Slashdot Mirror
Will The New 'Starship Troopers' Reboot Stay Faithful To The Book? (hollywoodreporter.com)
HughPickens.com shares news from the Hollywood Reporter:
"Columbia Pictures is rebooting Starship Troopers, the 1997 sci-fi film directed by Paul Verhoeven... The studio is not remaking the film but is said to be going back to the original Heinlein novel for an all-new take." The original movie, considered a mixed success at the time of its release, went on to achieve a cult following, and during the DVD boom of the 2000s it became a mini-franchise for the studio, which produced three additional direct-to-DVD movies... "Starship Troopers [the novel] has been decried as promoting fascism and being racist in its creation of a society where democracy has been severely restricted..." writes Graeme McMillan. "The question then becomes: in updating Starship Troopers to make it more acceptable to today's audience, can it still manage to remain faithful enough to Heinlein's original to please the existing fan base?"
The script will be written by the writers of the upcoming Baywatch film starring Zac Efron and Dwayne Johnson.
The script will be written by the writers of the upcoming Baywatch film starring Zac Efron and Dwayne Johnson.
It's Guy Fawkes night, not April Fool's Day!
My UID is prime!
> Starship Troopers has been decried as promoting fascism and being racist
unbelievable. The entire movie is biting satire of the perils of a society always at war and a society with a universally hated enemy. It's brilliant in its insights; coming out in 1997, it presaged the mess that was 9/11 / war in iraq / war in afghanistan / ISIS. It's a flippin awesome movie and I think they should show it in schools to educate about the dangers of mindlessly buying into the war economy.
At last weekend's Comikaze convention in Los Angeles, I had an extended conversation about this with Caspar Van Diem. A cool guy!
I assume the new movie will be a lame rehash of action scenes, without any insights to be had.
to make it more acceptable to today's audience
Yeah, because today's audience prefers to be in a nice echo chamber rather than having to face something that could challenge their ideas.
Heinlein didn't picture a "Service guarantees citizenship" society just to have it whitewashed away by today's PC standards. Any reboot that ignores the societal aspects may as well be filmed by Michael Bay, and just go straight to CGI exploding aliens; it won't be true to the book in any way.
John
hope it works out to visualize the book
Friday would be my preference.
http://michaelsmith.id.au
i liked the first one.
The 1997 film wasn't faithful to the book
The MI weren't in amoured suits.
They got the characters of the teacher (of history and moral philiosophy) and the Leiutent mixed up
RAH must have been spinning in his grave.
The award of best Heinlein adaptation goes to The Puppet Masters with Donald Sutherland as 'the old man
The special effects were pretty cool, but Verhoeven totally missed the point of the book.
If people can't recognize the satire in Starship Troopers..... we as a society have failed and I humbly await the Great Filter.
Sounds like they are going to take a Turd on the book and try to tell us this more version somehow smells of roses.
No. Not only no, but HELL NO! Hollyweird will implode into its own singularity before that happens.
"Starship Troopers has been decried as promoting fascism and being racist in its creation of a society where democracy has been severely restricted..."
Democracy severely restricted? Nothing like that in the book; separate states have their own governments, and ANYBODY can get Federal citizenship by putting in a 2-year tour of Federal service. You can't buy a franchise, you have to EARN it - but it's open to EVERYONE. If you have one eye and one hand and an IQ of 80, they'll find something for you to do for two years.
Sounds like they are giving it the Ghostbusters, Total Recall, Godzilla treatment. How about the concept of if you find the original too fucking offensive then stay the fuck away from it rather than trying to reimagine it as a steaming pile of shit.
" The script will be written by the writers of the upcoming Baywatch film starring Zac Efron and Dwayne Johnson."
Macho marines running down dark corridors in tight red swim suits?
I'm afraid that if someone produces a sincere, straightforward film adaptation of the novel, the result will be unintentionally hilarious. At least Verhoeven's take is satirical on purpose. Verhoeven's original project "Bug Planet" probably would have been a good movie, too, even if they hadn't opted to get the Heinlein license after the similarities to Starship Troopers became apparent. My point in bringing that up is this: Verhoeven's people had a movie idea, and it wasn't just "adapt a novel". The idea "young beautiful people fall in love, fight aliens, become Nazis" was the kernel, and they built a great movie around that. I'm not sure "make Heinlein's book into a movie" is in and of itself such a great idea. I would need to know more before I thought it was good or bad. Would you like to know more? (Click here.)
