|
|
Post by gljbradley on Aug 11, 2020 10:03:14 GMT
Not a bad idea.
Heinlein may have been a rightwing nutjob towards the end, but his book was still a hell of a read. God knows what Verhoevan was on about when he made the movie.
I once saw a clip of Verhoevan saying "People like these characters? They're fascists!" Verhoevan is probably a left wing nut who calls all military fascists, though. And that right there is the problem. The main characters, whom we're supposed to be rooting for, are fascists and many people aren't with that.
|
|
|
|
Post by Toasted Cheese on Aug 11, 2020 12:19:44 GMT
Nah! Leave well enough alone.
|
|
|
|
Post by gljbradley on Aug 11, 2020 21:57:51 GMT
Nah! Leave well enough alone. On one hand, I agree. Leave well enough alone. But on the other hand, if a possible reboot is done right, perhaps it can be given a chance. |
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on Aug 11, 2020 22:31:09 GMT
Biggest trouble with Starship Troopers is the Rico character is portrayed as a kind of dimwit, and Carmen is entirely cold and career-minded---Dizzy is the one interested in him, but she chases after him--so there's an odd dynamic to it. You don't really know who to sympathize with. They all act kind of distant or strange in one way or another. There isn't the same kind of dramatic core that Robocop or Total Recall had. Even though Rico's parents are killed, you never get the impression he was that close to them.
The "happy" ending is about Rico and Carmen finding their place in the military--this is what brings them together. Not love but serving in the armed forces.
Verhoeven said he wanted to show the society as functioning. Why? Why was the society shown to be peaceful?
Why was the mastermind of the plan to defeat the bugs a black woman?
Why was the reporter who pointed out that the bugs had their territory invaded-why was he mutilated by them when he got to the planet?
Another thing is the Golden Girls professor (herself a veteran) talks about the bugs in favorable terms, not dissing them as inferior or weak.
Jean Rasczak: This year in history, we talked about the failure of democracy, how the social scientists of the 21st Century brought our world to the brink of chaos. We talked about the veterans, how they took control and imposed the stability that has lasted for generations since.
|
|
|
|
Post by gljbradley on Aug 12, 2020 9:14:43 GMT
Biggest trouble with Starship Troopers is the Rico character is portrayed as a kind of dimwit, and Carmen is entirely cold and career-minded---Dizzy is the one interested in him, but she chases after him--so there's an odd dynamic to it. You don't really know who to sympathize with. They all act kind of distant or strange in one way or another. There isn't the same kind of dramatic core that Robocop or Total Recall had. Even though Rico's parents are killed, you never get the impression he was that close to them. The "happy" ending is about Rico and Carmen finding their place in the military--this is what brings them together. Not love but serving in the armed forces. Verhoeven said he wanted to show the society as functioning. Why? Why was the society shown to be peaceful? Why was the mastermind of the plan to defeat the bugs a black woman? Why was the reporter who pointed out that the bugs had their territory invaded-why was he mutilated by them when he got to the planet? Another thing is the Golden Girls professor (herself a veteran) talks about the bugs in favorable terms, not dissing them as inferior or weak. Jean Rasczak: This year in history, we talked about the failure of democracy, how the social scientists of the 21st Century brought our world to the brink of chaos. We talked about the veterans, how they took control and imposed the stability that has lasted for generations since. I couldn't agree with you more. Things like the main characters' personalities, the way that society works which is ran by fascism, and how there's no true resolution bother me. It makes me wonder if I'm supposed to be rooting for the main characters. And another thing about that "happy" ending, from what I heard, it also involves recruiting children into the military since they kept losing so many adult soldiers. Are you kidding me?! With all due respect to Mr. Verhoeven, how is that society peaceful? It's actually a dystopia. I mean, listen to the dialogue in the coed shower scene. One of the female recruits said that she joined the military so that she can have children. Wait, what? Why and how? Perhaps if they do make a Starship Troopers reboot, they can leave out the fascism, write the Johnny Rico, Carmen, and Dizzy's characters with more depth and likability, and improve upon the messages of the story. That was one of the best things about RoboCop. Murphy/RoboCop, Lewis and even the freakin villains had character depth and the messages were surprisingly positive (e.g. don't lose your humanity).
|
|
|
|
Post by Sarge on Aug 12, 2020 19:38:24 GMT
The government in ST was a capitalist democracy, except voting was earned priveledge as opposed to a birthright.
|
|
|
|
Post by cts1 on Aug 12, 2020 19:47:12 GMT
Unless they hire Mel Gibson  . Not a bad idea.
