The Book Was Better: Starship Troopers Review

[@Dorianin1]

A point that often gets missed from the book is that it isn't necessarily military service required for the vote. It's 2 years of Federal service. Rico explicitly volunteered for the military, it wasn't the only path to citizenship.

[@ThreeSeatStarboard]

Nor did the book's History and Moral Philosophy teacher Mr. Dubois say there was something inherently special about veterans or military service; he says the opposite, in fact; rather that the system of earning the franchise through service simply worked well enough.

[@Dorianin1]

It was the philosophy of the book...no one who wasn't willing to be at the very least uncomfortable for the privilege wasn't entitled to the vote. Regardless of your feelings on the military, there's something to be said there.

[@ninjabearpress2574]

There's a great scene in the book where Rico goes through a list of possible military jobs, and the recruiter crosses off all but one---brilliant.

[@leonardorossi998]

Yeah but from what I remember in the book you could still see Rico's huge boner for the military. Of course, nothing wrong with that, just that it kind of obstructed the view of the society of the Federation. I mean, I remember the part about the knife training. That was kind of masturbatory. Because even though you want to show your soldiers as also being capable of being silent assassins... they are not. They are clad in giant power armor, they are equipped with nukes, flamethrowers and so on, and they are deployment involves shooting them onto the surface. So yeah, no stealth involved. And even if they wanted to, I don't think they would even be able to wield a knife while wearing their power armor. And they don't even go equipped with one that they can actually wield in that situation. And if they found themselves without their power armor, they'd be dead. But hey, it wasn't really that bad, and if it's what it took to show us power armor, It's definetely worth it.

[@stuka80]

the overall message of the book is civic duty. citizens of a nation putting the welfare of the state above their own personal gains. It speaks volumes about our modern society in the West that lots of people put down the book as being militaristic or fascist. Its clear they didn't understand what Heinlein was going for. Which was the civic minded citizenry of ancient Athens and Republican Rome, in which Western society is built upon. Yet modern Western critics fail to understand this and criticize the form of government and society of Starship Troopers as "fascist' or 'militaristic" which basically mean they inadvertly criticize Athens and Rome and their ideals as well, which Western society in general praise.

[@SmilingGator96]

To be fair, Rico didn't intentionally join a different branch. He initially tried for the Fleet, but due to his bad grades was left with only the Mobile Infantry. Plus, Dizzy was a dude. A dude who dies in the prologue. He attributed nothing to the story.

[@BrowncoatAllywang]

I can't speak for the book as I haven't read it, but the fascist overtones in the movie are definitely intentional. The movie is clearly a satire.

[@digitalintent]

I find it amazing how people still can't see that. I saw the movie in theaters with two groups of friends and only a few of us seemed to have gotten it. If the little kid holding the gun at the beginning, in a very Leni Riefenstahl intro, didn't tip anyone off, then it should have been Rasczak talking about "the failure of democracy" They also make fun of Political Correctness quite a bit.

[@ThePauladee]

It's been a month, have you read the book.

[@RonPaulBot1234]

That's not true, It might seem like fascists to you but it's a new form of government, run by an elite that are chosen according to federal service it's based on meritocracy.(The book and the movie highlight this by punishing the highest general and the lowest of Grunts, allowing radical changes in tactics and behavior, something that does not exists in fascism) This government tries to have all the good parts of totalitarian and democratic systems. Also in old Greece in their democracy there were 2nd rate citizens, same as the romans you had to do your service to your country before gaining the right to vote and/or even own land. Why should you be able to vote if you are not willing to risk your life for the common good? If you aren't ready to risk your life you don't believe strongly on your views, a leader without a clear plan and a believe on himself, that he is indeed ready to lead is disaster waiting to happen. The book and movie are way too different and not comparable to tell the truth but I will add the movie "armor" is far worse than those detailed in the book.

[@TheWayoftheSith]

"This government tries to have all the good parts of totalitarian and democratic systems." Fascism is dynamic, and is very different depending on what society it forms in and based on the temporal circumstances of history/culture and the people's will. "run by an elite that are chosen according to federal service it's based on meritocracy" That is Fascism, they attempted to created a entirely meritocratic society IRL and according to Fascist doctrine. The thing with Fascism is that they believe in order to reach that 100% meritocratic society you need strong authoritarian top down rule to change the current generation of people to think/view the world differently, in a non-materialistic, ultra-nationalist, socialist ethics & according to NS it must be a race-based world-view. Then the society transitions towards a organic state and that may look like a epistocratic republic much like ancient Holy Roman Empire and Greece, along with Prussian militarism and socialism.

[@leonardorossi998]

You know what's harder than DYING for the common good? LIVING for the common good. That's why the military aren't necessarily great leaders.

[@RemarkableReviewBros]

it's not that he joined another branch, pre se. In the book, you enlist, but you cannot choose what you do. After you enlist, you are tested, and then they determine where you shall serve. Rico wasn't smart enough to be in the Navy, so he got the lowest level job in the Army, because he wasn't smart enough for any other job in the Army either.

[@ninjabearpress2574]

I love that scene, especially when they discuss the K9 option. The book is brilliant.

[@Joaquin546]

Well hold on they offered jobs to him but were highly truthful to what was needed to perform such duties. Like the K9 job they offered him the job but also assessed whether he was fit for such a job. They even said someone like Carmen or Carl could go for the top jobs but wash out and end up scrubbing floors on Pluto.

[@briancollins1296]

The fascist connections in the novel were not intentional. The fascist connections in the movie totally were, though.

[@TheStewieOne]

From what I heard it was charged move the movies director.

[@gethsoftware1]

The book doesn't promote fascism thou, it promotes what could be considered mix of Roman republicanism with Prussian militarism. Fascists only let ideological and racially "pure" people to vote.

[@dadobojart7895]

Not-Necesserially-. Brazil went through two dictatorships, both inspired on the molds of fascism, and in the 64 dictatorship, actually, pretty much everyone could vote. Although, it is worth pointing out the 64 dictatorship was a bit of a anomaly in terms of how dictatorships usually go. For one, there wasnt a "dictator" in the conventional sense of the world, as in, one solitary, highly charismatic leader of the movement: For two, elections were still happening... "as normal". Emphasis on the quotation marks, though, since the groups encharged of it were getting out of their way to make sure only those who they wanted to win could as much as be a candidate. It is still considered a dictatorship because many of the other usual aspects of dictatorships( Overmilitarization, super patriotism, extreme propaganda and media control by the government, the opposition being violently persecuted, and the general philosophy that the citizens exist solely to serve the State, and are valuable accordingly to how usefull they are to the State, the power being focused on the Executive etc. ), though, but as a regime, it is really on a awkward territory on which it doesnt quite fit in any cathegory we have, so we just throw it into the one that is the most similar to how it went.

[@mortarpestle.4267]

+Gethsoftware pp Mussolini wasn't much if a racist, he is however one of the founders of fascism. That is a hole in the theory.

