Starship Troopers - awesome film!

Richard Dower

For $80 million it looked liked it cost three times as much!, CGI as absolutely ace!, it was like a bigger version of Robocop - but in space!

The (made or tv/direct to video) "sequels" were crap, it's a movie that would deserve a proper sequel, or prequel.

Anybody else like it?....it's got a fantastic performance from Michael Ironside! + Neil Patrick Harris!!

Uber hotties in the form of Denise Richards and Dina Meyers (we get to see her boobs!), had everthing man, big guns, big ships and big BUGS!

irishh_bob

in my top ten movies of all time list

one of the most enjoyable ( bad ) movies ever made , makes me want to enlist in the morning , on condition that i get to shoot BUGS


ps , has anyone read the conspirocy that thier were no bugs , that they merley represented fear mongering by goverments , i.e, our enemy is so evil , thier giant bugs , we have nothing in common with them , therefore , its ok to slaughter them ??

me neither , its just a balls out brainless shoot em up action movie

indough

good film, just not as good as total recall or robocop in my opinion (i love those films though so not so much a criticism)

rednik

I want to be a citizen too. Very enjoyable movie with great effects.

jeffreylebowski

I met Casper Van Dien about a dozen years ago when I was working in a bookstore in London. I told him I loved Starship Troopers and he looked kind of pleased and wistful at the same time. "Yeah, more people in Europe seemed to think it was funny," he said.

I love it, I think it's a really funny, entertaining movie. And I certainly don't think Americans unilaterally don't get it, I have American friends who think it's a pretty awesome and hilarious flick. I think it's a shame it got so trashed as standing for the very things it's joking about.

Kind of reminds me of Scarface (1983 version), written to be this scathing attack on consumerism and aspirational culture, now co-opted as the ultimate aspirational icon.

Duggy747

Awesome film that used a mix of excellent models, great CGI and balls-out action.

I love that last stand-off at the base where thousands of those bugs come at the soldiers.

Plus it had an fantastic soundtrack by the great Basil Poledouris, this is one of my favourite all-time film scores:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CIGHCoVzqtk

TonyD79

Richard Dower wrote: »

For $80 million it looked liked it cost three times as much!, CGI as absolutely ace!, it was like a bigger version of Robocop - but in space!

Dont see how it was anything like Robocop in space. Perhaps a dumb down version of Aliens though

CombatCow

One of my all time fav films too, I didn't see the sequels because they do not exist...DO NOT EXIST!*


*like Robocop 3

G-Money

Have never seen this film but what the OP said got me thinking about films made in the 90's and early 2000's. Nowadays the big blockbuster films are almost all CG and while that does provide some very good special effects, sometimes it's too much.

One film that jumps out when I think about the perfect balance of CG v live action is Terminator 2. Even now, it doesn't look dated and the effects still look brilliant. But they don't take away from the film.

I guess when a film has too much CG it kind of gives me the feeling like when I eat too many sweets or too much junk food. A little is nice, but too much kind of ruins it and you don't enjoy it anymore.

Having said that, I've not seen Avatar yet

jeffreylebowski

grandmaster wrote: »

Have never seen this film but what the OP said got me thinking about films made in the 90's and early 2000's. Nowadays the big blockbuster films are almost all CG and while that does provide some very good special effects, sometimes it's too much.

One film that jumps out when I think about the perfect balance of CG v live action is Terminator 2. Even now, it doesn't look dated and the effects still look brilliant. But they don't take away from the film.

I guess when a film has too much CG it kind of gives me the feeling like when I eat too many sweets or too much junk food. A little is nice, but too much kind of ruins it and you don't enjoy it anymore.

Having said that, I've not seen Avatar yet

Yeah I have a very similar attitude. I think T2 does it very well in terms of that mix.

I also think T2 is fortunate for dating so well, because CG seemed to come into movies about fifteen years before the technology was really up to scratch (and for me, it's really still not most of the time). I love models and props, I wish there was less CG and more live action.

Klingon Hamlet

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBgqiCC2UMk

Duggy747

When it's props or models you automatically know they're physical items, how well they're composited against everything else can make the entire scene believable. When I 1st watched The Dark Knight, I thought the chase scene in the tunnel when the batmobile slams head on into the truck was some sort of actual stunt.............when in fact it was just models. That's the difference between CGI and props.

