By the way if U do a search for In defense of James Cameron by Steve Sailor U will find that Avatar has "Heinlein's fingerprints" all over it. Time4theStars: one identical twin must substitute at the last minute for his brother on an interstellar voyage. Starman Jones: a planet where the entire ecosystem is a single living network. N Red Planet & Between Planets: the heroes R human settlers on Mars/Venus who enlist the admirable indigenous aliens in their fight 4 independence from Earth.
What I find interesting is the movie is made after he died. I agree with ur analysis. Of course, it shines light onto their own depth of intellectual prowness. Let's face it, most novels by Heinlein R over theads of ur average movie producer. Take Avatar. I enjoy the beginning, but the last half is essentially so predictable. I am a Cameron fan, the Terminator, Aliens, Terminator II, haven't seen Titanic. But Hollywood most likely can't honor Heinlein's best.
the music at the start and finish of the video is about 4 times as loud as your voice (what i wanted to hear in the first place) but i agree with your comments
You hit the nail on the head! They have done the same thing to Ray Bradbury and his stories! Ruined many good stories created and written by Heinlein and Bradbury!
@rangeclerk agreed, bradbury and heinlein are my favourite from that gen. i can't get as much from azimov or clarke. i think the youtube animation 'lightglobal meltdown' may have been inspired in part by this era of scifi
Starship Troopers is a great book, but certainly not his best. Heinlein has written both better and worse books. I personally think "Stranger in a Strange Land" is his best work. I also love Red Planet, Space Cadet, Number of the Beast,. His works I didn't really enjoy would be Orphans in the Sky, The Cat Who Walks Through Walls (the ending was lame).
I personally believe the first "Starship Troopers" movie to be quite phenomenal. I am tired of people saying the movie sucked, when it is a great commentary on totalitarian states.
P.S. I am only defending the first movie, feel free to degrade the sequels as much you like.
If you are going to try and sound smart. It's best to understand what you are talking about. I never made any reference to the book. I only talked about the movie.
It's called sarcasm, so, you again win at sounding stupid.
When most of the comments are along the lines of "they fucked up the story when they made the movie," you can't claim that the movie is great, because to you, it's about something completely different. That's nonsense.
This is not a forum with specific threads on specific subjects. I do not have to voice an opinion based on what you and the majority may believe. The first "Starship Troopers" movie is brilliant. The commercials which are interjected throughout give a feeling of a militarized nation state. The symbols used show how society is structured e.g. when the murderer is being sentenced to death, the two scales of lady justice are balanced symbolizing eye for an eye.
I always love how children say they were "being sarcastic" after the fact. It's such a wonderful scapegoat.
Also, I love how my original comment has gone from +2 thumbs up to 0 since our little flame war has started. I wonder who could of been behind that? Hm.... This mystery is too complex for me. I guess I am going to need to call in the Hardy Boys and Nancy Drew.
If you think Heinlein is actually sexist then you probably haven't read too much. His female characters are more often than not smarter, more successful, and more capable than the men.
He is historically sexist in his books, especially the juvenile books. Women are always second-rate to men, the 'intelligent woman' always an exception to the rule. And then there's just their use as sex tools. Quotes like ''a perfume that was probably named something like 'Summer Orchard' but would be better called 'Justifiable Rape.' '' don't help...
- Women and cats will do as they please, and men and dogs should relax and get used to the idea.
I agree, Heinlein was very far from sexist. I do find that the most dominant female characters in the novels generally had a Romantic involvement with the protagonist such as Gwen in "the cat who walks through walls".
They attack RH deliberately. GROW UP. They mean to damage his ideas. They don't want humans to learn that stuff. This is not unintentional. You are being FUCKEDfor a reason. We must beat them down. Defeate the New World Order.