Cloudiot: A person who does not see offsite storage as a way to lose control over access to his or her own data.
Have the script writers actually read the book and understood it or are they just going to go by the movie and what today's self entitled individuals want? Just try to tell someone now that they have to put in 2 years of civil service to vote or hold certain jobs and they will claim it is facist, racist, sexist or some type of istism as 2 years of any type of service would interfere with their lives.
I watched Starship Troopers when it came out in the movie theater and had no expectations at all. And I loved it. It was a fun action movie and, at the same time, a fun satire of fascism. And the fact that I enjoyed it harmlessly until the last couple scenes (where it became obvious to me) managed to show me how much I enjoy fascism. Which is an important lesson, IMHO. Especially considering how enjoyable and thus rating friendly Trump currently is. The stuff is awesome.
Would anyone care to comment on the quality of the sequels? I didn't even know they existed until now.
Then you can't make a movie based on any book older than 20 years old. Those proslavery romans, those misogynist Knights of the Round Table (and no, Xena didn't defeat those pigs) ...
"The studio is not remaking the film but is said to be going back to the original Heinlein novel for an all-new take."
So, by "all-new," they admit that it won't be based on the actual novel. Because that wouldn't be new.
A more accurate description would be, as always, "Based on the title of a popular novel we didn't read."
That means all from-the-trenches war movies promote fascism but nobody complains about them. So many American television shows glorify war, one of the few countries to do so.
The books '1984', 'Fahrenheit 451', 'The hunger games', plus the movie 'Equilibrium' were also about oppressive government and to a lesser extent, war. Nobody complained about those stories.
Nobody lauds the shower scene emphasizing that men and women truly did live and fight in the same unit. Why is that?
Of course it won't. It won't be anything like the book. A modern movie has to film some percent in China so they can get a release there, and the book discusses a future that is not particularly bright for several reasons, and it does not do so critically- it portrays it in the same way that a story that takes place in the middle ages has feudalism- as an unfortunate effect of the setting. I'd be literally shocked if it was true to the book. There's a reason all these amazing writers only have their best stories told after they are dead and can't say no- they are utterly shit on in the translation.
I think you can get that. Looking how hostile political debates have become in the West I think a war is inevitable.
Does somebody want to tell him or should I?
You are welcome on my lawn.
The hero of the novel is from frickin' Brazil. They act like it's some white nationalist thing...
"...Would you like to know more? (Click here.)"
Verhoeven is a serious Political Director foremost, check out his early "Soldier Of Orange". But he eventually went into Satire, because Politics is rarely good Boxoffice. (I have no idea what "Showgirls" was all about...) The problem with Satire in the US, especially Political Satire, is that the average US audience doesn't understand or like it. (See "The President's Analyst".) Thus all the venom, especially here on Slashdot, where whenever Heinlein is brought up, most regulars turn into obsessed 12 year olds again. In Verhoeven satirizing Heinlein, they feel personally offended.
Personally, I think Verhoeven, especially with his ongoing religious interests, would be just perfect for next directing "A Canticle For Leibowitz", even as he is nearing 80. But keep Eszterhas away from the screenplay...
The God Emperor Trump will lead us to absolute victory!
and commented on him, yet mispelled his name the exact same way the author of the linked editorial in the above sumbission did. you and joe.ie both spelled his name Casper van Deim instead of Casper Van Dien. I think you made up the bit about meeting him to put some weight to your point.
in most societies in human history, government has had the absolute RIGHT to just grab people (often serfs or residents or subjects, NOT even "citizens" with rights) off the street and stuff them into uniforms and send them to war, expecting them to only come home if they win.
In the USA, people who were citizens with rights were nonetheless DRAFTED and sent off to fight in WWII, Korea, Vietnam... that only ended in the 1970s and would return in a heartbeat if there were an existential threat to the nation that could be solved with brute manpower.