[@TheWayoftheSith]

" the citizens exist solely to serve the State, and are valuable accordingly to how usefull they are to the State," Citizens serve their family, their nation and their race. Its not that different to what we believe now (except the latter in the West obviously because of how powerful liberals have become). The nation & race being synonymous, impossible to separate. The nation is a social construct of race (the opposite of what we are normally led to believe). Nations are created by the conscience of the people, and the people must do what is best for the nation. The state is the political power manifested by that conscience, the pragmatic result of that to put belief into action, allowing the will of our blood to be carried out. As such people of a nation use this centralized power to serve those 3 pillars of humanity, of what we sacrifice for and die to protect. The state as we see is always a temporal manifestation of our progress towards a meritocratic society. That is Fascism & NS. You can't have one w/o the other, if you do its merely half of the truth/justice world-view.

[@1987MartinT]

I think that whole "There's almost no wounded at all" thing is in reference to the casualty list on the wall. There were many wounded, but the number of wounded was tiny when compared with the number of dead.

[@asylumwoes4037]

what I thought it was is that in pervious battles their was so many wounded and dead that the people wounded was nothing compared to before, which would sort of be a criticism of the military of how we sometimes fight useless wars where many people die but nothing is gained.

[@jeanleon1637]

What's funny about the book is that the Bugs aren't really portrayed as evil, sure they're the bad guy, but its only because they are currently at war with the federation. They even say its a shame that they are at war with each other "over the same pieces of real-estate".

[@jeanleon1637]

Also, this did not in any way, shape, or form intentionally capture the books ideas.

[@OpenMawProductions]

+Yat Nami Especially given the film's script was written and they basically just attached the name Starship Troopers to it.

[@andyjacobs7010]

Paul Verhoeven, the Director, said this about the book, "I stopped after two chapters because it was so boring,...It is really quite a bad book. I asked Ed Neumeier to tell me the story because I just couldn't read the thing. It's a very right-wing book." The movie was a typical sci-fi action flick... It had little to do with the book. I mean, you can argue similarities but that is just because of the basic premise that bugs vs humans in a military setting.

[@ninjabearpress2574]

Verhoven couldn't get through the whole book, a tome intended for adolescent boys...jeez. I read it cover to cover in a day when I was eight.

[@AdamaGeist]

@@ninjabearpress2574 Verhoven's POLITICS kept him from finishing the book, and thus the problem.

[@rhenvao2844]

The knife scene was exactly your reaction when he said "The enemy can not push a button if you disable his hand." THEY HAVE SWORD APPENDAGES FOR CRYING OUT LOUD!

[@allantidgwell5624]

The bugs aren't the only alien species in the universe of Starship Troopers. In the book the instructors even go into how, with all of the tools at your disposal, if it came down to defending your life with just your bare hands you should be knowledgeable in how to do so. It's also why in part of their training they're stripped naked and tossed out into the Canadian wilderness in the middle of winter and told to survive (several don't). It's not about the particular enemy. It's about the training

[@KrimsonRogue]

I've hit a bit of a snag in filming unfortunately. I'm a little behind, but I'm gonna do my best to finish it by this weekend. It's easily gonna be my longest review to date, so I hope everyone enjoys it! XD

[@zakle3805]

This movie will always have a place in my heart because I used to watch it with my grandfather as a kid. It was kind of our thing.

[@hariman7727]

My issue with the Starship Troopers movie is that it utterly defiles the intent and spirit of the original book. Large sections are cut from the book, the meaning of certain scenes get reversed in the movie, and the movie ends up being a bad satire of a war movie, directed by a man who (reportedly) didn't even finish the book. No, the points don't have to be exactly the same, but they should at least TRY to keep the same spirit as the book.

[@Amaral46]

The director should be introduced to that new thing called "intellectual property" and the rules applied to it. The new movie promissed to be faithfull to Heinlein's novel.

[@trueweapon8916]

I respect your viewpoint and I agree that the book and movie differ greatly. I think that Verhoeven and Neumeier saw Heinlein's society as one that had shiny spaceships and guns but was able to do nothing but kill bugs and act like them.

[@Malthus0]

trueweapon "Neumeier saw Heinlein's society as one that had shiny spaceships and guns but was able to do nothing but kill bugs and act like them" Which is the opposite of the message of Heinlein's book. The bugs hive mind represent a pure and efficient communism and the Federation is Heinlein's attempt to sketch a society capable of fighting that without losing its humanity and freedom to militarism and totalitarianism in the process. At the time a highly relevant real world political question.

[@hariman7727]

Malthus0 trueweapon I agree with Malthus0, as he said much of what I wanted to say better than anything I had in mind.

[@ThePauladee]

Basically, they did not read the book.

[@danieldimitrov5997]

Don't mean to offend, but I do not think you've understood the book at all. To me any comparison between the two is meaningless, as the movie uses the characters and main plot (as in only the basics of it) of the book to send a completely different message. As a stand alone satire of war and fascism the movie might have appealed to me, but any use of Heinlein's work /especially this book/ in this manner is pure abuse. If Verhoeven wanted to ride the fame of a book for promoting his movie, the least he could have done is use another one - but then again Heinlein was already safely dead and could not disagree, while authors like Joe Haldeman (whose "Forever war" might have been far better suited for the task ) were very much alive and able to prevent the possible butchery of their creations. The book studies the process of growing up, maturing, the nature of honor and responsibility, and the possibility of applying the values and ideals of the Early Roman Republic in a modern society - mainly the idea that the right to vote and participate in the governing of a nation should be earned and not simply given, otherwise it is undervalued and abused much too often. It also explains in some serious detail what "military service" is really all about and why it is organised the way it is. The movie, if you change 1) its name 2) the names of the characters and 3) some of the major plot points, might be considered a not very bad B movie satire of whatever Verhoeven wanted to satirize in the first place. The way it is done, Verhoeven rides on the name and the fame of the author and the book, uses whatever works for him from the source materiel and makes 180 degree changes from it when it does not suit his purpose. Basically, the movie is not even a terrible adaptation of the source materiel - albeit a /very, very,very/ distantly related one. It is an abuse of the book for whatever purposes you choose to imagine. For you to better understand where I am comming from - I am from Eastern Europe and was 14 when the Iron Curtain fell. The book was one of the most sought after here in the early 90s and was a revelation for me. I still remember how eager I was to watch the movie when in came out. Well, you might imagine how I felt after... suffice it to say that to this day I remember every painfull minute of that afternoon, the movie theater hall, the exact place where I sat and the desperate thoughts going through my head - "please, let this be a nightmare", "should I leave or maybe there is still hope this is gonna somehow change for the better", "why would someone, anyone, do this to such a great book" and stuff like that. Sorry for the uber long post, but this book has a special meaning for me, and what was done to it remains ( in my opinion ) to this day the worst butchery done to a piece of literature by Hollywood.