I never read Troopers until I saw the movie so your fears are wack. Everyone who has more than 3 molecules in their brain knows that THE BOOK IS ALWAYS 100 TIMES BETTER THAN THE MOVIE. If you are so upset about hollywood why dont you try taking a book and making it into a movie instead of posting lame videos berating others efforts. Remember a movie needs to appeal to a wide range of people in order to recoup the millions spent making it in just 2 hours time. dont watch movies just read the book
dart, that's a damned good idea. Read books!!!To Hell with the movies. They suck, anyway. The last movie I went to was "First Contact". When you pay the price of a ticket, get popcorn and a drink you've spent almost $30.00. Meanwhile, I can stoke my pipe, and open a book for less than $5.00. Who has the better deal?? =Stefan=
I 1st read this book when it came out in 1960, it was Heinlein's 1st "adult" sci-fi work in novel form. Juan "johnny" Rico had a Brazilian mother and an American father. Earth for the most part was a full democracy, not totalitarian, but soft none the less. After "The First Men on the Moon" Heinlein swore he would never let Hollywood touch his books. "Troopers" proves his fears were justified!
Uh dude, Juan Rico in the novel is filipino, his ethnic language is tagalog. He's mother is not Brazilian, she was in Buenos Aires for a vacation. In addition to that, Juan's father is not American, but he probably did go to Harvard.
Well, I have bad news for you guys. They are going to make a movie of The Foundation by Isaac Asimov. How in the hell are they going to cover a millenium in 2 hours--I have no friggin idea
Actually, though, the movie struck me as if it had a few elements of "Space Cadet" in it also, a Heinlein juvenile on pretty much the same subject. As for the gripe that Rico wasn't from Buenos Aires, you're right, but that's an extremely minor point; Buenos Aires was the first place the Bugs hit in the book, and Rico's mother died there. Diz wasn't a chick in the book, either, for that matter.
A great American writer, a tedious book. I felt the much of the setting and execution of the first film was ok, myself (I know the limitations of film adaptations) --up until the end of Boot Camp, where I lost interest; action movies put me to sleep. There are very few good SF movies, and too often we settle for less. And to those who think you know RAH's intentions from reading one book: you don't (especially one written in the late 50s). He was writer, not a preacher.
Oh, bob, and the premise of not being a full citizen unless you served government service is not preaching?? Read the book again. I think you missed a few parts. Let's start with the basics. A,B, C...=Stefan=
If you listened to paul verhoeven's commentary on his version of starship troopers, you would know that he intended to invert at least some of heinlein's ideas. heinlein himself was not always precise in what conclusions should be drawn from the novel. I still greatly admire the the man, dispite disagreement with a few of his pet ideas, It should be noted however, as heinlein himself always said, the novels were written for "groceries" and to provoke discussion/contraversy..
the point is, Hollywood types don't want people to read Heinlein, it goes against their liberal pacifist philosophy's. I heard somewhere that when he director of the first movie read the book that he hated it. They are going to do the same thing with atlas shrugged unfortunately.
Hollywood's biggest problem is that it is no longer run by people who like making movies. When you only make movies to make money, you invariably make movies for the lowest common denominator ie: 15 year old kids.
the movies are awesome well the second sucked but 1 and 3 weere awesome i love the book allot to but u shouldnt complaine u shouldve actually liked 3 cuz it had allot of stuff the book had u know hence the marauders
Verhoeven shouldn't do military films. He had his "elite" troopers making mistakes even a boot private in admin would laugh at. He also gutted a great coming of age subplot and twisted the rational discussion of various political setups into a joke. Starship Troopers could be made into a great and thought-provoking movie without ever showing a battle scene. I don't think he bothered to read the book. Rico was from the Phillippines, not Buenos Aires. And where was the ballad of Rodger Young?
Why! Why do they rape such good stories? And I have to actually listen to kids from my high school tell me what a good movie 'Starship Toopers' was. The movie was completey opposite of the book.
Do androids dream of electric sheep made a good enough "blade runner" "Make room! make room" wasnt that great anyway but the first prize for really bad movies goes to ........ "Freejack" with Mick Jagger murdering a great book by Robert Sheckley !