Whereas in todays CGI you know it's not real and (for me) can end up comparing it to another film's CGI or think "Hmm, that looks pretty good" instead of going with the flow of the film.

I watched Solomon Kane the other night and while a decent flick that kept most of it's CGI to a minimum the

big monster reveal at the end looked daft and really showed the movie's budget. Completely detracted away from an otherwise grounded film.

indough

TonyD79 wrote: »

Dont see how it was anything like Robocop in space. Perhaps a dumb down version of Aliens though

its got the same satirical tone and also has the faux advertisement/propaganda clips so it is very similar in some respects

its sort of like robocop meets triumph of the will/battleship potemkin meets aliens

Otis Driftwood

Richard Dower wrote: »

For $80 million it looked liked it cost three times as much!, CGI as absolutely ace!, it was like a bigger version of Robocop - but in space!

No!
It didnt!
By what yard stick can you say the movie looks like it cost $240,000,000 to make!
Robocop in space!
Ehhh,no!

Richard Dower wrote: »

Anybody else like it?....it's got a fantastic performance from Michael Ironside! + Neil Patrick Harris!!

Its an average switch the brain off on the way in movie,nothing more!
As for the performances,they were just 2 cheesed up showings,thats all!

Richard Dower wrote: »

Uber hotties in the form of Denise Richards and Dina Meyers (we get to see her boobs!), had everthing man, big guns, big ships and big BUGS!

Uber!
2001 called and asked for its lingo back!

TerrorFirmer

Don't forget that not only was that 80,000,000 in 1997, it was also an 80,000,000 film that employed b-grade actors, which freed up the majority of the budget for the film itself - whereas your average hollywood film, if it cost 80,000,000, anything up to 20-25,000,000 could go on actors.

Great film though. For 1997, the effects are astounding. I have the blu-ray and it still looks absolutely amazing. Definitely one of my top 5 films ever.

The second one was pretty rubbish, though it had great special effects - comically enough, the third film had decent acting and a much more expansive storyline similar to the original film, but the special effects were quite poor. Somewhere, in between both sequels, lies a worthy sequel, but for what it's worth, Starship Troopers 3 is a lot better than SST2, if you can get past the ropey visuals.

As for robocop....yes, the films have a familiarity between them, having the same director and the same satirical/social commentary style to them.

Edit: Budget was actually $105,000,000. It says also that SST2 only cost $7, 000, 000, though I doubt at the same time you could find another film of such a tiny budget with such impressive visual effects. Tippet studios did SST2 as well, so its the same team working on both movies, though they were, unsurprisingly, absent from the third, which clocks in at $30,000,000. God...if only the effects were even 'decent', SST3 would have been a damn good sequel.

fitz

To say that this is a switch off your brain movie is to ignore the best part about it: the razor sharp satire. It's a movie that walks and talks like a big dumb b-movie, but it's far from it.

I was at a preview screening a couple of months before it first came out and everyone just got it. The whole of Savoy 1 was laughing right the way through. I saw it again in a packed cinema when it went on general release, and I was one of the only people laughing.

I feel sorry for people who don't think the censored sign over the cow is hilarious, even as bloody chunks of cow fly out from behind it. The propaganda and swipes at the military crack me up every time.

krudler

Robocop in space!
Ehhh,no!

If you cant see the similarites you need to watch it again, biting satire on propaganda, military industrialism and consumer goods all over the place. tons of violence, jet black humour,its all there.

One of the best movies of the 90's imo, to the people who see it as a stupid B movie are missing the point entirely. The performances are all spot on, everyone looks like a 90210 charicature which is exactly the point. The humour is brilliant, the cgi is still flawless and puts most modern blockbusters to shame. The action is still immense, the initial landing on Klendathu with all the dropships landind, thousands of troops pouring out and the flares going off while that awesome score blare out is still one of those hairs on end moments.

tman

Yes... A thousand times yes!

One of my favourite films of all time, and is sadly ignored by some due to it seeming to be just another sci fi movie. There's so much more to it than that, and it even has a great commentary track to boot!:eek: (the only one I've ever seen through to the end)

Otis Driftwood

krudler wrote: »

If you cant see the similarites you need to watch it again, biting satire on propaganda, military industrialism and consumer goods all over the place. tons of violence, jet black humour,its all there.