[@KrimsonRogue]

No offense taken at all. I thought I touched on some of the points you mentioned, like honor and responsibility, but yes, I could have done more to analyze/understand the book. Honestly, I wrote/recorded this when I was still learning simply HOW to be a critic (Let's be realistic, I'm STILL learning XD), so there were going to be mistakes/oversights. Not to mention I read the book months before filming, as opposed to a week or two in advance like I do now, so not all the changes were fresh in my mind. :P Still, I can see where you're coming from and can understand why you'd be disappointed, especially considering your particular background. I would argue that the movie, while very different from the book, is still a goofy/stupid movie to enjoy, but you've opened me to more opinions about the differences, and for that I thank you. Your criticism has been noted and is appreciated. :)

[@charlessumner5657]

Thanks for the uber long post. Glad to see that there are people out there with heart, intelligence, sense of duty and honor and responsibility. I was offended and appalled by Verhoeven's butchery of a timeless classic.

[@GoogleAccount-zu8yp]

Wow!!!! Great post. I read the book in 1964. I was a little kid then. I've given copies of the book to people over all these years. I was deeply offended by the movie using the same title/name. My wife. From Hungary at 42. Read the book and cried. Her father had been away must of her early life, in the military.

[@sorzin2289]

Daniel Dimitrov The book is ridiculous. It's worse than Atlas Shrugged and that's saying something.

[@SleepyMatt-zzz]

Really great points here. It's sad to see the novel interpreted as fascist propaganda because of the movie. You can't even call the movie satire of fascism because it is completely divorced from its source material. Aside from the propaganda clips, the movie really has no substance at all aside outside of some "creative readings". Wisecrack more recently made a video that tried arguing that the movie was set in a fascistic setting, but even under their own description made the setting sound like a liberal utopia.

[@VikingPotatoes]

This is probably my favourite movie of all time. I loved it when I was younger. Still love it. The sequels are shit.

[@eitkoml]

The book had power armor, the movie should have had power armor.

[@Melodave86]

Literally everything is better with power armor. Reading Stereo Manuals is better with Power Armor.

[@eitkoml]

Melo dave Washing dishes and taking out the trash is better with power armor.

[@eitkoml]

***** Vehicles would have gone very well alongside power armor.

[@金M-t4e]

no one ever got the movie? it was the director poking fun at Robert's novel [satire]

[@dominicmilan7324]

If the director meant it to be satire he should have called it something else saying 'based on the book.' To deliberately twist the intent of scenes and the book is not to point out any errors in outlook or reasoning.

[@Aleesb]

You're wrong on Starship Troopers as a defense of nuclear testing. Heinlein was pro-nukes, but his point with Starship Troopers was more opposition to the Eisenhower and Truman policies that had seen US conventional forces neglected in favor of atomic weaponry as a method of containing Soviet influence. I recommend reading a chapter in "This Kind of War" called "Proud Legions" by TR Fehrenbach which can be found online and almost spells out the major themes of Starship Troopers to the T. For example: "In July 1950, one news commentator rather plaintively remarked that warfare had not changed so much, after all. For some reason, ground troops still seemed to be necessary, in spite of the atom bomb. And oddly and unfortunately, to this gentleman, man still seemed to be an important ingredient in battle. Troops were getting killed, in pain and fury and dust and filth. What had happened to the widely heralded pushbutton warfare where skilled, immaculate technicians who had never suffered the misery and ignominy of basic training blew each other to kingdom come like gentlemen? In this unconsciously plaintive cry lies buried a great deal of the truth why the United States was almost defeated. Nothing had happened to pushbutton warfare; its emergence was at hand. Horrible weapons that could destroy every city on earth were at hand - at too many hands. But pushbutton warfare meant Armageddon, and Armageddon, hopefully, will never be an end of national policy. Americans in 1950 rediscovered something that since Hiroshima they had forgotten: you may fly over a land forever; you may bomb it, atomize it, pulverize it and wipe it clean of life - but if you desire to defend it, protect it, and keep it for civilization, you must do this on the ground, the way the Roman legions did, by putting your young men into the mud. The object of warfare is to dominate a portion of the earth, with its peoples, for causes either just or unjust. It is not to destroy the land and people, unless you have gone wholly mad. Pushbutton war has its place. There is another kind of conflict - crusade, jihad, holy war, call it what you choose. It has been loosed before, with attendant horror but indecisive results. In the past, there were never means enough to exterminate all the unholy, whether Christian, Moslem, Protestant, Papist, or Communist. If jihad is preached again, undoubtedly the modern age will do much better. Americans, denying from moral grounds that war can ever be a part of politics, inevitably tend to think in terms of holy war - against militarism, against fascism, against bolshevism. In the postwar age, uneasy, disliking and fearing the unholiness of Communism, they have prepared for jihad. If their leaders blow the trumpet, or if their homeland is attacked, their millions are agreed to be better dead than Red. Any kind of war short of jihad was, is, and will be unpopular with the people. Because such wars are fought with legions, and American, even when they are proud of them, do not like their legions. They do not like to serve in them, nor even to allow them to be what they must. For legions have no ideological or spiritual home in the liberal society. The liberal society has no use or need for legions - as its prophets have long proclaimed. Except that in this world are tigers."

[@TitusCastiglione1503]

7:10 Ok, this scene is why I despise this film. In the book, a recruit basically asks the same question, and Sgt. Zim gives the recruit a very erudite and philosophically satisfying answer. In the film, the Sgt. just throws the knife into the recruits hand and makes a cringy joke. This film feels like a cheap, shallow parody of the original novel (given that the film’s director only read the first chapter before he apparently ‘got bored,’ I am not surprised).

[@LionofCaliban]

Agree to disagree? I believe that the movie butchers the spirit of the book, nevermind the armour the MI actually wore. Or the fact that while military service was an option, it wasn't the only one. As for the story, again, agree to disagree, there's a lot more going on than I think you give it credit for. About the only thing in the movie that does stand out is the discussion between Ace and Juan, not Johnny, Juan, about the pair of them being the 'old men' in the unit.

[@karonic115]

Did you know Zim is also the voice actor for Mr. Krabs from spongebob? lol

[@boyssouls5689]

karonic115 And Savage Oppress from Clone Wars

[@Robbinson98]

He also played Lex Luthor

[@jasongradyphstiger6179]

And Alec Ryder the original Pathfinder from mass effect Andromeda.