Disney did Something Wicked This Way Comes, Bradbury writing the script. Probably the only exception. They can't leave 'im alone. Funny how they kill the goose before it gets to lay those golden eggs.
Heinlein was such an incredible influence to me growing up and I agree completely that Hollywood is destroying his work now. They did make 'Destination Moon' in 1950 that wasn't bad, but that was probably because RAH was the technical advisor.
They say that any publicity,even bad, is good publicity so maybe Hollywood making crap but keeping RAH's name out there is a good thing.
Geez! I never knew they desecrated a second time, much less 3?!? NEW RULE: NO MOVIE SHALL BE MADE OF A HEINLEIN STORY W/O A COMMITTEE OF AT LEAST 3 FANS EMPOWERED TO VETO BS!
I agree 100%. The movies are an absolute insult to the novel. The political views he expressed in the novel, though controversial, were far from fascist or Nazi-like. The films presented a shallow caricature of his views
he came to true sense of what a Fascist type democracy is. an the meaning of somone that really gives a damn about his country will die for it an an how if you want to vote that it should be earned.
Starship Troopers originally was a generic movie script called "Bug Hunt." At some point someone pointed out that the script was similar to Heinlein's novel, and so they did some retrofit and slapped the name "Starship Troopers" on it. It's not really Starship Troopers at all.
Harry Harrison got a pretty fair shake when they made "Make Room, Make Room!" into Soylent Green, but there aren't any others I can think of. Anybody else have a candidate?
OMG! Now a third movie? As if the first two weren't bad enough. These films are bad parodies. Heinlein envisioned a libertarian society, but in these films it was a fascist state. The technology depicted in his novels was ahead of it's time, i.e. powered armor, and suborbital drops, but apparently, no one has the talent to bring it to the wide screen. I agree. Leave RAH's works alone if you can't get it right!
Agree 100%
Toracube 1 year ago
By the way if U do a search for In defense of James Cameron by Steve Sailor U will find that Avatar has "Heinlein's fingerprints" all over it. Time4theStars: one identical twin must substitute at the last minute for his brother on an interstellar voyage. Starman Jones: a planet where the entire ecosystem is a single living network. N Red Planet & Between Planets: the heroes R human settlers on Mars/Venus who enlist the admirable indigenous aliens in their fight 4 independence from Earth.
WilliBond0007 1 year ago
What I find interesting is the movie is made after he died. I agree with ur analysis. Of course, it shines light onto their own depth of intellectual prowness. Let's face it, most novels by Heinlein R over theads of ur average movie producer. Take Avatar. I enjoy the beginning, but the last half is essentially so predictable. I am a Cameron fan, the Terminator, Aliens, Terminator II, haven't seen Titanic. But Hollywood most likely can't honor Heinlein's best.
WilliBond0007 1 year ago
the music at the start and finish of the video is about 4 times as loud as your voice (what i wanted to hear in the first place) but i agree with your comments
blandoworthlessness 1 year ago
I agree completely. But if you want to see an actually good (and surprisingly recent) sci-fi film, check out 'Moon.' (If you haven't already)
sammislawa 1 year ago
dude, hollywood creates stinkers. maybe in the future it won't, but at the moment pretty much everything big budget is tosh
its not personal to sci-fi, unfortunately
lancsFrogger 1 year ago
You hit the nail on the head! They have done the same thing to Ray Bradbury and his stories! Ruined many good stories created and written by Heinlein and Bradbury!
rangeclerk 1 year ago
@rangeclerk agreed, bradbury and heinlein are my favourite from that gen. i can't get as much from azimov or clarke. i think the youtube animation 'lightglobal meltdown' may have been inspired in part by this era of scifi
calabiyou 1 week ago
Starship troopers the Book was amazing. they need to do a complete remake!