Heinlein may have been a rightwing nutjob towards the end, but his book was still a hell of a read. God knows what Verhoevan was on about when he made the movie.
Think Verhoeven nailed what he was aiming for: a satire of mindless nationalism and the cogs that make up the machine.
|
|
|
|
Post by cts1 on Aug 12, 2020 19:48:27 GMT
Biggest trouble with Starship Troopers is the Rico character is portrayed as a kind of dimwit, and Carmen is entirely cold and career-minded---Dizzy is the one interested in him, but she chases after him--so there's an odd dynamic to it. You don't really know who to sympathize with. They all act kind of distant or strange in one way or another. There isn't the same kind of dramatic core that Robocop or Total Recall had. Even though Rico's parents are killed, you never get the impression he was that close to them. The "happy" ending is about Rico and Carmen finding their place in the military--this is what brings them together. Not love but serving in the armed forces. Verhoeven said he wanted to show the society as functioning. Why? Why was the society shown to be peaceful? Why was the mastermind of the plan to defeat the bugs a black woman? Why was the reporter who pointed out that the bugs had their territory invaded-why was he mutilated by them when he got to the planet? Another thing is the Golden Girls professor (herself a veteran) talks about the bugs in favorable terms, not dissing them as inferior or weak. Jean Rasczak: This year in history, we talked about the failure of democracy, how the social scientists of the 21st Century brought our world to the brink of chaos. We talked about the veterans, how they took control and imposed the stability that has lasted for generations since.
Mr. Point flew right past you without saying "hi there!" yet again, I see.
|
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on Aug 12, 2020 20:07:24 GMT
Mr. Point flew right past you without saying "hi there!" yet again, I see.
No, I think you just don't pay attention to films very closely, you don't notice things.
That wouldn't explain why he made the society functional, or diverse, or gave women authority positions. Verhoeven said:
“So I think the essence of my interest in this so-called fascism of Heinlein’s, or pseudo-fascism, the real reason I wanted to transfer that to film was that at this moment there are voices in the United States that would actually embrace this form of policy. Which is another reason I wanted to do this film. To carry over the fascist framework from the book to the movie. It’s a metaphor, you see—for that part of the American society which would like to have something like the government portrayed in Starship Troopers in power in the United States today. It would also be interesting. I felt, to have the film of Starship Troopers make this statement: “ This quasi-fascist society we’re showing you works. On a certain level, anyway.”
|
|
|
|
Post by loofapotato on Aug 12, 2020 22:57:49 GMT
Already been done. Seek out 'Roughnecks: The Starship Trooper Chronicles'
|
|
|
|
Post by gljbradley on Aug 13, 2020 3:23:45 GMT
Mr. Point flew right past you without saying "hi there!" yet again, I see.
No, I think you just don't pay attention to films very closely, you don't notice things.