[@tetraneutron9350]

and the Kurgan in Highlander

[@allantidgwell5624]

To me he will always be Hadley from Shawshank

[@1smallstep]

At about 7:15 "But you're fighting bugs; they don't have hands..." Yeaa…. no. The MI was not created to fight bugs, it was created to fight whatever needed to be fought. Both Dubois and the recruiter lost limbs in battles long before the war with the bugs started; lost them fighting against things that may or may not have had hands. Further, at the start of the war the bugs were aligned with the skinnies - 10 foot tall humanoids. Humanoid implies hands, does it not? Anyway, the purpose of training them in knife fighting, hand to hand, gun powder weapons, etc. really had nothing to do with the expectation that they would use them in combat; it had everything to do with teaching the recruits that they are not the arms and armor (A&A) , the A&A is just a tool. If your A&A is damaged, if it is ineffective against the enemy you press on. You figure out how to go on, how to adapt - or you die. And so you spend weeks or months learning how to depend on yourself, to depend on your brothers, to know they will depend on you before you ever even see the pretty toys you will get to use in combat. The ungrateful little weasel who made this bastard of a movie (it was thanks to the allied military that he did not spend his life hailing der Fuhrer) clearly did not get this as is evidence by his MI's one tactic; run screaming at the bugs, run away in panic when they shoot back, scream in frustration when someone dies during the route, run back screaming vengeance, all but one run away screaming as the one gets gunned down while firing ineffectively and screaming "You want some of this?"... rinse and repeat.

[@jasonfenton8250]

It's worth noting that Heinlein went on to write Stranger in a Strange Land, which was the opposite of Starship Troopers in a lot of ways. I think Heinlein just enjoyed exploring the idea of no voting until service, corporal punishment, and the maturing of a boy to a soldier, moreso than he actually wanted any of his ideas in Starship Troopers to come true.

[@Dogmeat1950]

The Book is very Educational, it's also the only Sci-Fi book on the U.S Marine and U.S Navy reading list and all Military schools in the USA. The Government isn't Fascist, you have freedoms as you would in the USA only difference is to be a Citizen you must serve and no just in the Government. and only Vets can be Elected to Office. the Vets are no longer in the military when they serve. KrimsonRogue you read the book but you didn't understand most of it, there is a reason why the book is Dedicated to "Sergeants" Here is a fine example of not understanding the book, the Book was written in a time when even the USA Conscripted people to join the Military, the USA no longer does, But I will give you that the book is an Essay somewhat Political but it's an essay about the future use of the Infantry and tactics used.

[@scotcheggable]

Heinlein was not a fascist, however the idiot director did not read the book and assumed fascism because Heinlein thought a strong military was good, and so he tried to make the government seem as fascist as he could. Which is embarrassing because the government doesnt seem fascist at all, unless you only judge a nation on its recruitment drives and fashion sense.

[@marudoethiopia]

10:08 Did you not actually watch the scene? If you saw the same thing you was, you would notice there was practically no wounded compared the enormous numbers dead. The wounded people in the clinic are very few compared to the number that went down there.

[@ronniehopper2726]

Also fun fact Gene Roddenberry used elements from the original Starship Troopers novels in Star Trek even naming one ship the John a warden and the USS Johnny Rico

[@aliendaydreamer7931]

Fun fact: my parents nearly broke up on their first date because of Starship Troopers!

[@J.S.3259]

My parents’ first date was another Verhoeven film: SPETTERS (1981). Marriage lasted 14 years!

[@Amaral46]

The director made a criminal misuse of the book. He raped Heinlein's story. Not only Verhoeven twisted the war between the Humans and the Bugs as an evil expansionism by the Nazi Humans claiming we should look for a peacefull coexistence; on the dvd commentary, Verhoeven explains that the final scene was primarily intended as a very cynical coda: it shows that Johnny Rico has become a full-blown mindless war machine just like Lt. Rasczak (he has even copied his war cry "Come on, you apes, you wanna live forever?") and that mankind still thinks they can win this war through superior firepower. In this context, the final tag line 'They'll keep on fighting' can be read as 'They still haven't learned anything'. Paraphrasing another youtube comment: "Verhoeven tried to create a satire on Heinlein's novels, he ended up creating a homage to its philosophy. He did the exact same thing with Robocop, trying to put a lame lefty spin on an iron-balls action movie. Luckily, his grasp on subtext is so weak that the initial (and best) layer comes out on top." The director mocks the military in the movie from start to finish. There is a lot of subtext in this movie that went missing. When Rico is fighting "the other guy", there are two images in the walls taken from "1984". But the governament isn't Nazi-Fascist, it's a democracy. People vote, but they must serve the Federation in some way - usually a hazardous one - to earn this right. This is how the ancient Greeks did. Only men capable of getting a "panoplia" (meaning "full armor") were citizens and could vote. And by the way, Verhoeven decided to put women in the Mobile Infantry and make the shower scene to prove that, in the future, men and women would be completely "equal". What a joke... The Mobile Infantry of the book is 100% male. And still on the shower scene, a woman says she is serving because she wants to be a mother and needs a license to have kids. This is an invention of the director to claim the governament is evil-fascist-eugenist, leftist mambo jambo at its best. What the book says is about taking responsability, understanding there is no "free meal" and the importance of hard work. Everything a Leftist hates.And the soldier in question, Johnny Rico, is Filipino. The director chose a lot of Berverly Hills 90210 wannabees to be the protagonists as, in the Leftist canon, white people are evil oppressors and fascists. All in all, the book is about the forming of a Marine/Soldier. It is also something that every over-grown childish leftist militant is mortally afraid of: to grow up.

[@charlessumner5657]

Too right. You're one of the few who realize just how Verhoeven shit on the book, the author, and the millions of fans who understand the intent of the author. I watched the movie, threw up a perfectly good lunch and cried bitter tears for the values our republic was founded on, and so many have died to protect.

[@Amaral46]

Charles Sumner One thing even Verhoeven admitted is that he didn't finish the book.

[@patrickmastrobuono310]

The reason he gave was is that while reading the source material, he had a different take than the author. As in "Wow, this reminds me of living under Nazi occupation during my youth." Which is a legitimate take.

[@Amaral46]

No it's not. Whenever something is against the Leftist agenda, it is "fascist". He didn't even finish the book, he said it wa depressing and that "War makes fascists of us all." Typical leftist propaganda. Middle class socialist snobs, are the only clever people in the world and they have degrees in Political Science, or Sociology to prove it! Everybody except them is stupid! They need to do the thinking on behalf of us proles, because we must be thick, because we aren't middle class socialists. All soldiers are particularly stupid (unless they wear jackboots and have little red stars on their hats). It therefore follows that any expendable prole can be given "a gun" and sent off to die for his socialist betters at five minutes notice. In the real world it takes months of training on top of an adequate education to produce a minimally competent front line soldier and years to train military technicians to service complex equipment. The middle class socialist is too stupid to understand this! This anti-militarist ranting desguised as movie is a proof of this reality.

[@patrickmastrobuono310]

Wow, looks like Fox News worked on this guy ;)

[@Prich319]

Field promotions happen in wartime, though officer promotions don't normally stick unless the person has the field experience and the higher education. It's part of the reason Rico is sent to OCS in the book. There is actually a field promoted 1st LT in his class, who is attending because his prospects of climbing any higher are zero without higher education. Also if Zim were a little green megalomaniac, that would have been awesome.

[@MethosChannel]

This movie still holds up, it's so funny. Rico and his friends lost all their humanity at the end "It's AFRAAAAAID!" "YEAAAAAH" Everyone cheers haha

[@dehdeh55]

In starship troopers, the book is so much better. If you like ideas, the book is full of them. The book gets people arguing about whether voters do a better job if they have to work hard for the right to vote. The movie is - well - far better as a video game. No thinking required!