One of the best movies of the 90's imo, to the people who see it as a stupid B movie are missing the point entirely. The performances are all spot on, everyone looks like a 90210 charicature which is exactly the point. The humour is brilliant, the cgi is still flawless and puts most modern blockbusters to shame. The action is still immense, the initial landing on Klendathu with all the dropships landind, thousands of troops pouring out and the flares going off while that awesome score blare out is still one of those hairs on end moments.

Hmmm,maybe.In general Paul Verhoevens work in American movies doesnt really seem all that deep to me,he makes enjoyable throwaway movies,or at least he used to.IMO.

krudler

nedtheshed wrote: »

Hmmm,maybe.In general Paul Verhoevens work in American movies doesnt really seem all that deep to me,he makes enjoyable throwaway movies,or at least he used to.IMO.

Ah come now, Robocop and Total Recall have far deeper meanings than most throwaway sci-fi movies, TR especially if you subscribe to the "its all a dream" scenario, which Verhoeven himself does, and so does Arnie according to the dvd commentary.

Otis Driftwood

Thing is,every movie can have some deep sub text if you look for it,it doesnt neccessarily mean its there though.


Its like the South Park episode about Scrotie McBoogerballs,people can read into things and put their own slant on it or take different meanings from it,doesnt mean its there(I should add that it doesnt mean it isnt there either).

Sure aint that one of the best things about movies!

indough

that is sometimes the case but the subtexts arent even hidden to be honest, theyre definitely there and are pretty much the whole point of the movies

Retr0gamer

krudler wrote: »

One of the best movies of the 90's imo, to the people who see it as a stupid B movie are missing the point entirely. The performances are all spot on, everyone looks like a 90210 charicature which is exactly the point.

I read somewhere before that Paul Verhoven said that it wouldn't have been the same film or a good film if he had used better actors. He picked them purposely for the cheese factor. The entire film is meant to be a send up of american military propaganda afterall.

indough

yeah its sort of an attack on the principles of the book its based on, along with lots of other stuff

Mr. K

I haven't seen it in a few years, but it's an excellent movie. As far as Verhoeven work goes though, I still prefer Total Recall and Robocop. His films always put me in good humour!

Klingon Hamlet

Mr. K wrote: »

I haven't seen it in a few years, but it's an excellent movie. As far as Verhoeven work goes though, I still prefer Total Recall and Robocop. His films always put me in good humour!

He has taken flak for his use of violence in his movies, but I commend it. Hollywood films tend to soften the impact when it comes to people being shot/stabbed/killed. They make it heroic/romantic/slapstick. Verhoeven shoves the gore and agony and indignity in your face. Robocop rattled me when I was younger, especially the bit where

Murphy gets shot to pieces.

But now I appreciate it, I think it's important that if a director is making a film involving violence, that they show how horrible it can be for the victim (whether they're goodie or baddie).

mikhail

indough wrote: »

yeah its sort of an attack on the principles of the book its based on, along with lots of other stuff

Which is spectacularly annoying for fans of the book.

It gets accused of being fascist and what not, but I think most of that is overblown. I think a full discussion of that would be off topic, but it boils down to that you have to complete a slightly dangerous public service (not necessarily military) to be eligable to vote (which is compared with the exaggerated nationalism of fascism; pretty weak, I think), and only citizens may teach history and civics (which certainly has a whiff of censorship to it).

The book has its charms too. There was scope to make a thoughtful and exciting film out of it without turning it into a parody of the source material. That was just rude. It'd be like buying the rights to Harry Potter or The Da Vinci Code and making a film by that name about the inanity of public reading habits.

fonecrusher1

A great film alright that still looks fantastic for a 1997 vintage.

Question: Why did this film spawn such atrociously bad sequels? Yeah i know sequels are often completely inferior to the original (matrix, robocop, J Park) but whats with the straight to dvd bullsh!t?

Pound for pound ST2 & ST3 must be some of the worst film sequels ever?

I can't help thinking given proper funding & direction it could have been one of the great trilogys of the 90's/00's. It seems Paul Verhoeven doesn't do sequels so thats was probably the biggest nail in the coffin of the starship trooper phenomena.
Maybe some films just don't convert into trilogys?