Society today is mainly becoming mushy and snowflakey because we have had the luxury of relative peace and relative prosperity for so long that most have never known full-scale mobilization and war, or true poverty (the sort NOT softened by government checks) and we have been teaching our kids all sorts of cultural PC bull excrement instead of actual history. when reality crashes into the snowflake generation, which it eventually will given the $20 trillion dollar national debt and the Clinton/Obama effort yo enable nukes in North Korea and Iran, half will probably turn to drugs and the others will assume the fetal position and cry themselves to death.
like a "thought experiment" The authors created very different societies, environments, etc and then offered scenarios that were interesting and thought provoking turning many norms upside down. The fact that an author showed an idea and toyed with it and said, in effect, "here's where this stuff MIGHT lead" did NOT mean that either the author or the reader agreed with it all or endorsed it. It was all interesting and THOUGHT PROVOKING.
Any time I hear anybody say that Starship Troopers is fascist, or that the author was a fascist, I know I am listening to a pablum-spewing moron.
If Starship Troopers and Heinlien are fascist, what does that make The Twilight Zone" and Rod Serling???? Have people SEEN all the episodes? Some of the best were portraying societies far worse than in Starship Troopers - Does "Obsolete Man" ring any bells? - hell, we're even partway there now with Zeke Emannuel (one of Obama's advisors on Obamacare) having openly advocated a "whole Life" system in which the value of a person would be judged by government based on his/her age and those who are youngest getting little medical care (because they are easily replaced) and those who are old getting little more than pain pills (because they have little left to offer society), thus making them "obsolete" though not yet directly because of occupation (only by lack of occupation).
I get annoyed by most SciFi films and TV PRECISELY because most is NOT faithful to the original stories. The previous Starship Troopers film was an appalling mangle of art - like a crayon drawing by a monkey being the pop culture version of the Mona Lisa. I'm not convinced that the collective IQ of Hollywood is sufficient to address SciFi, it seems they often just use the visual elements to amp-up an otherwise non-SciFi action flick (add space ships and ray guns to a car chase storyline) and they often cannot tie things up coherently in the end so most seem to fall apart in the last ten minutes.
Will The New 'Starship Troopers' Reboot Stay Faithful To The Book?
Should it have to?
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
If they want to make a film that will be approved of by Chinese audiences, and pretty much the audiences of the majority of the world which is very traditionalist and authoritarian, yet who miss out on the sarcasm,
then the biggest mistake they can do with the movie is make it more "acceptable" and politically correct which is something only cared about by Western media houses and a minor and insignificant population of white guilt correctness evangelists from the standpoint of the much wider and bigger world around us.
I used to think that, Starship Troopers was a bad adaptation of the book, but a website explained it differently a few years ago. I think of the 1997 movie, as being a propaganda film in the book's universe. It's like Beverly Hills, 90210 in the book's universe. The 'would you like to know more' bits hint at it, but I'd like the movie to be more explicit.
Of course, it will just be some people shooting aliens in space.
I was actually amazed that the movie followed the plot of the book as much as it did. But, traveling across the galaxy to fight bugs with assault rifles at 10 ft range was absolutely stupid. This is a book where soldiers fight in powered armor suits, parachuting from space and tossing tiny nuclear bombs around! Think Iron Man meets Star Wars! The plot about service to society as well as the basic training plot were critical to understanding the point of the book. The movie nearly cut out the heart of the book. I hope the reboot doesn't just turn into another action movie.
The main character Johnny Rico was part Filipino in the original book.
errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
I'm afraid that if someone produces a sincere, straightforward film adaptation of the novel, the result will be unintentionally hilarious. At least Verhoeven's take is satirical on purpose. Verhoeven's original project "Bug Planet" probably would have been a good movie, too, even if they hadn't opted to get the Heinlein license after the similarities to Starship Troopers became apparent. My point in bringing that up is this: Verhoeven's people had a movie idea, and it wasn't just "adapt a novel". The idea "young beautiful people fall in love, fight aliens, become Nazis" was the kernel, and they built a great movie around that. I'm not sure "make Heinlein's book into a movie" is in and of itself such a great idea. I would need to know more before I thought it was good or bad. Would you like to know more? (Click here.)