That wouldn't explain why he made the society functional, or diverse, or gave women authority positions. Verhoeven said:
“So I think the essence of my interest in this so-called fascism of Heinlein’s, or pseudo-fascism, the real reason I wanted to transfer that to film was that at this moment there are voices in the United States that would actually embrace this form of policy. Which is another reason I wanted to do this film. To carry over the fascist framework from the book to the movie. It’s a metaphor, you see—for that part of the American society which would like to have something like the government portrayed in Starship Troopers in power in the United States today. It would also be interesting. I felt, to have the film of Starship Troopers make this statement: “ This quasi-fascist society we’re showing you works. On a certain level, anyway.” THIS. ^
|
|
|
|
Post by Winter_King on Aug 13, 2020 9:19:25 GMT
Biggest trouble with Starship Troopers is the Rico character is portrayed as a kind of dimwit, and Carmen is entirely cold and career-minded---Dizzy is the one interested in him, but she chases after him--so there's an odd dynamic to it. You don't really know who to sympathize with. They all act kind of distant or strange in one way or another. There isn't the same kind of dramatic core that Robocop or Total Recall had. Even though Rico's parents are killed, you never get the impression he was that close to them. The "happy" ending is about Rico and Carmen finding their place in the military--this is what brings them together. Not love but serving in the armed forces. Verhoeven said he wanted to show the society as functioning. Why? Why was the society shown to be peaceful? Why was the mastermind of the plan to defeat the bugs a black woman? Why was the reporter who pointed out that the bugs had their territory invaded-why was he mutilated by them when he got to the planet? Another thing is the Golden Girls professor (herself a veteran) talks about the bugs in favorable terms, not dissing them as inferior or weak. Jean Rasczak: This year in history, we talked about the failure of democracy, how the social scientists of the 21st Century brought our world to the brink of chaos. We talked about the veterans, how they took control and imposed the stability that has lasted for generations since. I couldn't agree with you more. Things like the main characters' personalities, the way that society works which is ran by fascism, and how there's no true resolution bother me. It makes me wonder if I'm supposed to be rooting for the main characters. And another thing about that "happy" ending, from what I heard, it also involves recruiting children into the military since they kept losing so many adult soldiers. Are you kidding me?! With all due respect to Mr. Verhoeven, how is that society peaceful? It's actually a dystopia. I mean, listen to the dialogue in the coed shower scene. One of the female recruits said that she joined the military so that she can have children. Wait, what? Why and how? Perhaps if they do make a Starship Troopers reboot, they can leave out the fascism, write the Johnny Rico, Carmen, and Dizzy's characters with more depth and likability, and improve upon the messages of the story. That was one of the best things about RoboCop. Murphy/RoboCop, Lewis and even the freakin villains had character depth and the messages were surprisingly positive (e.g. don't lose your humanity). I don't think Verhoeven was trying to show the society as an utopia. In fact I'd argue he was showing the opposite and how everyone was being brainwashed by the Federation propaganda. And yes, the entire society is militarized as per Robert Heilein book. Only that the book treat this society as virtuous and Verhoeven showed the opposite. I think you are somewhat forced to root for the characters because they're just insects with very little in terms of brain function. If the aliens were Ewoks or the Na'vi, then our sympathies were unlikely to be with the humans. I feel that that if they leave the fascism elements, then the story will just be a rehash of Aliens. Another generic movie about space marines killing monsters. It has been done countless times before. The fascist elements present in Starship Troopers is what made the movie memorable and unique IMO.
