I know that the movie differs greatly from the book upon which it is based. It is, however, a movie that intrigues me. The movie puts forth a world that has "citizen rule." Citizenship is based on military service--if you don't serve, then you are not a citizen. The movie has been accused of being both pro-war and anti-war, a satire on fascism, a popcorn action movie, a science fiction drama lacking science, and any number of things. I like the movie because it can be watched at any of these levels and because it has an interesting precursor to arena football in it. So, any thoughts on the movie? Have you seen it? Read Heinlein's book? I'm not looking for incredibly deep discussion--or discussion on how bad the SFX or the acting was--but I'd be interested in seeing other people's ideas on the philosophy expressed in the movie. Thanks!
The book has a lot more exposition than the movie--the movie makes some substantial character changes. But both kind of stand on their own merits (at least a lot better than the novel "The Shining" and the Kubrick movie version).
I know what you mean about The Shining. The movie was a mess. As far as Stephen King goes, Salem's Lot and The Shining are provably my two favorite books.
I read something proposing that Kubrick deliberately made a movie that deliberately contradicted everything that King set forth in the novel. It was a pretty interesting read. I loved Salem's Lot--and hated David Soul of all people in the movie. I can't say which of his books is my favorite, since I love elements of so many of them, but The Stand is pretty close to the top. I've never been a huge Heinlein fan. I hated Stranger in a Strange Land and that kind of set my standard for his adult novels. I kind of liked Starman Jones when I was a kid, though. Naturally, I loved the "spider puppy," although I can't even stand being in the same room with a spider. LOL
Among other things we agree on spiders. I don't read much SF. But I'm a fan of traditional horror. Have you read Something Wicked This Way Comes? Ray Bradbury kind of crosses the bridge in that one
I read Something Wicked when I was in fifth grade and it scared the skirt right off of me. I've never had the nerve to pick it up again to see if it's still as scary. LOL I don't read SF much any longer, but I do love horror novels and I do still enjoy some SF. I'd go back and read Starship Troopers just because of an old fondness for Heinlein and to see if I understood his philosophy of the "utopian" society of his proposed world.
I grew up reading Robert Heinlein's books along with those of Isaac Asimov and L. Sprague de Camp to name but a few of the Sci fi writers of that era and enjoyed them immensly LOL as for the movie great shoot em up space western If you read more about the man though you will find that he goes further into the society he crated in "ST" in another of his books Expanded Universe This is what he had to say " It was his intention in the novel that service could include positions outside strictly military functions and such as teachers, police officers, and other government positions. This is presented in the novel as an outgrowth of the failure of unearned suffrage government and as a very successful arrangement. In addition, the franchise was only awarded after leaving the assigned service, thus those serving their terms—in the military, or any other service—were excluded from exercising any franchise. Career military were completely disenfranchised until retirement"
You too? Man, I read every single one of those authors and many more of that time frame when I was younger. Asimov was my favorite. I think I read almost every book and story he ever wrote that I could find (quite a feat lol) including the autobiographies and many of his science books. Was a subscriber to IASFM (his magazine) for probably 15 years.Wish I'd kept the issues. lol
Starship Troopers is one of those movies, for whatever reason, that if I see on TV, I stop and watch it no matter where it is at in the movie. I really don't know why. It is no masterpiece of acting or really plot. But I just like the movie. I always see the movie as a cautionary tale but the themes in the book were probably not meant that way.
Read the book maybe thirty years or more ago. If I remember correctly, soldiers felt betrayed after a world war and banded together to basically run the world for the world could not be trusted to the rich or to the politicans anymore. Everyone is free but only citizens could vote and run for public office. To be a citzen you have to have served in the miltary. Did not see it as being to the right or to the left but perhaps having its own political views of a warrior society/ Sure wilki has a summary but do not know if it has a slant or is objective.
One thing that I've noticed about Heinlein's fiction is that the future always has a great resemblance to life when he was writing--the main character of Starman Jones, for example, is a self-described "hillbilly" who slops hogs and cooks on a wood-burning stove. In the movie Starship Troopers, at least, Carl seems to live in his mother's basement and it appears that the basic social structure remains essentially the same (school, sports, cliques, etc.). Where Heinlein seems to make his differences is in the societies he's drawn. Going back to Starman Jones, (which I've recently revisited), Max Jones lives in a society in which satisfying and interesting work is strictly controlled by hereditary guild membership. In Starship Troopers, citizenship is limited to those who served in and have retired from the military (thanks for that insight, de Orc!). While other people can own property, the non-citizen members of society have no control over their society because they have no right to vote--and even those who are currently fighting for their right for citizenship have no right to vote. Obviously, Heinlein had a lot to say about society, whether in his juveniles or in his adult novels. Given the way things are right now, I'd say that we're moving closer to a Starship Troopers type of society, although perhaps without military service being the limiter for citizenship.