Tiz a shame.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

blurgh, wrong thread altogether

Evac105

Great flick with a sharp black comedy about it. Say what you like about the source material and the differences between the two in content and intent but it's kind of pointless when there are MANY worse adaptations (many with the name Philip K Dick associated) out there.

thirtythirty

Top 5 favourite films. It's SO good.

I think i probably gave the CGI tv series way more credit than it deserved, and actually quite liked it (apart from the pathetic gun noises) because of the film!

As far as the sequels went, I hated ST2, but thought ST3 was *ok*, but that was mainly because of the Marauders....

Klingon Hamlet

Evac105 wrote: »

...there are MANY worse adaptations (many with the name Philip K Dick associated) out there.

Whaaaaa...?:eek:

Blade Runner...excellent

Total Recall...excellent

Minority Report...good bordering on excellent

A Scanner Darkly...good bordering on excellent

bonerm

fonecrusher1 wrote: »

Question: Why did this film spawn such atrociously bad sequels? Yeah i know sequels are often completely inferior to the original (matrix, robocop, J Park) but whats with the straight to dvd bullsh!t?

Simple really. Whilst many people (myself included) consider Starship Troopers to be an all-time classic what many of us have forgotten in the intervening years is that it was a box-office flop upon release (barely making back its initial budget). You're not going to reinvest in a franchise that has already stung you. Thankfully it came out at the advent of DVD and that appeared to give it a second life that it may not have enjoyed otherwise.

As for making a "real" sequel I personally wouldn't want to see it. It's clear that the characters in situations in this adaptation are so vapid that to scrape the surface of what's going would be to betray the original movie.

It's perfect as it is. We get dropped in the middle of a story full of half-baked ideas and leave before it's concluded.

God I did not enjoy A Scanner Darkly in the slightest. I was bored to tears.

Absolutely loved Starship Troopers. Amusingly enough, it did spawn a cartoon as well.

Roar

the thing is, starship troopers is just a brainless action movie if you want it to be just that.

it's also a biting satire, if you want it to be.

the fact it caters for both these audiences equally well is a testement to how fúcking awesome this movie is!

BEST MOVIE EVER!

(sorry, starship troopers gets me all excited, like a giddy kid)

I'M FROM BUENOS ARIES, AND I SAY KILL EM ALL!

Galvasean

Loved it as a kid because it was big guns versus bugs action action action!!!
Then when I got a bit older I dismissed it as a 'stupid mindless dumb film'.
Only after revisiting it a few years ago did I see it for the excellent satire that it is.

PeterIanStaker

It really is excellent satire, and one of the best parts is when the Mobile Infantry attack the bugs head-on, rather than from the air, at first.

Its gloriously violent, the FX still hold up (I watched it about six months ago), all the stereotypes - the tough sergeant, cocky recruit, gifted pilot, are all there.


and Dina Meyer is a fox.

What more do you want?

purple_hatstand

mikhail wrote: »

Which is spectacularly annoying for fans of the book.

It gets accused of being fascist and what not, but I think most of that is overblown. I think a full discussion of that would be off topic, but it boils down to that you have to complete a slightly dangerous public service (not necessarily military) to be eligable to vote (which is compared with the exaggerated nationalism of fascism; pretty weak, I think), and only citizens may teach history and civics (which certainly has a whiff of censorship to it).

The book has its charms too. There was scope to make a thoughtful and exciting film out of it without turning it into a parody of the source material. That was just rude. It'd be like buying the rights to Harry Potter or The Da Vinci Code and making a film by that name about the inanity of public reading habits.

One could argue that films by those names championing the inanity of public viewing habits have been clogging up theatres for a number of years now...

Nothing should be regarded as being too precious for satire;)

podgemonster

Babes, guns, bugs, gruesome deaths, constant shouting.

'the only good bug is a dead bug'

Reminds me how soft movies have gotten these days to facilitate the 12-15yr old markets, which means no boobs, no blood and guts and no f-words.

podgemonster

podgemonster wrote: »

Babes, guns, bugs, gruesome deaths, constant shouting.

'the only good bug is a dead bug'

Reminds me how soft movies have gotten these days to facilitate the 12-15yr old markets, which means no boobs, no blood and guts and no f-words.

Not necessarily true, the excellent Push was rated 12s and featured some great violence, gore and a few f bombs. Starship Troopers was and remains an 18 cert film it was not aimed at 12 year old kids and to say that action cinema has gone soft leads me to believe that you have not seen Rambo, Ninja Assassin or any of the dozens of great action films featuing Scott Adkins and other released straight to DVD year in year out.