[@TheWaggishAmerican]

7:18 just stole the line from the book. In the book they aren't just fighting the bugs- the first intro combat scene is on that planet who's name I can't remember against an alien race that is mostly humanoid and lives in cities.

[@vincentanuneko4269]

Could you please do a review of Frankenstein by mary shelley and lord of the flies by william golding?

[@KrimsonRogue]

I have been looking for a reason to review Lord of the Flies. That one is definitely on the list. We might do it when that "remake" comes out, if they manage to finish it.

[@alexturlais8558]

my big problem with futuristic space military sci fi: WHY DO WE USE SO MUCH INFANTRY?! If we can create ships that fly from planet to planet, can't we build tanks that are remote controlled or have basic AI? I know watching a drone would be boring, but it would be more accurate.

[@Glowingfed]

There are only about 10000 in the mobile infantry in the books, and they are walking tanks. The power armor in the book inspired 40k, Armor, and Halo.

[@chrn22]

No mention of the exosuits

[@chriswilson3630]

Instructions unclear, kids playing tug of war with assault loaded assault rifle with no safety on

[@Dim4323]

Also yeah The black girl went scott free Because she didnt get whipped ...dodge a bullet

[@clarkkent6035]

5:35 Well at recruitment drives and open days Marines do let children handle weapons and Armour, mainly for photos.

[@MadDemon64]

Did you know that the armor used in the movie was reused in Power Rangers Lost Galaxy?

[@megaflamer]

+MadDemon64 no, and now I need to watch that

[@DarknessIsTheTruth]

+MadDemon64 It was also used in Firefly. :)

[@OpenMawProductions]

+MadDemon64 The armor has shown up in dozens upon dozens of other movies by now. It was featured in a movie entitled "Imposter" and again showed up in "Firefly" and others. It's because they made so many duplicates.

[@lessthanwilliam7152]

+MadDemon64 Yep, and im surprised anyone remembers that one

[@Disconnectmyself]

Did I miss it or you said the movie deviate from books plot, but didnt actually said how? You just summed up movies plot, but left out what really happened in book and what do you consider as better story, or provide at least some thoughts those two.

[@boredzero037]

Don't forget the lack of the Marauder powered armor (kinda important), the drop pods(also important), the fact that the director skimmed the book and cobbled this movie together based on his limited knowledge of said actual movie - which resulted in the, "blow it all to hell" cinematic.

[@Justowner]

I think I recall hearing the director never even touched the book.

[@brandonbrown6922]

@@Justowner Barely. He read like two chapters, said "LOL, this is fascist, fuck this" and made this film to mock the entire thing. As someone who actually finds the book actually much deeper than that, this annoys me.

[@ArodWingfoot]

Missed 1 thing. In the book the only right you didn't have if you didn't serve was to vote. You were still human, you still had all other rights, you just couldn't vote on elected officials or run for office. Basically you couldn't determine the future of the society unless you served the society. Granted there are a lot of ways to serve the society that do not involve military service that the book leaves out for some reason. Also when it comes to kids and guns. Remember Texas, most kids are taught about gun safety and are shooting before they become teenagers. Heck, Shyanne Roberts is a professional shooter, and she is only 10! The key phrase in that is GUN SAFETY! The kids holding guns, assuming it was being taught (Thus being unloaded) no big deal. However we clearly see the kids pulling on a gun... That is not gun safety, that is gonna get you shot.

[@taylorwest6986]

That first chapter of exo-suit combat is amazing. Jumping from building to building lobbing tactical nukes. Each trooper being extremely powerful and mobile, but still vulnerable is something I still haven't seen in a movie or game.

[@gryphonofmight]

the book is basically the space marines from Warhammer 40k. the movie is the imperial guard from Warhammer 40k....very different factions

[@SequentiallyCompact]

I think a more apt comparison to the book is Joe Alderman's follow up/response Forever War, which is also a good book. Although there were a few elements I liked from TFW better, I think the strength of Heinlein's philosophy is soundly superior to Haldeman's - at least with regards to having presented it in the novels. Still, I would absolutely recommend TFW as it's a highly engaging novel in its own right with some of its own ideas that are also worth exploring. The film is pretty lazy satire. It's okay, but it's undeserving of the title.

[@Dorianin1]

Not gonna lie, love your bookshelf.

[@KrimsonRogue]

You should see my current setup. Three bookshelves, almost all full! XD

[@Dorianin1]

Nice. I left behind 600 books or so when I left my wife. Was some good shit there. Even had a signed copy of 'the adventures of tom sawyer'...signed Samuel Clemens.

[@alexanderweeks4701]

this movie is the most blatant and obvious satire i have ever seen. it’s hilarious.

[@angelabeyer2497]

...The movie is horrible.... FAITHFULLY?! In what...no! NO! Carmen was not followed at all in the book, she never mattered! She was the little push that got things started, but considering she was never Rico's girlfriend in the first place, yeah. She was barely mentioned. And the infantry Boot Camp was NOT Co-ED. And Rico never SHOT a guy and killed him! And HE was not lashed for anything like that! He was not lashed at all! And it barely followed the books plot at all! UGH.

[@x_nasheed_x9622]

The fact that The original character is a Filipino. But in the Movie they made it a Puerto Rican that dosent even look like one.

[@PikkaBird]

An important point is that this movie was directed by Paul Verhoeven, so of course the fascism and crazy propaganda was intentional. Something that I feel gets overlooked is this: Okay, Earth gets hit by an asteroid that's supposedly knocked out of its path by bug plasma, right? Consider that there is no way Klendathu is anywhere near Earth, not even on an astronomical scale. Are we to believe that the bugs can see all the way to our region of space, map out our solar system + the asteroid belts, aim their plasma butts skywards and fire their blue glowing crap across the galaxy and hit a specific asteroid precisely enough that it gets redirected towards Earth's orbit? Not even considering the IMMENSE amount of calculations that would require, not to mention hitting the surface of an irregular object that they have no way of seeing from Klendathu, just think about the timeframe. We see how slowly the bug plasma travels, and we see that the globs are dragging long trails after them. So it would take these bolts several millennia to reach our solar system, IF they could indeed contain their energy on their way here, and with those aforementioned trails representing lost energy, there's just nooo way (!) that asteroid impact was caused by the bugs. The implication: The Federation had to have orchestrated the whole thing, and with the propaganda machinery turning full blast, it was easy to convince the populace that it was the work of slimy bugs, with next to nobody putting two and two together. So they sacrificed Buenos Aires to get the people's support for this war. Seems very similar to the 911 conspiracies, hm? Of course there's no relation, but I am willing to bet money that Verhoeven put this little thing in the movie deliberately, to make the concept of a big, all-encompassing government even more sinister, similar to his point about rampant consumerism, to the point where big corporations (OCP) are calling the shots in our society in Robocop.

