Three years or so ago, the only thing on TV was Starship Troopers. Dutifully I succumbed, because when there's only one thing on, you have to watch it. I then wrote a quick review:
Boy did this movie suck.
It sucked badly.
On the suck-o-meter, it rates slightly more suckage than "bowling balls through a garden hose".
I've never spent an action movie wishing that all of the lead characters would just die. Not one of them had a single redeeming feature. I wanted to see each of them eviscerated by a CGI monster. This is a movie where the computer-generated aliens were better actors than the humans. If this is the future of the Earth, then for God's sake just let the bugs kill us all.
Tonight, the only thing on TV is Starship Troopers. So guess what I'm doing?
Of course you'll be watching it and writing another review for us to read!
Not a *single* redeeming feature? Hmmm, I disagree; Denise Richards is *astatically* pleasing, if nothing else.
That's about it in favour of Starship Troopers, though, it's true.
Just think, to review the sequel, you will only need to wait 3 weeks, instead of years, until it comes out on TV.
> I’ve never spent an action movie wishing that
> all of the lead characters would just die.
Actually I think that's part of the "message" of the movie. I won't try to defend it, because my initial reaction was similar, however after learning more of the background, I gained a different viewpoint on the movie. Maybe you want to read:
http://industrycentral.net/director_interviews/PV01.HTM
-----------------------------
Q: Normally with a Hollywood film the audience wants to root for the young heroes. Here it's disturbing because they're part of a fascist war machine and it creates a strange feeling in the audience. How much of that did you intend as satirical?
A: I tried to indicate that without making it into the essence of the movie. Because I think the essence of the movie is really young kids fighting giant bugs. And of course, [the fascist nature of the society] was indicated in Heinlein's book even more than we did it. On the other hand, I think a lot of elements in the film put question marks around that. That was my intention. Young kids starting at three already using guns--is that really what you want?
[...]
Q: You don't think they will misinterpret it and think the young troopers are cool?
A: No, I didn't get that feeling at all. The exaggeration in the style goes so over the top, they realize we were, not spoofing, but looking at a hyperbole of reality.
-----------------------------
Boy, I never would have thought I'd ever come this close to defending that movie...
Starship Troopers: the movie based on the back cover of the Robert Heinlein novel.
I suppose it could be worse - Battlefield Earth? We've got Harry Potter repeated twice in the same week. Not nearly as bad, but that's the exception rather than the rule.
Don't watch the movie: read the book. Besides bugs, the two have very little in common. (Like the previous poster said: "based on the back cover".) The book has redeeming qualities that the movie lacks...
oh come on. How can a movie with Dina Meyer and Denise Richard be bad? It's sad to say, but I love that movie. I hate to admit it but I love bad movies :) I own the DVD and I have probably see the movie atleast 20 times :) I need a life
As far as reedeeming features go, I find three:
1. Absolutely brilliant space battle scenes - especially as the battleships fall from the sky.
2. For once, the humans are the bad guys. We started this war.
3. It speaks forcefully about fascism in the guise of democracy. (Can you imagine the movie turning out quite that way post 9/11?)
Still, I would have liked to have seen more lasers and fewer bullets. The book had much cooler weaponry than the movie. Perhaps it was a nod from Paul Verhoeven to the Vietnam movie genre?
Actually I think your review was way too mild for how bad this movie is, was, and always will be.