I see from Comment Moderation that I've been accused of trolling for the parent comment. Anyone who is offended care to explain? I don't get it. Who have I offended?
Cloudiot: A person who does not see offsite storage as a way to lose control over access to his or her own data.
Well, the liberals will self-exterminate sooner or later.
The less liberal societies and cultures are the ones who are birthing the most,
while the more liberal "civilized" societies and cultures are the ones who are becoming more of a minority due to negative birth rates.
And those with an emphasis on feminism are especially going doing quickly and being replaced by sturdier and more resilient migrants who don't give a fuck about
this hugspace shit.
Look at USA for instance. The biggest contributor to birth rates are the most traditionalist/conservative collective - the Latino collectives. They mostly scoff at this political correctness shit, and they will become the majority soon.
"updating Starship Troopers to make it more acceptable to today's audience,"
FUCK OFF
that should be left alone. Personally I love the show and the CGI, my kids loved it too when I played it for them. Its got action, cool CGI and some cheese for the ultimate SCIFi Action Flick.
by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
Verhoven is a hack. Camera angles and 'splosions. beep! beep! vroom, GIANT BUGS! Blam! Splat!
His politics are mind-numbingly stupid and shallow, though given the current crop of college-age morons who need to be protected from any ideas they might disagree with, I suppose he might be a man for this moment. His typically-European view of politics reminds me of a horse with blinders on - personally pleasant but only able to see a very narrow perspective of what his owners allow him to see because he would be too frightened and unable to cope with something to his left or right. He is trapped in marshmallow socialism with a patina of democracy (but not actual democracy where candidates with real differences would be allowed). In a political spectrum 10 kilometers wide, he is trapped with the modern European idea that only a 4 centimeter wide part of that overall spectrum, and located 4 kilometers left-of-center is allowable with anything to the right of that leftist box being fascist/nazi.
There was no depth to his flick, nothing serious about it, and the "fascism" he pretends to mock is the comic book form which the left has erected within the culture to distract from ACTUAL fascism which the left is eagerly implementing across western civilization. REAL fascism, as created by Italian socialist Benito Mussolini and then adapted by Germany's National Socialists, was indirect socialism where government controlled INDIRECTLY through corporations while running a police-state of total government surveillance, speech controls, and constant war....
Do we have constant war? yup, and not just from the Bush family, but also the Clintons and Obama
Do we have speech codes? yup. The Clintons introduced "politicial correctness" into the federal government in the '90s when they plugged Donna Shalala into HHS and she brought in her University of Wisconsin "speech codes"
Do we have total surveillance? yup. It got ramped up during the 1990s under the Clintons in the 1st internet bubble, then the Bush admin put it on steroids post 9/11, and now Obama has it pumped-up even more thanks to his admin being completely in-bed with Google (about 250 people have been back-and-forth between jobs in this admin and Google)
Do we have government controls in the economy indirectly via corporations? yup. The 2008 meltdown had government corporations "Fannie Mae" and "Freddie Mac" as its ground zero. Under Obama, government has taken-over the entire student loan business, and Obamacare turned American healthcare fascist (government forces the population to buy the product, and government set the design parameters for the product, and government controls what companies can sell the product...)
Verhoven encourages people to be scared of the type of fascist you see in an Indiana Jones flick, so you do not see actual textbook fascism in the real world.... and then the very people who are sliding gently into actual fascism now wonder how the civilized and intelligent Germans slid into fascism in the 1930s.... it happened with an assist from the media. It's called propaganda.
Would love to see a movie that was very true to the book, though I think a lot of liberals heads would explode at the concept of service meaning picking up a gun and standing between danger and society. That you can't vote or hold office till you serve and as a "civilian" (non-citizen) are only allowed to have 1 child.
Imagine if that was the world today. Nearly all the Democratic part and most of the Republican party would be fired from office/ineligible to vote.
6 episodes, pretty good, old school drawings.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XIZty-Eol4s
It might be better to call Islam a slaver's codex with a religion and a nasty genocidal streak. Their "holy books" seem to spend more time on how to enslave, mistreat or murder other people than on Mohammad or Allah.
Well, I hope they include the part where...um...where the humans become more and more like their enemy as they don exoskeletons to fight bugs.
(Also, powered armor.)