[@jamesb.8940]

Maybe Klendathu has a scientific culture that, in some ways at least, is aeons ahead of ours, so that that they can fold space/use wormholes/whatever to pelt distant planets with asteroids tailored to produce a specific effect. If the Xindi can send an planet-cutting weapon through space and time to kill millions on earth in "Enterprise", or Star Wars can have not 1 but 3 enormous planet-killers, or Star Trek TOS can have a colossal planet-eating machine that goes through the universe destroying planets: the Klendathu-controlled asteroid travelling through space to damage Earth really doesn't seem unlikely. So while a govt. conspiracy is entirely possible, that particular explanation is not necessary - the seeming explanation, of an attack by the bugs, may after all be the correct one. The fact that the bugs are bugs, and that even the other bugs are bugs, need not prevent some at least of them being scientific geniuses. Klendathu society in the film is not described in enough detail for the audience to know.

[@PikkaBird]

Well, the Xindi are at least a space-faring kind of people, and (for all we know) the Klendathu are not , save for hurling spores in any general direction. They may have some unseen science caste hidden away somewhere, but the movies (and books) mention this with exactly zero words, so that possibility is even more speculative than mine. What's more, a conspiracy seems to go hand in hand with the movie's main themes of propaganda and glorification of military operations, which is a theme that Verhoeven himself generally has a major erection for. I'm not saying that your idea cannot possibly be true (fictionally true, that is), just that there's not really anything that I have found that backs it up.

[@ThreeSeatStarboard]

Movie, sure. Not so much the book. Though Heinlein says Buenos Aires was "smeared", he also says the bugs were a space-faring and weapon-using race: there's no reason to think BA was taken out by anything other than a raid with a WMD.

[@ninjabearpress2574]

In the book the bugs travel in ships. "Stupid people don't build starships."

[@leonardorossi998]

James M Well, if I were able to use wormholes to send an asteroid directly on my mortal enemy's homeplanet, I would also be able to plunge that same planet directly into a black hole, and have fun imagining the look of their faces when 8 minutes later all the light is turned off.

[@jamesspinner7764]

Roughnecks was a thing of beauty...Testosterone filled beauty!

[@SmarkAngel]

Dude, you're funny. The writing is good. You make good points. Your over the top reactions come across as genuine for the most part without being forced like some online critics. Subscribed! Great work.

[@KrimsonRogue]

+Anthony Jocko Thanks, and welcome to the Rogues Gallery! XD

[@floricel_112]

"ARE THOSE SOLDIERS LETTING CHILDREN PLAY WITH ASSAULT RIFLES?!" Yes... what's so weird about that? Our military also came to us on school grounds to display their weapons every once in a while. They were unloaded, we were supervised, and whenever they came we didn't start singing the national anthem or something, we were all like "oh cool, guns". Granted, it was high school

[@jayasuryangoral-maanyan3901]

I was about to criticise you for using a 2012 song in a meme, until i realised this was made in 2013

[@turtleanton6539]

Listening to this book rite now.

[@antitroll890]

I think one reason why the book and the film are so different is because Robert Heinlein and Paul Verhoeven differ so strongly in terms of political views. Heinlein was definitely pro war, pro patriotism and very jingoistic. He was very much in favour of America being the dominant superpower, where as Verhoeven lived in the Netherlands under the Nazi occupation and experienced first hand of what a society ruled by the military was like. I imagine if they ever met each other they would have had a pretty heated argument or two, I also think Heinlein would have hated the film. But in my view the changes the film made worked in its favour, I have a good friend who read the book who said the film was more entertaining I rather like the satire and the ambiguous nature as to if the film is pro-war or anti-war or just a fun action sci-fi romp. It's also probably my favourite Paul Verhoeven film along with RoboCop, I really enjoyed watching your review as well.

[@Vara91391]

7:13 . The human race, although already having had skirmishes with the bugs, at the point of Rico's initial training, they were not the main enemy of mankind. Mankind has however in outer space exploration started to annex planets with different races (humanoid in particular). Humankind tried the same with the bugs, which ended up with the bugs retaliating and destroying Buenos Aires. So when you said "Bugs have no hand, why you need a knife!!" that is because at that point when the knife was thrown, the bugs were not humankind's main enemy. No offence, but why make a video when not understanding the timelines correctly?

[@jankostrhun8725]

HOW did the movie captured the ideas of the book? How? When? Don't get me wrong I enjoy the movie, but it has about as much in common with the book as Dune did. It maybe mentions them and briefly glosses over them (or in this case, just pokes fun at them. Yes "main" storyline in book was relatively thin, mainly because it was of tertiary importance to the books themes and ideas while movie focuses almost exclusively (and over exaggerates) it's militaristic aspects. And even as far as war goes... Mobile infantry had a level far beyond what movie suggests, and they also traded powered armour equipped with jetpack, sophisticated com system and multitude of weapons for flack piece and rifle (and also Bugs forgot how to use weapons, which they had in book), so even it's very far removed. While it's enjoyable flick in it's own right, it fails as adaptation on every level.

[@jankostrhun8725]

Sporky Mcsporkins Sorry but I call bullcrap on that. Yes there was anti-communist subtext but it had also a lot to do with raising new generation in relatively unstable times (crime wave, cold war and similar Jazz) and trying to balance between disciplined society and well... collectivism where individual looses value. I'm not going into ethicality of WMDs but I don't recall any of them actually being used, sure they HAD them that's about it, there were briefly brought up and glossed over. Sure a lot of other things IS probably too harsh for liberal west nowadays (like school beating and such) but just because something is insensitive doesn't mean it's impossible to make or inherently wrong because of it. But my question was HOW is it faithful adaptation not why. I would wager most of a former has to do with director being Vietnam vet then anything else.

[@LegoManiac_101]

Unfortunately, Netflix is removing the film on September 1st for little to no reason.

[@jameshalleluyah8133]

My nine year old daughter loved shooting my Ak74. It's America it's how we roll dude!

[@epicbenstudios]

0:27 To argue with this opinion myself, film can be just as affective in allowing the audience to understand it's concepts, story, and ideas if made effectively. I look at the novel and movie for Starship Troopers as two different stories, because at their core, each story is trying to convey different ideas. I mean no offensive when I say this, but, I'm glad you, the host of a series called "The Book Was Better," understand this.

[@tuschman168]

I never made it through the whole book for whatever reason. Maybe I should try again. I was quite young the first time.

[@Farscryer0]

tuschman168 it's a good book. Quality reading for anyone planning on joining the armed forces.

[@tuschman168]

Oh I'm just about the last person to join any armed forces. Tried it. Turns out it is not for me AT ALL! (I can actually do more good with words than I could ever do with a gun.) But I recognize their necessity in this imperfect world.

[@michaelkeha]

One thing I thought the movie did better than the books was dropping the power armor suit things that were in the books instead making them in joe everyman grunts with nothing but his rifle and his paper thin armor vs beings that could turn him into paste it makes them feel far more badass in the same way Imperial Guard in Warhammer 40k are badass mother fuckers.

