The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
I like Starship Troopers, the book and the movie. To me, the adaption is great and faithful. Both are stories where it turns out humanity are the aggressors, but it's told from the perspective of humanity where your tribalism kicks in and you want to cheer along. Two tales of an overtly and overly militaristic society.
But it appears that I am the only one who read the book that way. When strangely, I thought the book was much more explicit that humanity were the aggressors; while in the movie you might miss the bit about the Mormon outpost in the beginning.
Yeah I was under the impression the book is written legitimately pro military and the film satirizes it. Is that not the case?
I've always been unclear how to take the book. I can see going either way and I don't know enough about Heinlein, at the time he wrote it, to really judge. Dude's attitudes varied all over the place during his career. Though he was more crazy libertarian than traditionally fascist.
I'll have to dig my copy out, but I was under the impression that the skinnies had been giving information on where earth was to the bugs, which led directly to BA getting destroyed. So, they may have been as neutral as we were before Pearl Harbor, I guess.
+1
WhiteZinfandelYour insidesLet me show you themRegistered Userregular
edited February 2021
I actually reread Starship Troopers a couple months ago and Krieghund has the right of it regarding the skinnies. I don't remember anything specifically laying out who struck first between the bugs and humanity, though.
I don’t know much about Heinlein besides having read most of his books over the decades. But I feel comfortable pigeonholing him as the libertarian type.
That being said his characters and worlds range from the military-authoritarian (Starship Troopers) to what I would call literal communism (Stranger in a Strange Land). I always thought he was good at having characters give powerful arguments for the social orders within his worlds, even if they weren’t Heinlein’s own views.
I think a lot of people have difficulty distinguishing between the views expressed by fictional characters versus the work itself. For example, there is a bafflingly large number of people who think Starship Troopers (movie) is pro fascism. And even people who understand that it isn’t often think that their insight is somehow clever or that the anti-Nazi views are a hidden meaning of the movie.
I don’t know much about Heinlein besides having read most of his books over the decades. But I feel comfortable pigeonholing him as the libertarian type.
That being said his characters and worlds range from the military-authoritarian (Starship Troopers) to what I would call literal communism (Stranger in a Strange Land). I always thought he was good at having characters give powerful arguments for the social orders within his worlds, even if they weren’t Heinlein’s own views.
I think a lot of people have difficulty distinguishing between the views expressed by fictional characters versus the work itself. For example, there is a bafflingly large number of people who think Starship Troopers (movie) is pro fascism. And even people who understand that it isn’t often think that their insight is somehow clever or that the anti-Nazi views are a hidden meaning of the movie.
The meaning has to be hidden, otherwise that would mean I was a dumb little shit as a teenager.
I'm definitely much more in the Death of the Author camp of reading, so I really don't know anything about Heinlein as a person or what he believed. And especially with Starship Troopers, we don't get a lot of information to go on. They go from peace to war while the main character is in boot camp with no information on how or why the problems started. As for if it's set in an authoritarian system, if it is, it's a pretty soft one.
0
cj iwakuraThe Rhythm RegentBears The Name FreedomRegistered Userregular
I'm definitely much more in the Death of the Author camp of reading, so I really don't know anything about Heinlein as a person or what he believed. And especially with Starship Troopers, we don't get a lot of information to go on. They go from peace to war while the main character is in boot camp with no information on how or why the problems started. As for if it's set in an authoritarian system, if it is, it's a pretty soft one.
Heinlein was a writer of speculative fiction far more than science fiction; his works spanned an enormous spectrum of political perspective. With that in mind, the society he comes up with for Starship Troopers, while wildly idealized within the book (as he does with basically any of his books), is far from definitively "fascist". Individuals have rights, they just don't get to vote or participate in the politics if they aren't willing to stick their neck out for said society. Society takes care of everybody. If you don't want to serve in the military, you don't. Nobody can be barred from military service due to age, sex, or disability. There is no draft or mandatory service. If you can't handle serving after you sign up, you can walk away at virtually any moment with zero penalty. If anything, the more fascist tones are from creepy cultural aspects of the 50s. It's a meritocracy based on volunteer military service. Would it become fascist? All but certainly, because you just can't hand the military-minded the much power without rapid corruption. But Heinlein's goal isn't to change society to that, it's to get people to examine the notion as well as exploring some other scifi concepts (powered armor, FTL travel, etc).