|
|
|
|
Post by gljbradley on Aug 13, 2020 22:10:55 GMT
I couldn't agree with you more. Things like the main characters' personalities, the way that society works which is ran by fascism, and how there's no true resolution bother me. It makes me wonder if I'm supposed to be rooting for the main characters. And another thing about that "happy" ending, from what I heard, it also involves recruiting children into the military since they kept losing so many adult soldiers. Are you kidding me?! With all due respect to Mr. Verhoeven, how is that society peaceful? It's actually a dystopia. I mean, listen to the dialogue in the coed shower scene. One of the female recruits said that she joined the military so that she can have children. Wait, what? Why and how? Perhaps if they do make a Starship Troopers reboot, they can leave out the fascism, write the Johnny Rico, Carmen, and Dizzy's characters with more depth and likability, and improve upon the messages of the story. That was one of the best things about RoboCop. Murphy/RoboCop, Lewis and even the freakin villains had character depth and the messages were surprisingly positive (e.g. don't lose your humanity). I don't think Verhoeven was trying to show the society as an utopia. In fact I'd argue he was showing the opposite and how everyone was being brainwashed by the Federation propaganda. And yes, the entire society is militarized as per Robert Heilein book. Only that the book treat this society as virtuous and Verhoeven showed the opposite. I think you are somewhat forced to root for the characters because they're just insects with very little in terms of brain function. If the aliens were Ewoks or the Na'vi, then our sympathies were unlikely to be with the humans. I feel that that if they leave the fascism elements, then the story will just be a rehash of Aliens. Another generic movie about space marines killing monsters. It has been done countless times before. The fascist elements present in Starship Troopers is what made the movie memorable and unique IMO. I understand that this film would've been another generic sci-fi film about space marines killing monsters. Still, with all due respect, the fascist elements of this film turns people off and the notion that we're supposed to be rooting for a bunch of brainwashed, zealot fascists isn't too appealing. There's a lot in the film's writing and the plot details that could've been improved.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lux on Aug 14, 2020 19:08:52 GMT
Biggest trouble with Starship Troopers is the Rico character is portrayed as a kind of dimwit, and Carmen is entirely cold and career-minded---Dizzy is the one interested in him, but she chases after him--so there's an odd dynamic to it. You don't really know who to sympathize with. They all act kind of distant or strange in one way or another. There isn't the same kind of dramatic core that Robocop or Total Recall had. Even though Rico's parents are killed, you never get the impression he was that close to them. The "happy" ending is about Rico and Carmen finding their place in the military--this is what brings them together. Not love but serving in the armed forces. Verhoeven said he wanted to show the society as functioning. Why? Why was the society shown to be peaceful? Why was the mastermind of the plan to defeat the bugs a black woman? Why was the reporter who pointed out that the bugs had their territory invaded-why was he mutilated by them when he got to the planet? Another thing is the Golden Girls professor (herself a veteran) talks about the bugs in favorable terms, not dissing them as inferior or weak. Jean Rasczak: This year in history, we talked about the failure of democracy, how the social scientists of the 21st Century brought our world to the brink of chaos. We talked about the veterans, how they took control and imposed the stability that has lasted for generations since. Rico was clearly affected by his parents death. Although it looked like he was sulking instead. |
|
|
|
Post by petrolino on Aug 14, 2020 19:17:52 GMT
I did not like the new 'Total Recall' or the new 'RoboCop'. I fear they will neuter another Paul Verhoeven classic by diluting all the content. Unless this is more an adaptation of Robert Heinlein's work, in which case it might be interesting.
|
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on Aug 14, 2020 19:41:08 GMT
Not a utopia, but "works on a certain level." Why did he want to do that? Does it make the satire more effective?
Another thing are the moments where characters show some compassion.
Zim where he gives Rico something to bite on before he gets lashed- yet
it's not really a bonding moment---the audience has to feel disturbed not comforted.
The other is where Rasczak tells him not to waste a good thing --so Rico does a 180 and goes into the tent with Dizzy.
Neil Patrick Harris has it too when he is at the funeral but he is dressed up in the uniform (he takes off his hat and tells them they can be informal).
The high schoolers get separated in adulthood based on their skills and intelligence. Rico is less intelligent than Carmen or Carl.
On the other hand, Marshall Bell is presented as being afraid and kind of useless-and he is the general.
As for the insect aliens--I think the scene where one of them is helpless on the ground and gets shot in the one eye is meant to provoke some sympathy or at least to make one feel ill at ease.
Ditto for the ending where the brain bug is surrounded and DESPITE the fact that they were cutting up their victims or sucking their brains out.
The brain bug has a blank expression--not really scary looking or threatening.
|
|
|
|
Post by gljbradley on Aug 15, 2020 3:57:42 GMT
I did not like the new 'Total Recall' or the new 'RoboCop'. I fear they will neuter another Paul Verhoeven classic by diluting all the content. Unless this is more an adaptation of Robert Heinlein's work, in which case it might be interesting.