Skerries

kept seeing the trooper uniforms and weapons in other films and tv series for years after

Renn

Heh, we get it, you watch straight to dvd material - a lot of us do. As for Rambo (since I haven't seen NA), that was horribly offensive. And it contained loads of bad acting, dreadful dialogue, seemed like it was on repeat every five seconds, the list is endless. It was just awful and one of the worst of 2008. And I'm sure I'm not really missing too much, but I've only watched First Blood which really wasn't as good as I was led to believe. But that's beside the point.

I heart Starship Troopers fwiw.

trustno1

I absolutley loved this film and will often throw it into the video player to watch (I refuse to upgrade it to DVD). Clancy Brown (AKA Mr Crabs from Spongebob Squarepants) as Career Sergeant Zim steels the show for me in this one.. "Put your hand on that wall trooper... PUT YOUR HAND ON THAT WALL... MEDIC!!"...

Renn

It looks better on dvd. And it looks even better on blu-ray.

FruitLover

Hmm, what can I say? Any movie that pull off a line like "They sucked his brains out..." is a winner with me!

Renn

Renn wrote: »

Heh, we get it, you watch straight to dvd material - a lot of us do. As for Rambo (since I haven't seen NA), that was horribly offensive. And it contained loads of bad acting, dreadful dialogue, seemed like it was on repeat every five seconds, the list is endless. It was just awful and one of the worst of 2008. And I'm sure I'm not really missing too much, but I've only watched First Blood which really wasn't as good as I was led to believe. But that's beside the point.

I heart Starship Troopers fwiw.

I'm aware that most fans watch direct to DVD films, the post was directed at a poster who said seemed to believe that all action films these days were made for 12 year olds, I was merely pointing out that this is far from the case and that even when a film is rated 12s it does not mean there is a lack of violence/adult material. Push being a prime example of an action film rated 12 with violence, gore and language. Rambo was great for what it was, an old school 80s action film. No one expected anything other than 80 minutes of people dieing violently and Rambo looking all emotional as he does ponders the effect of gutting a bad guy, which the film delivers in spades. Also skip Ninja Assassin and get Ninja with Scott Adkins, it's a far superior action film.

Starship Troopers is a great film, one which has stood the test of time and is still as fresh today as it was on release day. The sequels aren't that bad either, the second one has amazing effects and when viewed as a remake of Rio Bravo in space (as was intended) rather than a direct sequel it improves slightly. The third part has a very good story thought the effects really drag it down. Van Dien has said that there has been talk of a fourth film and given the subsequent career part of all but Neil Patrick Harris getting the original cast back together wouldn't be hard.

sky88

i absoluty love this film just awesome it is

dr gonzo

Must admit, ive seen this film a few times and it is fairly epic alright.

Who else thought

the end where the propaganda film is talking about how badass Johnny Rico is was fantastic, really stirring and exciting. Actually really makes me want a proper sequel.

dr gonzo

dr gonzo wrote: »

Must admit, ive seen this film a few times and it is fairly epic alright.

Who else thought

the end where the propaganda film is talking about how badass Johnny Rico is was fantastic, really stirring and exciting. Actually really makes me want a proper sequel.

I actually wrote a script for a 4th film and submitted it to the producers and Casper Van Dien, it was set on Earth with the bugs invading and Johnny Rico and the Marauders engaged in a civil war with the federation and while both fought the bugs. Got some rather nice feedback though like my script for the Lost Boys which I also submitted to the producers it may have been a little ambitious, setting a direct to DVD sequel in a future in which the last human survivors must cross a world in perpetual darkness while fending over a government sanctioned vampire death squad isn't a good idea.

DrumSteve

i have loved this film for years... hearing that music while they are fighting off the bugs on the wall of the base gives me goosebumps.

DrumSteve

trustno1 wrote: »

I absolutley loved this film and will often throw it into the video player to watch (I refuse to upgrade it to DVD). Clancy Brown (AKA Mr Crabs from Spongebob Squarepants) as Career Sergeant Zim steels the show for me in this one.. "Put your hand on that wall trooper... PUT YOUR HAND ON THAT WALL... MEDIC!!"...

it all makes sense now...