The script will be written by the writers of the upcoming Baywatch film[...]
Heinlein's books that have been made into movies strayed a long way from the master's works. The movies are nothing more than a money grab. The books are much better.
Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.
Well, we can always hope the re-re-boot might be better.
People want to dismiss the book and the movie as satire and fascism because they do not want to consider the idea that a person needs to purchase their political franchise with service. It's a serious idea worth considering. It's not to far afield from the Guardian calling every politician they don't like a far-right extremist.
I absolutely loved the movie because the special effects made the bugs look super real. The interactions and acting with the bugs was very believable. Truly superb CGI, set design, costumes, and script. If you can't appreciate a movie about militarization of society then you are too stupid to understand the absolute brilliance of the movie. It's in the same vein as Idiocracy or 1984 for being a warning message to society of what not to do but set against a fictitious alien enemy. It would have drawn a lot more criticism if it was set against another nation. It's absolutely brilliant. Unfortunately the movie series degenerated in quality in every possible way with each successive title. I enjoyed Starship Troopers 2 to a degree, some of the acting was sub-par. By the time it got to Starship Troopers III it was as if a 10 year old wrote the script and a high school drama club did the acting. As bad ass as the marauder tech was the whole mega mind plot sucked. All they had to do was keep the bug ground war theme that made the first so successful. It was obvious that the budget for CGI dwindled to almost non-existent and got too abstract with the ideological messages turning it into a convoluted mess. Even if Starship Troopers III had Anthony Hopkins and Brad Pitt it still would have been a tragedy and waste of time. I'm all for another movie as long as it's done like the first, properly. I've never read the book just a fan of the movies. From all the discussion here about how different the book is; I think I'll go read it. Starship Troopers with the Rock? Yeah I'm down for that. If possible bring back Casper Van Dien (Johnny Rico) he really does make the whole series tie together and is a great actor (my opinion). He's a bit older now so make him a general and make his son Juan Rico. That would make the movies prequels to the book? That would be cool.
Given the controversy surrounding Starship Troopers the book — and, to be blunt, some of the flaws of the book itself, which reads much like polemic with (too) many scenes taking place inside classrooms with characters expressing the author's militaristic worldview to the reader as if they were one of the students — it's difficult to imagine a faithful screen version of Starship Troopers finding much success with modern audiences. Indeed, the very prospect seems oddly reminiscent of Ender's Game, a similarly beloved — and controversial — sci-fi novel that received its own movie version in 2013.
The Ender's Game failure was due very much to its NOT sticking to the book. It was an incredibly shallow movie because rather than focus on the humanism that the movie was literally about it focused on whatever flashy special effect could be applied to it. Yeah, that single battle room scene felt right out of the book but the battle room scenes served a greater purpose in the book.
The book Ender's Game would never have become the classic that it is if it was just about showcasing cool action scenes. As some one who was in accelerated academic programs but also felt a bit isolated because of it, the book was a perfect match.
(Disclaimer: I don't consider myself brilliant and / or tragic. I'm just explaining the book's draw for me.)
I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
I'm afraid that if someone produces a sincere, straightforward film adaptation of the novel, the result will be unintentionally hilarious. At least Verhoeven's take is satirical on purpose. Verhoeven's original project "Bug Planet" probably would have been a good movie, too, even if they hadn't opted to get the Heinlein license after the similarities to Starship Troopers became apparent. My point in bringing that up is this: Verhoeven's people had a movie idea, and it wasn't just "adapt a novel". The idea "young beautiful people fall in love, fight aliens, become Nazis" was the kernel, and they built a great movie around that. I'm not sure "make Heinlein's book into a movie" is in and of itself such a great idea. I would need to know more before I thought it was good or bad. Would you like to know more? (Click here.)
I see from Comment Moderation that I've been accused of trolling for the parent comment. Anyone who is offended care to explain? I don't get it. Who have I offended?
You have offended the resident fascists, they don't like it when you call them nazis (or fascists for that matter).
... I am sure they'll be doing fine.
What would be the point?
Play Command HQ online
SERIOUSLY. One of you read it. ONE. Yet you all seem to think you know all about it.