And there's far, far more to it than Verhoeven short-stroking a hate boner of "fascists are bad!" over the book. For one thing, Verhoeven's political angle is so toothless as to be all gums, and "fascism is bad!" as a movie message is so low-hanging fruit for the 90s that you almost have to dig a trench to get any less risky or interesting. His execution is also cartoonish crap with his characters having all the depth and durability of soap bubbles; you could turn the whole thing into an actual cartoon and it wouldn't be more cartoonish. There's nothing whatsoever clever or subtle to the film, and Verhoeven further shits on any of the other scifi stuff the book has (like the bugs being actually intelligent and having technology and whatnot, not just literally being bugs) because he's just so obsessed with stuffing every last corner with trying to make fascism look dumb.
And just like with the Punisher and cops, Verhoeven could have put a text scroll at the beginning of the movie that said "fascism is stupid, this is all making fun of fascism, do not think it is promoting fascism" and a fair chunk of the population would've done exactly that anyway because they believe what they want. He really tried to make the anti-fascism angle really blatant to the point of making a pretty shitty movie, but the fact that people still missed the message is on society, not him.
However, taking a classic piece of scifi and turning it into a litterbox of bad ideas, bad characters, and worse writing? That's definitely on Verhoeven. There was a lot of interesting things he could've done with the property and instead made a Reefer Madness-grade film in the 90s.
I think a lot of people have difficulty distinguishing between the views expressed by fictional characters versus the work itself.
Ah yes.
The Rick & Morty problem.
0
Brainiac 8Don't call me Shirley...Registered Userregular
edited February 2021
“And so, in what world do you have any credibility anywhere, to anyone? I would love the opportunity to just say to the world, and to fandom in general, who these fakers are and what should be done to them, or with them. It’s just a bunch of BS. In regards to that toxic fandom, or it’s ‘a win for toxic fandom,’ again, in what world does this ‘toxic fandom’ raise hundreds of thousands of dollars for suicide prevention? How is that toxic fandom? They’ve probably achieved more than any other fan base, [and done more] good than any other group. So I don’t understand.”
This whole thing is exhausting. And given the enthusiasm of the Release the Snyder Cut crowd, it'll probably stay exhausting for months after the movie comes out. Possibly years.
This whole thing is exhausting. And given the enthusiasm of the Release the Snyder Cut crowd, it'll probably stay exhausting for months after the movie comes out. Possibly years.
Nah. Once it comes out people won't have anything to rally around. There'll be maybe months of fanboys trolling about how awesome it was and then it will die down. I don't think the movie is going to get any kind of discussion over a period of years, except maybe as a historical example of absurd excess in a studio bending over backwards for a director.
if it comes out and it's as awful as it probably will be the whole 'movement' shtick will be forgotten in a couple weeks
if by some weird miracle the thing's actually an improvement on what got released there'll be some 'I told you so' and then it'll also get forgotten in a couple weeks as the outrage farm moves on to the next thing
hold your head high soldier, it ain't over yet
that's why we call it the struggle, you're supposed to sweat
+1
Doctor DetroitNot a doctorTree townRegistered Userregular
“Holy shit, Batman!”
Yep, the Snyder Cut is gonna be rated R for violence and language.
This whole thing is exhausting. And given the enthusiasm of the Release the Snyder Cut crowd, it'll probably stay exhausting for months after the movie comes out. Possibly years.
Nah. Once it comes out people won't have anything to rally around. There'll be maybe months of fanboys trolling about how awesome it was and then it will die down. I don't think the movie is going to get any kind of discussion over a period of years, except maybe as a historical example of absurd excess in a studio bending over backwards for a director.
Maybe. Then again the heated discussions around the last two Star Wars movies lasted for months.
Posts
Starship troopers: the musical.
The music should be written by Daft punk.
But it appears that I am the only one who read the book that way. When strangely, I thought the book was much more explicit that humanity were the aggressors; while in the movie you might miss the bit about the Mormon outpost in the beginning.
The opening skirmish is the humans blowing up some "skinnies" cities to make sure they stay neutral. Not "return to neutral" but "stay".
I've always been unclear how to take the book. I can see going either way and I don't know enough about Heinlein, at the time he wrote it, to really judge. Dude's attitudes varied all over the place during his career. Though he was more crazy libertarian than traditionally fascist.