Dogmeat1950 1 year ago
1st movie was great 2nd was okay
and the book...do u recommend reading it?
minablock 2 years ago
R.A.Heinlein is my favorite writer and I loved the first movie,but... I would recommend every other Heinlein book before Starship Troopers.
funningincircles 2 years ago
Starship Troopers is a great book, but certainly not his best. Heinlein has written both better and worse books. I personally think "Stranger in a Strange Land" is his best work. I also love Red Planet, Space Cadet, Number of the Beast,. His works I didn't really enjoy would be Orphans in the Sky, The Cat Who Walks Through Walls (the ending was lame).
Not2Sane 2 years ago
I personally believe the first "Starship Troopers" movie to be quite phenomenal. I am tired of people saying the movie sucked, when it is a great commentary on totalitarian states.
P.S. I am only defending the first movie, feel free to degrade the sequels as much you like.
Not2Sane 2 years ago
@Not2Sane
Calling it a great commentary on totalitarian states indicates you don't understand the book, at all. That's not at all what the story was about.
macornelius 2 years ago
If you are going to try and sound smart. It's best to understand what you are talking about. I never made any reference to the book. I only talked about the movie.
Not2Sane 2 years ago
@Not2Sane
If you are going to try and sound smart. You should write in complete sentences. And not leave dependent clauses on their own.
macornelius 2 years ago
When correcting someone's grammar, it is best not to make the same mistake(s). So again, you fail at trying to sound smart.
Not2Sane 2 years ago
It's called sarcasm, so, you again win at sounding stupid.
When most of the comments are along the lines of "they fucked up the story when they made the movie," you can't claim that the movie is great, because to you, it's about something completely different. That's nonsense.
macornelius 2 years ago
Comment removed
Not2Sane 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
This is not a forum with specific threads on specific subjects. I do not have to voice an opinion based on what you and the majority may believe. The first "Starship Troopers" movie is brilliant. The commercials which are interjected throughout give a feeling of a militarized nation state. The symbols used show how society is structured e.g. when the murderer is being sentenced to death, the two scales of lady justice are balanced symbolizing eye for an eye.
Not2Sane 2 years ago
I always love how children say they were "being sarcastic" after the fact. It's such a wonderful scapegoat.
Also, I love how my original comment has gone from +2 thumbs up to 0 since our little flame war has started. I wonder who could of been behind that? Hm.... This mystery is too complex for me. I guess I am going to need to call in the Hardy Boys and Nancy Drew.
Not2Sane 2 years ago
who really gives a shit
sure the book's way and above the movie
it's a freaking great book
but the movie was just attempting to be a sci-fi action flick with a bit of satire, which is anything but what the book is
bigswano 2 years ago
The book was anti-military. If you go by chapter 2 how Sgt. Ho makes anti-military tirades and that there are no draftees but volunteers in the MI.
CosmoShidan 2 years ago
heinleins my last name :D
kurtyballer24 2 years ago
Don't get me wrong - I love Heinlein - but the best "war" novel is Black Hawk Down. And certainly the most accurate.
stigmutha 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Hey, look at it this way; They corrected Heinlein's horrible sexism in the films...
Napalmdog 2 years ago
If you think Heinlein is actually sexist then you probably haven't read too much. His female characters are more often than not smarter, more successful, and more capable than the men.
MoondogUSA 2 years ago 15
He is historically sexist in his books, especially the juvenile books. Women are always second-rate to men, the 'intelligent woman' always an exception to the rule. And then there's just their use as sex tools. Quotes like ''a perfume that was probably named something like 'Summer Orchard' but would be better called 'Justifiable Rape.' '' don't help...
Napalmdog 2 years ago
- Women and cats will do as they please, and men and dogs should relax and get used to the idea.
I agree, Heinlein was very far from sexist. I do find that the most dominant female characters in the novels generally had a Romantic involvement with the protagonist such as Gwen in "the cat who walks through walls".
Not2Sane 2 years ago
They attack RH deliberately. GROW UP. They mean to damage his ideas. They don't want humans to learn that stuff. This is not unintentional. You are being FUCKEDfor a reason. We must beat them down. Defeate the New World Order.