People like me do not mind that you insult/disparage/hunt/kill extremist islamist terrorist. What we find racist is when somebody jump from "extremist islamist terrorist" to "the moslems". That is it generalize to the whole islam. E.g. all those pretending that islam is a religion which makes people violent, or that inherentely all moslem are violent etc...
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
"Democracy severely restricted? " that is the facist part, citizenship only open to those having gone thru military (federal service). You haven't gone through the service ? Then you are not a citizen with degraded rights. Saying it is open to everyone does not make it more democratic.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
The book has a lot of classroom learning, told in the way of flashbacks, that show how society functions.
There is very little action in the book, compared to the discussion of society.
Can you imagine Dwayne Johnson sitting in a classroom behind a desk learning about morality?
The actors chosen show you what kind of film this will be. A Michael Bay style CGI fest about as exciting or engaging as the new ID:4 was...
So rise up, all ye lost ones, as one, we'll claw the clouds.
I see from Comment Moderation that I've been accused of trolling for the parent comment. Anyone who is offended care to explain? I don't get it. Who have I offended?
Do not try to make sense of the Slashdot moderation system. That way lies madness. All you need to know about it is that it is broken by design because you can either moderate in a discussion or you can comment but not both. The problem with this is that the people best qualified to moderate are also the people best qualified to comment. The system should permit you to moderate in discussions in which you comment, so long as you do not moderate in threads in which you comment.
Suffice to say that moderation is frequently abused, and leave it at that, because going down any road is pointless.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
How can there be almost 300 comments, and nobody has even mentioned the lovely Denise Richards' role in Starship Troopers?
The nerds are certainly cloistered in their basements today.
Not much confidence in the 'reboot' after reading who will write the script...
I'm not sure "make Heinlein's book into a movie" is in and of itself such a great idea. I would need to know more before I thought it was good or bad. Would you like to know more? (Click here.)
Possibly, but it would still be pretty awesome to see the combat system described used in a space-war movie of any kind. Who wouldn't want to see a movie with spaceships jockying around and shooting enormous guns loaded not with bullets or missiles, but with angry space-marines in power armor.
Have you considered the possibility that they read the book and understood it in a different way to how you did?
Heinlein does strike me as a right-wing nut job with some serious incest hangups, but he does occasionally show some signs of different, less stereotyped, thinking.
Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
OTOH, there continue to be rumours that Ridley Scott is working on a script for the Forever War, which is good news in itself, but bad news for this idea.
Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
If they're going to stay true to the book, they're going to need at least one, to play Juan Rico.
There's no time like the present. Well, the past used to be.
The parent is making a telling point.
Seriously, take out the fascist political ideology and what do you have? A fast-paced action movie, a Sci-Fi epic, lots of good special effects and good looking actors. It would be a popcorn movie, and even though a good popcorn movie, extremely shallow.
Add in the fascist ideology and suddenly the movie has a deeper morality, it is raising troubling issues. Notice that the fascism is appealing? All the heroics, charming and noble characters, it really sells the fascism. And the fascism itself is presented in the best possible light.
One can start to draw interesting historical parallels. Why did fascism take root in Europe, prior to the Second World War? Well it was appealing. It offered a simple authority figure to obey and follow. It offered simple boogey monsters to blame for societal problems. And for people who didn't like Communism, it offered a simple oppositional ideology to battle Communism. Fascism had some real appeal and to ignore that is to risk opening the door to fascism again today.
Thus, the fascist content in Starship Troopers makes it a much better movie, IMO. Making the political content "acceptable for today's audiences" will almost certainly dumb down the movie. What you will get will be very much like the Star Trek reboot. All action, no ideas worthy of consideration.
You have offended the resident fascists, they don't like it when you call them nazis (or fascists for that matter).
Hmm. That would be shooting the messenger. I didn't make up that "Beautiful young people fall in love, fight aliens, become Nazis" summary. That's from the supplemental materials from the laserdisc of Verhoeven's Starship Troopers. Anyone offended, don't blame me. I recall this being the summary the production crew worked with when first creating this movie. If you find this offensive, there's some piece of this story somewhere that you need to understand better. Anyway, I didn't call anyone a Nazi, and I don't like the accusation of trolling.