That being said his characters and worlds range from the military-authoritarian (Starship Troopers) to what I would call literal communism (Stranger in a Strange Land). I always thought he was good at having characters give powerful arguments for the social orders within his worlds, even if they weren’t Heinlein’s own views.
I think a lot of people have difficulty distinguishing between the views expressed by fictional characters versus the work itself. For example, there is a bafflingly large number of people who think Starship Troopers (movie) is pro fascism. And even people who understand that it isn’t often think that their insight is somehow clever or that the anti-Nazi views are a hidden meaning of the movie.
The meaning has to be hidden, otherwise that would mean I was a dumb little shit as a teenager.
Would you like to know moooooooOOOORRREEE?
Now THERE'S the butthole cut I want.
Heinlein was a writer of speculative fiction far more than science fiction; his works spanned an enormous spectrum of political perspective. With that in mind, the society he comes up with for Starship Troopers, while wildly idealized within the book (as he does with basically any of his books), is far from definitively "fascist". Individuals have rights, they just don't get to vote or participate in the politics if they aren't willing to stick their neck out for said society. Society takes care of everybody. If you don't want to serve in the military, you don't. Nobody can be barred from military service due to age, sex, or disability. There is no draft or mandatory service. If you can't handle serving after you sign up, you can walk away at virtually any moment with zero penalty. If anything, the more fascist tones are from creepy cultural aspects of the 50s. It's a meritocracy based on volunteer military service. Would it become fascist? All but certainly, because you just can't hand the military-minded the much power without rapid corruption. But Heinlein's goal isn't to change society to that, it's to get people to examine the notion as well as exploring some other scifi concepts (powered armor, FTL travel, etc).
And there's far, far more to it than Verhoeven short-stroking a hate boner of "fascists are bad!" over the book. For one thing, Verhoeven's political angle is so toothless as to be all gums, and "fascism is bad!" as a movie message is so low-hanging fruit for the 90s that you almost have to dig a trench to get any less risky or interesting. His execution is also cartoonish crap with his characters having all the depth and durability of soap bubbles; you could turn the whole thing into an actual cartoon and it wouldn't be more cartoonish. There's nothing whatsoever clever or subtle to the film, and Verhoeven further shits on any of the other scifi stuff the book has (like the bugs being actually intelligent and having technology and whatnot, not just literally being bugs) because he's just so obsessed with stuffing every last corner with trying to make fascism look dumb.
And just like with the Punisher and cops, Verhoeven could have put a text scroll at the beginning of the movie that said "fascism is stupid, this is all making fun of fascism, do not think it is promoting fascism" and a fair chunk of the population would've done exactly that anyway because they believe what they want. He really tried to make the anti-fascism angle really blatant to the point of making a pretty shitty movie, but the fact that people still missed the message is on society, not him.
However, taking a classic piece of scifi and turning it into a litterbox of bad ideas, bad characters, and worse writing? That's definitely on Verhoeven. There was a lot of interesting things he could've done with the property and instead made a Reefer Madness-grade film in the 90s.
Ah yes.
The Rick & Morty problem.
https://thedirect.com/article/justice-league-zack-snyder-toxicity-fandom-denies
https://www.cinemablend.com/news/2562262/zack-snyder-calls-out-the-fakers-who-hated-on-his-justice-league
Um....Zack...not sure what to say anymore. :?
Sure sounds like someone telling his fans to get violent against people who don't like his movie. :?
Nintendo Network ID - Brainiac_8
PSN - Brainiac_8
Steam - http://steamcommunity.com/id/BRAINIAC8/
Add me!
Nah. Once it comes out people won't have anything to rally around. There'll be maybe months of fanboys trolling about how awesome it was and then it will die down. I don't think the movie is going to get any kind of discussion over a period of years, except maybe as a historical example of absurd excess in a studio bending over backwards for a director.
if by some weird miracle the thing's actually an improvement on what got released there'll be some 'I told you so' and then it'll also get forgotten in a couple weeks as the outrage farm moves on to the next thing
that's why we call it the struggle, you're supposed to sweat
Yep, the Snyder Cut is gonna be rated R for violence and language.
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3
Maybe. Then again the heated discussions around the last two Star Wars movies lasted for months.
At any rate, Justice League officially got an R rating, so wheeeeee.