DAILEYericCaryUSA 2 years ago
I never read Troopers until I saw the movie so your fears are wack. Everyone who has more than 3 molecules in their brain knows that THE BOOK IS ALWAYS 100 TIMES BETTER THAN THE MOVIE. If you are so upset about hollywood why dont you try taking a book and making it into a movie instead of posting lame videos berating others efforts. Remember a movie needs to appeal to a wide range of people in order to recoup the millions spent making it in just 2 hours time. dont watch movies just read the book
dartsharkbob 2 years ago
dart, that's a damned good idea. Read books!!!To Hell with the movies. They suck, anyway. The last movie I went to was "First Contact". When you pay the price of a ticket, get popcorn and a drink you've spent almost $30.00. Meanwhile, I can stoke my pipe, and open a book for less than $5.00. Who has the better deal?? =Stefan=
chengloki 2 years ago
I 1st read this book when it came out in 1960, it was Heinlein's 1st "adult" sci-fi work in novel form. Juan "johnny" Rico had a Brazilian mother and an American father. Earth for the most part was a full democracy, not totalitarian, but soft none the less. After "The First Men on the Moon" Heinlein swore he would never let Hollywood touch his books. "Troopers" proves his fears were justified!
Bullettube 2 years ago
Uh dude, Juan Rico in the novel is filipino, his ethnic language is tagalog. He's mother is not Brazilian, she was in Buenos Aires for a vacation. In addition to that, Juan's father is not American, but he probably did go to Harvard.
Oriz78 2 years ago 4
Well, I have bad news for you guys. They are going to make a movie of The Foundation by Isaac Asimov. How in the hell are they going to cover a millenium in 2 hours--I have no friggin idea
BedlamBoyze 2 years ago
Actually, though, the movie struck me as if it had a few elements of "Space Cadet" in it also, a Heinlein juvenile on pretty much the same subject. As for the gripe that Rico wasn't from Buenos Aires, you're right, but that's an extremely minor point; Buenos Aires was the first place the Bugs hit in the book, and Rico's mother died there. Diz wasn't a chick in the book, either, for that matter.
bobgee1999 2 years ago
A great American writer, a tedious book. I felt the much of the setting and execution of the first film was ok, myself (I know the limitations of film adaptations) --up until the end of Boot Camp, where I lost interest; action movies put me to sleep. There are very few good SF movies, and too often we settle for less. And to those who think you know RAH's intentions from reading one book: you don't (especially one written in the late 50s). He was writer, not a preacher.
bobgee1999 2 years ago
Oh, bob, and the premise of not being a full citizen unless you served government service is not preaching?? Read the book again. I think you missed a few parts. Let's start with the basics. A,B, C...=Stefan=
chengloki 2 years ago
That book totally kicked ass. I think it might contain more political and social cometary then alot of his other books.
wdchrismon 3 years ago
I would add that Carl Sagan's contact was given a fair shake. But I do agree that Hollywood has ruined sci-fi.
marcparella 3 years ago
If you listened to paul verhoeven's commentary on his version of starship troopers, you would know that he intended to invert at least some of heinlein's ideas. heinlein himself was not always precise in what conclusions should be drawn from the novel. I still greatly admire the the man, dispite disagreement with a few of his pet ideas, It should be noted however, as heinlein himself always said, the novels were written for "groceries" and to provoke discussion/contraversy..
myxtyplic 3 years ago
the point is, Hollywood types don't want people to read Heinlein, it goes against their liberal pacifist philosophy's. I heard somewhere that when he director of the first movie read the book that he hated it. They are going to do the same thing with atlas shrugged unfortunately.
Vitalon1152 3 years ago
Hollywood's biggest problem is that it is no longer run by people who like making movies. When you only make movies to make money, you invariably make movies for the lowest common denominator ie: 15 year old kids.
Bullettube 2 years ago
The movie sucked! They should have waited for another 10 years to make it into a movie.