Cloudiot: A person who does not see offsite storage as a way to lose control over access to his or her own data.
Does Hollywood have something against Paul Verhoeven? All his movies are being remade (robocop, total recall, now starship troopers), while they are all perfectly fine. If anything, there's a bunch of OTHER movies which could perhaps benefit from a remake, so why pick on Verhoeven?
On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
I don't really have anything else to add. Just wanted to add my voice to the chorus.
The right to vote in Starship Troopers did not require military service, merely that you did _some_ community service for a term of not less than two years. Military was one option. Antarctic labor was another. Medical guinea pig was another. Heinlein mentions several in passing.
The idea was "prove you can put the whole before yourself, to justify giving you the authority to govern the whole."
0) The 1997 movie bears ABSOLUTELY no resemblance to the book, period. I walked out the the movie 30 minutes in.
In the Book:
1) The main character, Rico, is not white..he is Filipino. So not racist. There are characters in leadership of all races and genders. Women commanded most of the spaceships. A huge deal given the book's publication date, 1959. He would have gone further but the audience would have bought it.
2) The prime exploration in the book is three things: a) Should society have a republic along the lines of ancient Greece, which required service before holding office. What would the implementation look like in a space-faring world?, b) How does discipline of children affect society? (spoiled millennials..this means you), c) how should a future military look? How should officers and enlisted troops be trained and selected?
3) A big question for the main character is this: Why serve? He finds his own reasons as the book progresses.
4) The book predicts many modern infantry technologies (not bad, since the author served in the navy in the 1930s) including common operating picture, the role of airborne in limited actions, and combat armor and powered suits.
If they are not going to follow the book precisely don't bother. If you haven't bothered to read the book, your opinion is degraded at best.
FYI.. I did serve in the US military myself, and recommended this book to my cadets when I became an instructor for this reason: why are you going in, exactly?
Is it a blueprint for US society, not quite, and it wasn't meant to be.....I have read almost everything Heinlein wrote, and if you read Stranger in a Strange Land you might get how Heinlein really writes.,..he liked to go all the way to the wall when exploring concepts.
First off the movie Starship Troopers (1997) wasn't all that true to the book anyway (as mentioned by many), so if the reboot is or not is sort of irrelevant. I enjoyed the movie a lot and have seen it many times. I'd say one of the primary reasons was the over the top nature of political satire which is common for books of that era/genre but sadly missing from pretty much all movies for a number of reasons (most modern movies want to be as middle of the road and PG13 as to not alienate any potential demographic that would get in the way of making money and viewership). Having a movie with the courage to go there these days might be unlikely. Movies like Deadpool might change some peoples minds in that it was widely successful despite limiting itself to an R rating. That said, if it did manage to go there it would be all the more great in that only so few go there these days. I'd say the second thing that was good it that the acting in in what actually pretty good given the context of the movie. The best of which I thought was Michael Ironside as Rasczak. If they can cast the movie well that will also be a big deal. They may have their work cut out for them however as that kind of movie likely won't attract a lot of interest from many actors. In many cases it seems that once some actors get known for that work, they are stuck in that genre forever and it turns out not to be the most successful path an actor might take. Anyway I'd probably check it out no matter what simply to see how it turns out...
The book was racist? When citizens had names of numerous races in them? Democracy was exercised by people who chose to do national service. You were not restricted from national service, but you had to serve your term. Oh wait, I forgot, this goes against the SJW creed that anything that requires achievement is racist, sexist, etc.
I personally think that anyone that is coming from a combat zone should be reassigned to a non combat zone for a term prior to be released back into mainstream society. We expect people to go from be shot at and returning fire in a combat zone to passive without difficulty and that is already proving to be very difficult. If combat vets from the war zones were reassigned to non combat zones while still under military discipline for a period to 'decompress' prior to being cut loose completely and all of them were required/given counselling and some retraining back to the civilian world it would help those that need it most while not singling them out for getting/seeking help. I have nothing but respect for the volunteers that serve in our countries military, the way our country treats them when they are done is sad and in many ways shameful.
errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
thats one way of selling it
as in : does an e-book contain less wisdom than the paper version ?
Free speech was meant to be free for all... how can anyone grow up in a nanny state ?