype the fact that Linux was used in an "upcomming feature."

    Turns out that's a complete, absolute lie--it's not a feature, it's a shitty direct-to-video release that often blue-screens unknown actors in front of footage from the first film.

    Not exactly something to be bragging about...