[@WilliamGarland]

He once was an ordinary house-cat until he was zapped by God through the internet . . .

[@ccanime36]

I didn’t know there was a book, the only reason I watched this movie was I was young and didn’t have control of the tv remote. But this is one of the movies my father and I share our like for. Loved the story characters everything, except for the love interest, She felt bland. My dad’s only excuse is that she’s hot, I agree. It’s a real fun movie so I agree with the review.

[@Makarosc]

Well A lot of people think the book was pro Fascist

[@masterstoner666]

He once was an ordinary house cat until he was zapped by God through the internet! And seriously he goes from pvt to cpl to lt wtf

[@AlongCameASpider]

Whipping and public humiliation = sound like my boss XD

[@cahivx]

Dizzy was a guy. Also jump jers not plastic bmx "armor."

[@khylerbane4523]

Something that *needs* to be mentioned is that in the book they had *power armor* with jetpacks, hence the name Mobile Infantry. The book is famous for being the first ever use power armored suits in sci fi. Iron Man, 40k, Fallout, and Halo, just to name a few, all get their power armor ideas from this back.

[@papi-champoo6033]

Damn sweaty Zander always stealing someone's girl, first Kelly from Zack Morris then Carmen from Johnny Rico.

[@ivorybooker8957]

You gotta remember the time it came out: Desert Shield (Fox?) was going on, along with the madness of Bosnia; "Heroin Chic" became a thing in fashion adverts that President Clinton condemned it; Gun violence, drug violence, 'moral decay' (i.e. gays, interracial anything, thinking for oneself). People were subconsciously were demanding strong leadership. If anything, it too apt in it's considering that we as Americans silently lust after such things. Also, we invaded Iraq with no provocation after we soundly defeated them. The bug planet and space mirrors nicely.

[@coralreeves4276]

Wow how did I miss this channel? I wonder if this guy will ever do Ender's Game?

[@baddragonite]

I've heard some describe the movies "fascist themes" as being completely intentional because it was meant to be sort of a parody of propaganda which is kinda interesting to me.

[@rixlan]

The problem is they named it "Starship Troopers" and it isn't. Imagine "Galaxy Quest" had been billed as a genuine Star Trek film. Those not familiar with Star Trek would come away thinking, "Well, now I know what Star Trek is." Those who did know Star Trek would come away thinking, "WTF? That wasn't Star Trek!"

[@dIRECTOR259]

Fucking TANKS and ARTILLERY!!! Where are they!?

[@ShinyCopperpot]

In the book, the Mobile Infantry soldier is in high-tech power armour like suit which has as much firepower as a modern tank platoon, it's speed like a fast car on virtually any terrain and can be dropped from the orbit. Therefore the Mobile Infantry doesn't need tanks. The artillery is on the battlecruisers bombarding also from the orbit.

[@nton8057]

well in this movie they don't so this military feels a bit too barebones

[@KrimsonRogue]

Yeah, these videos are all mine, and Jurassic Park was a book, as was The Lost World. Jurassic Park 3 just sucked on its own though. No book. :P

[@AdamAus85]

Awesome OST in this film and that kind of world united behind a common cause thing fills with you warm fuzzy films.

[@castelgandalf]

'differently good' i agree. i loved both, pretty much agreeing with everything in your review.

[@NoArtisticLimitation]

“Books are hundreds of pages, movies are just two hours.” Me: So, what’s the difference?

[@jaykay6222]

A book works on a different time schedule. It has a lot more time to develop scenes and characters than a movie does. If a movie plodded along at the same pace as a book it'd be boring as hell and incredibly long. There is a massive difference between a books length and a movies run time, even if you are a quick reader. What you are capable of fitting into the chosen medium in any entertaining way is completely altered from one to the other, which is often times why movies need to be adjusted, because you CANNOT translate them directly due to that awkward time difference. When you try to write a movie like a book, it is noticeable, and it usually doesn't work (I say as if I have data to back up my claim). With that said, movies can cut out time in fairly easy ways as well, some of them you don't even have to TRY to do, it just happens implicitly, such as scenes in books that describe how things look happens very quickly in movies. A character's appearance is immediately shown in a movie. Sometimes they do panning shots for grandiose imagery in movies, or to show off how sexy or hot a person is, but overall, it takes much less 'time' than a book usually needs to get the same amount of information across to the reader. Anyway, point simply is that there is a difference, if you want to look up more then I'd hit up google.

[@pauln9297]

A solid overview of the movie but you seem to lose focus of comparing the movie to the book.

[@rodechsyrinx1406]

I disagree that books are ALWAYS better than the movies. A clockwork orange, Psycho, Planet of the apes, Jurrasic park, Dr. Strangelove, the shining; these are great examples of the films being superior to their literary counterparts. in my view anyhow

[@ninjabearpress2574]

The book is always better than any movie. After Destination Moon Heinlein said Hollywood would make another movie based on his stories over his dead body, which is what these bungholes did---but even if you detach from the book (Verhoven admits he didn't read the whole thing, a book meant for adolescent boys) this movie is about as dumb as it gets, and the reason Jar-Jar Abrams has a career.

[@MidgardMessiah]

'Lootenant Rayzak' hahaha nice

[@Isaac-gh5ku]

5:20 Starship Troopers universe is pretty lax on that law.

[@klonoa450]

Haha loved that part

[@duaneninjaray]

I jus wanna go on record saying that both versions of Zim are equally awesome lol

[@jameslear4188]

When the cap troopers were giving the children the Moritas, the weapons were de-activated so they couldn't fire at all.Feel free to challenge my explanation, but be aware that I'm a very strong fan for Starship Troopers, and rely on my expertise in the area and on the credibility of the previous statement.

[@michaelmegson2778]

I mean you aren't wrong but the situation is still fucked since they're making a propaganda piece to indoctrinate children into the military, which happens to be a glorified meat grinder in the movie.

[@TN-xx4ih]

I kinda like the world of Starship troopers tbh

[@ganjaman59650]

again the guy never say WHY the book is better than the movie...this is disapointting, the film is a piece of art, a masterpiece of 90's engineering.

[@lgmmrm]

ganjaman the film is a piece of leftist bunk modified from an unrelated script to criticize a book that Vershitsoeven never even read. The book was 1000x times better than the movie.

[@TheBoshman95]

Am I the only one that thinks this would have made an amazing N64 game? I mean, we kinda got Perfect Dark, but a real Starship Trooper game.

[@JonathanLundkvist]

Not a minute in and I disgree with you already. Good start! :D I must however commend you for the good production.

[@ODSTOninersIxTwO]

gotta realize that in a little area like that there can be what? 20-50 people injuried when the attack had like 100,000+ people

[@bartkatastroof6150]

ok i wanne read the book now and you are awsome

[@JessOkami]

I never cared for Xander as a character, but the brain bug scene gave me nightmares as a kid.