I absolutely agree. The Total Recall and RoboCop remakes don't hold a candle to the original films. The fact that they were watered down was one of the main reasons why they ultimately failed. If they do decide to reboot this film, they need to stick more to the Heinlein book. Hopefully, thanks to the immense success of Joker, an R rated film that wasn't released in China and was continuously bashed by mainstream media yet managed to beat the odds by earning over $1 billion worldwide and become an instant classic, perhaps they're smart not tamper with and dilute the content for this film.
|
|
|
|
Post by gljbradley on Aug 15, 2020 4:08:57 GMT
Not a utopia, but "works on a certain level." Why did he want to do that? Does it make the satire more effective? Another thing are the moments where characters show some compassion. Zim where he gives Rico something to bite on before he gets lashed- yet it's not really a bonding moment---the audience has to feel disturbed not comforted. The other is where Rasczak tells him not to waste a good thing --so Rico does a 180 and goes into the tent with Dizzy. Neil Patrick Harris has it too when he is at the funeral but he is dressed up in the uniform (he takes off his hat and tells them they can be informal). The high schoolers get separated in adulthood based on their skills and intelligence. Rico is less intelligent than Carmen or Carl. On the other hand, Marshall Bell is presented as being afraid and kind of useless-and he is the general. As for the insect aliens--I think the scene where one of them is helpless on the ground and gets shot in the one eye is meant to provoke some sympathy or at least to make one feel ill at ease. Ditto for the ending where the brain bug is surrounded and DESPITE the fact that they were cutting up their victims or sucking their brains out. The brain bug has a blank expression--not really scary looking or threatening. For me personally, I think the satire wasn't up to par because it felt disjointed and all over the place. Verhoeven was able to master the satire in RoboCop beautifully. But in this film, I couldn't quite grasp it. Maybe it's me. As for the compassion from the characters, it felt really off.
|
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on Aug 15, 2020 7:22:32 GMT
For me personally, I think the satire wasn't up to par because it felt disjointed and all over the place. Verhoeven was able to master the satire in RoboCop beautifully. But in this film, I couldn't quite grasp it. Maybe it's me.
The television stuff was more overtly comical in Robocop--in ST it was not. It was all geared around the militarized state and more serious. Are we supposed to laugh at the end scene with the brain bug in the lab? I think it is meant to be like a Roman arena display of the conquered enemy to be ritually sacrificed and we are to feel uncomfortable. I assume we should-but then Verhoeven has a weird sense of humor so maybe it is not so sincerely felt by him and he is just BSing his way to explain some of the reasoning.
Plus the characters in ST are part of the satire, in Robocop the personal story of Murphy is not. Rico's love triangle IS part of the satire.
|
|
|
|
Post by gljbradley on Aug 15, 2020 22:08:07 GMT
For me personally, I think the satire wasn't up to par because it felt disjointed and all over the place. Verhoeven was able to master the satire in RoboCop beautifully. But in this film, I couldn't quite grasp it. Maybe it's me.
The television stuff was more overtly comical in Robocop--in ST it was not. It was all geared around the militarized state and more serious. Are we supposed to laugh at the end scene with the brain bug in the lab? I think it is meant to be like a Roman arena display of the conquered enemy to be ritually sacrificed and we are to feel uncomfortable. I assume we should-but then Verhoeven has a weird sense of humor so maybe it is not so sincerely felt by him and he is just BSing his way to explain some of the reasoning.
Plus the characters in ST are part of the satire, in Robocop the personal story of Murphy is not. Rico's love triangle IS part of the satire.
I'm not saying that we should laugh at the brain bug during the ending. I'm saying that you have to be careful with how you present satire in certain films. Yes, the main characters in ST were meant to be satirical but they still needed more character depth to make them more appealing and relatable. And Rico's love triangle could've been done better. RC managed to do a beautiful job in balancing out satire and seriousness, especially when it came to Murphy/RoboCop. Like I said in one of my previous posts, one of the main problems with ST is that it's all over the place when it comes to the satire.
|
|
.
