[C19fan]

For some reason this year old article is on the top of the most popular list on The Atlantic. I saw Starship Troopers when it came out and I understood immediately it was a satire on militarism and jingoism. The people who missed that theme must of been blind because the whole movie had fascist overtones. Hard to miss how Doogie Howser was dressed like a SS officer with the black leather jacket and cap.

[BenLurkin]

What’s wrong with snappy uniforms?

[TomGuy]

I enjoyed it.

#2 wasn’t that good.

#3 was okay and more like the first one.

[Chickensoup]

The movie might have been satire, I am not sure the author meant the book as satire.

[Azeem]

“I understood immediately it was a satire on militarism and jingoism”

The book is the opposite. It’s also a great discussion on national service, responsibility, and the use of violence.

[jjsheridan5]

Starship Troopers is satire, a ruthlessly funny and keenly self-aware sendup of right-wing militarism.

Except ... the most malevolent uses of militarism are almost invariably left-wing. The "right-wing" uses the military to ensure freedom, and to protect the innocent against those that would do them harm. The left uses the military to oppress, to steal, to subjugate, and for their own selfish purposes.

[E. Pluribus Unum]

Rules.

[thefactor]

Great book. Hot chicks in the movie.

[mrsmith]

The fact that it was and continues to be taken at face value speaks to the very vapidity of the producers, directors, writers, actors....

Liberals always blame others.

[Blood of Tyrants]

One of the points often overlooked is the requirement that you serve in the military to become a full voting citizen.

[logi_cal869]

Starship Troopers is satire, a ruthlessly funny and keenly self-aware sendup of right-wing militarism.

In contrast with the book, exactly. But many take offense at being mocked.

[left that other site]

Right Wing Militarism and Jingoism in the face of enormous evil bug invaders is a GOOD thing.

A time for everything under the sun.

[Captain Peter Blood]

The movie bears little or no resemblance to Robert Heinlein's book.
His book is much better and when you read it he is very prescient about where society was headed when he wrote the book over 55 years ago.

[Mr. K]

I love that movie!

Even the sequels were not bad

[The_Victor]

The movie is a pale impostor compared to the book. The director completely missed the philosophical point of a society that requires a level of dedication and service to become a citizen. In the book, the government isn't totalitarian militarism, it's a free society with a requirement of service in exchange for the rights of citizenship. Punishment is harsh by our standards, but short and painful, in order to teach. The director completely messed up the society Heinlein envisioned.

[Jewbacca]

Pretty sure no one noticed anything but the young Jewess Dina Meyer and Jewess (by conversion) Denise Richards.

[Bayan]

The book was great but the movie was garbage except for the hot women.

[Zhang Fei]

Dumb movie. Infantry using rifles to go after swarms of oversized insects. The book had them lobbing small nukes. I’d say the book’s parallel with reality was with Iwo Jima’s flamethrowers.

[isthisnickcool]

Maybe some don’t Grok?

[dead]

I love the movie. It's clearly a smirking satire at points (the bug-stomping newsreel), mixed with righteous political pontificating ("Naked force has resolved more conflicts throughout history than any other factor. The contrary opinion, that violence doesn't solve anything, is wishful thinking at its worst; people who forget that always die."), hot chicks, great special effects, fantastic battle scenes. Visually exciting, fun dialog, good characters, action action action. What's not to love?

I knew for a long time that Heinlein fans HATED the movie, so I finally got around to reading it. Here comes the heresy - the movie was much more entertaining than the book. The book was endless pontification with rather mundane battle scenes and weak characters. "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress" was a far far better Heinlein book that covered much of the same political ground.

The one thing that has always bothered me about the movie though is the absolutely sub-standard weaponry the humans carried. If you have to shoot something a few hundred times to bring it down, you very obviously need a more powerful weapon. You're in the freaking future, for godsakes! Invent something that stops them in one shot.

[LS]

I agree, but how can anyone not like a young Denise Richards?