[@DeepPastry]

The movie was about fascism being just the bestest. The book was about civil service being required to vote. People who are bad at reading confused civil service for Fascism. The specific story was about Rico deciding to join the military for his civil service.

[@ODSTOninersIxTwO]

yo u gonna do STI?

[@kylemma33]

The movie wouldn't of been so bad if it was a stand alone title and not based on any book. But the fact that its clearly a parody of the book is a slap in the face to Heinlein. The movie spends the entire run time spreading the directors political philosophy.

[@StevenSeril]

"Sounds like my boss"

[@Ch4os4ever]

I highly suggest watching the politics of starship troopers by sargon of akkad.

[@Mashmarriner69]

I personally loved both. I just wish they had the power armour in the movie.

[@redseagaming7832]

honestly I think a movie can be 2 to 3 hours a book can be anywhere from 100 pages to a thousand pages. a video game can be 10 to 100 hours or more I say video games can tell a story better than a movie as well as a book. the difference between a book and a movie is the visual you only have two to three hours to make your point while book you can take all the time you want to use your imagination while playing a video game you get to experience the story once again at your own pace just like a book.

[@jamestomato1744]

I mean, games have the added advantage of being able to immerse you into it's narrative and world as well as be more engaging and feel attached to characters and story beats since it is YOU who is taking lead as the main character so any decisions made ends up reflecting back to you, the player. Honestly, there's no contest. It goes books --> movies --> video games.

[@PK-MegaLolCaT]

2:18 it IS! Robert A. Heinlein wrote a book about how fascist could actually work properly in the right conditions Aka.. having an escape goat For its racist nature that lacks any sort of human qualities .. " aliens or bug" in this case the book is rather subtle about this but an easy give away is the reason this story event takes place in the future of space colonization its all a metaphor StarShip Trooper = SS Troopers

[@Malthus0]

"Robert A. Heinlein wrote a book about how fascist could actually work properly in the right conditions Aka.. having an escape goat For its racist nature that lacks any sort of human qualities .. " aliens or bug" in this case" Absolutely not. Go and read (or listen the audiobook is free on youtube) again. The Federation has two controversial elements public corporal punishment (flogging) for some crimes, and the restricted franchise where only those who have undertaken state service can vote. Apart from those two elements the Federation is just like the America he was writing in with all the rights that modern western people have come to expect such as total free speech. The Federation completely lacks the main elements of Fascism. Such as a supreme leader, and leadership cult. Extreme nationalism (the book has no nationalism), the militarization of society, any kind of secret police or propaganda system. There is no racism there ether the main character is 'Juan' a Puerto Rican. Politically the Federation is actually a federation. That is all of the member nations are autonomous with complete control over their own culture and educational narrative. This is the opposite of Fascist ideas that idolize the unity of one state with one identity whose national will is encapsulated in the leader and his party. (FYI the Italian word fascism is based on the Roman symbol for unity, a bundle of sticks with an axe in it. Each stick can be broken easily but bound together they are unbreakable). People are misled by the military theme of the book to thinking it advocates those military values for society. When it is in fact the opposite. The military values are only for the military and serve to keep it a small but effective elite that does not need to resort to the advertising glorifying soldiering seen in the film or to conscription (in fact the ideology of the Federation is completely against conscription). Heinlein actually wrote in the book that the Federation military was the smallest in history in terms of the population served. What the book is really about is the cold war. The book has a character explicitly state the bugs are a perfectly efficient communist hive mind evolved to the task(unlike humans). The Federation is Heinlein's attempt to sketch a society capable of fighting that without losing its humanity and freedom to militarism and totalitarianism in the process. Which is where the most controversial element the lack of voting without service comes in. The theory is that people will only understand the value and the duty to vote if they have risked and sacrificed to get it. If you look to where Heinlein got this idea it wasn't from Nazi Germany or Fascist Italy but from the city states & republics of the ancient Greeks and Italians. If anything the book is about how a robust civic republicanism can maintain freedom even when under extreme military threat.

[@KamiRecca]

I always read Starship Troopers as the warning tale of military indoctrination. As we follow Rico through his career (oh and i guess Spoilers?) he keeps losing the things close to him to the military life. First his friends who either die or becomes estranged officers in other branches of the army, then mentors, then his own flesh as he sustains injuries and finaly the last family bond he has when his father joins up and becomes his subordinate, removing their father/son relationship in favor of a officer/trooper one. In the end Rico the questioning civilian is no more, only Rico the Trooper exists, and he is nothing more than another kog in the military machine, having little personality other than his military role and the only remnant of his personality that remains is the military legend that has built up around him. P.S Yea i know, not the authors intent, but Death of the Author ftw

[@georgethompson1460]

That is probably the least charitable interpretation of the book i've ever seen, at no point do we see Rico become an emotionless cog. In fact from reading the book we see Rico coming to better understand the values of his society and gain an appreciation for the system.

[@KamiRecca]

@@georgethompson1460 and this is the beauty of Death of the Autor concept. Thats a fascinating difference

[@AdamaGeist]

@@KamiRecca There's Death of the Author, as in 'Orson Scott Card, the homophobe, never intended his classic novel 'Ender's Game' to reach the hearts of so many LGBT kids who see themselves in the othering of Ender' and then there's this nonsense of a take you're bringing to the table. This isn't death of the author, this is just personal bias. It's like seeing someone reading The Green Mile and claiming the book is telling you not to try and prove the innocence of people on death row, because they're going to just die anyway.

[@KamiRecca]

@@AdamaGeist i dont think you understand the concept, so here it is Death of the Author: The authors intent carries no weight, instead its up to the readers to find or understand their own m meaning and intent of a book. And here is the important part; no one take is supperior or inferior to any other.

[@AdamaGeist]

@@KamiRecca I understand the concept perfectly, I just don't ascribe to your interpretation, nor for that matter do I hold to the concept of moral relativism that your second point requires. And to point out why, I'll use another analogy. You could tell me that because of death of the Author, you take Mein Kamph as an instructional text on WEIGHT LIFTING, and for that reason everyone should read it, and I would not be required to hold your interpretation's value as equal to anyone else's. This is because before one's interpretation, regardless to whatever application of 'Death of the Author' as a concept is trotted out by some mush-mouthed moron who wishes to gain validity to the nonsense they're about to spew, still requires a base level of READING COMPREHENSION to begin with, and more so an understanding of how PERSONAL BIAS is a factor into whatever interpretation finally results from it. So no, I don't care how you believe Death of the Author gives some validity to your pet theory that 'The Hungry Hungry Caterpillar' is a scathing rebuke of Pinochet's Fascist regime, because in order for your takes to be considered legitimate, it would require you to be able to show that your interpretations came from the TEXT, rather than from the worms crawling around inside your brain.

[@MultiNihil]

I just discovered your show and i really enjoyed it. I will se more in the future, but only one remark: Why there is not any image of the book? If while you are talking about it yiu are showing footage of the movie i get confused. Show both

[@UCUCUC27]

he was once an ordinary house cat.....