CosmoShidan 3 years ago
the movies are awesome well the second sucked but 1 and 3 weere awesome i love the book allot to but u shouldnt complaine u shouldve actually liked 3 cuz it had allot of stuff the book had u know hence the marauders
Rampage1196708 3 years ago
Verhoeven shouldn't do military films. He had his "elite" troopers making mistakes even a boot private in admin would laugh at. He also gutted a great coming of age subplot and twisted the rational discussion of various political setups into a joke. Starship Troopers could be made into a great and thought-provoking movie without ever showing a battle scene. I don't think he bothered to read the book. Rico was from the Phillippines, not Buenos Aires. And where was the ballad of Rodger Young?
oooooDisgruntledMonk 3 years ago
um the rodger young was in the movie
Rampage1196708 3 years ago
The ballad was the music they played to alert people that the ship was in port/ready to go.
Mbast1 2 years ago
ment to say starship troopers.
Dogmeat7 3 years ago
need to do a whole freakin remake of Starships movie.
Dogmeat7 3 years ago
Amen
RadicalDreamer420 3 years ago
Small point, but as to the matter of pronunciation, when asked RAH said "It's Heinlein -- rhymes with fine line."
pnutbutrncrackers 3 years ago
Why! Why do they rape such good stories? And I have to actually listen to kids from my high school tell me what a good movie 'Starship Toopers' was. The movie was completey opposite of the book.
http69ing 3 years ago
Do androids dream of electric sheep made a good enough "blade runner" "Make room! make room" wasnt that great anyway but the first prize for really bad movies goes to ........ "Freejack" with Mick Jagger murdering a great book by Robert Sheckley !
clearly 3 years ago
Disney did Something Wicked This Way Comes, Bradbury writing the script. Probably the only exception. They can't leave 'im alone. Funny how they kill the goose before it gets to lay those golden eggs.
keytoothed 3 years ago
Paul Verhoeven who did Starship Troopers also did Total Recall which is based on a short novel by Phillip K Dick
lukmansiim 3 years ago
Heinlein was such an incredible influence to me growing up and I agree completely that Hollywood is destroying his work now. They did make 'Destination Moon' in 1950 that wasn't bad, but that was probably because RAH was the technical advisor.
They say that any publicity,even bad, is good publicity so maybe Hollywood making crap but keeping RAH's name out there is a good thing.
Redplanetlover 3 years ago
the book rocks , the movie sucks felt totally betrayed by it and was so looking forward to it
captrooper294 3 years ago
Geez! I never knew they desecrated a second time, much less 3?!? NEW RULE: NO MOVIE SHALL BE MADE OF A HEINLEIN STORY W/O A COMMITTEE OF AT LEAST 3 FANS EMPOWERED TO VETO BS!
curious2btoy 3 years ago
I agree 100%. The movies are an absolute insult to the novel. The political views he expressed in the novel, though controversial, were far from fascist or Nazi-like. The films presented a shallow caricature of his views
HansMoleman9 3 years ago
he came to true sense of what a Fascist type democracy is. an the meaning of somone that really gives a damn about his country will die for it an an how if you want to vote that it should be earned.
Dogmeat7 3 years ago
Hear, hear!
TheLogicJunkie 4 years ago
Starship Troopers originally was a generic movie script called "Bug Hunt." At some point someone pointed out that the script was similar to Heinlein's novel, and so they did some retrofit and slapped the name "Starship Troopers" on it. It's not really Starship Troopers at all.
LacusOdii 4 years ago
Harry Harrison got a pretty fair shake when they made "Make Room, Make Room!" into Soylent Green, but there aren't any others I can think of. Anybody else have a candidate?
mraksalot 4 years ago
OMG! Now a third movie? As if the first two weren't bad enough. These films are bad parodies. Heinlein envisioned a libertarian society, but in these films it was a fascist state. The technology depicted in his novels was ahead of it's time, i.e. powered armor, and suborbital drops, but apparently, no one has the talent to bring it to the wide screen. I agree. Leave RAH's works alone if you can't get it right!
emellrob 4 years ago