Another Hollywood "Starship Troopers?"

[David E. Powell]

Worth a look here:

https://www.inverse.com/article/23247-starship-trooper-reboot-movie-robert-heinlein-novel?utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=on_site

<https://www.inverse.com/article/23247-starship-trooper-reboot-movie-robert-heinlein-novel?utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=on_site>

[MajorOz]

They claim it will be "...closer to the book..."

Welll, she-yittt, Clell......couldn't be any further.

[Chris Zakes]

Bets?
"Hold my beer and watch this."

-Chris Zakes
Texas
--

GNU Terry Pratchett
Mind how you go.

[quietcat]

Worse is the planned sci-fi network version of "Stranger"
I read who was involved and felt immediate urgent catastrophic need for a vomit bag.

[Loupgarous]

On Monday, November 21, 2016 at 6:04:32 PM UTC-6, quietcat wrote:
> Worse is the planned sci-fi network version of "Stranger"
> I read who was involved and felt immediate urgent catastrophic need for a vomit bag.

Got any URLs for that? I have to admit to a grim curiosity. And courtesy of chemo and cancer, I've got nausea pills. I think I'll probably need them.

[Loupgarous]

On Sunday, November 6, 2016 at 9:10:59 PM UTC-6, David E. Powell wrote:

From the article, here's this gem:

"The legacy of Starship Troopers goes way beyond the novel and the 1997 film, though. In 1959, the book arguably influenced the entire genre of military science fiction, for better or for worse. While some view Heinlein’s vision of the future in which only military personal are considered voting “citizens” to be frightening and bordering on fascist, others see the book in a more satirical light, one which critiques military organizations. Naturally, there’s a big conversation there — and Heinlein himself was a veteran — meaning the source material is rich enough to produce all sorts of contemporarily relevant adaptations."

Missing in all of this is RAH's own stance, neither fascistic nor satirical.

Not only did the author miss a grammar class or two ("Though the Paul Verhoeven take on Starship Troopers is considered something of a kitsch classic among sci-fi movie fans, it’s tone and characters differ enough from the Heinlein text warrant a totally new film adaptation." in which the grammatical errors are left as an exercise for the reader) but he or she apparently missed much of the book itself - such as the veterans returning home painfully and slowly from a badly-run war ON fascism determined never to let such follies happen again.

[quietcat]

http://www.blastr.com/2016-11-8/columbia-cruises-interstellar-war-reboot-robert-heinleins-starship-troopers

[Nyssa]

Loupgarous wrote:

> On Sunday, November 6, 2016 at 9:10:59 PM UTC-6, David E.
> Powell wrote:
>> Worth a look here:
>>
>> https://www.inverse.com/article/23247-starship-trooper-reboot-movie-robert-
heinlein-novel?utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=on_site
>>
>> <https://www.inverse.com/article/23247-starship-trooper-reboot-movie-robert-
heinlein-novel?utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=on_site>
>
> From the article, here's this gem:
>
> "The legacy of Starship Troopers goes way beyond the novel
> and the 1997 film, though. In 1959, the book arguably
> influenced the entire genre of military science fiction,

> for better or for worse. While some view Heinlein?s vision

> of the future in which only military personal are

> considered voting ?citizens? to be frightening and

> bordering on fascist, others see the book in a more
> satirical light, one which critiques military

> organizations. Naturally, there?s a big conversation there
> ? and Heinlein himself was a veteran ? meaning the source

> material is rich enough to produce all sorts of
> contemporarily relevant adaptations."
>
> Missing in all of this is RAH's own stance, neither
> fascistic nor satirical.
>
> Not only did the author miss a grammar class or two
> ("Though the Paul Verhoeven take on Starship Troopers is
> considered something of a kitsch classic among sci-fi

> movie fans, it?s tone and characters differ enough from

> the Heinlein text warrant a totally new film adaptation."
> in which the grammatical errors are left as an exercise
> for the reader) but he or she apparently missed much of
> the book itself - such as the veterans returning home
> painfully and slowly from a badly-run war ON fascism
> determined never to let such follies happen again.

And also misses the point about it's not SERVING military
who can vote, only those who have done their time and
left the military.

And that not only military service punches your ticket
for voting, but also other forms of public service.

I'm with you on the grammar and punctuation errors. Whenever
I see a gaggle of those in something from a "professional"
writer, I tend to dismiss much of the content presented
as well. If they don't know enough to either proofread it
themselves, what about having an editor or even a clever
friend have a look before putting it out there?

Nyssa, who luckily has avoided the first "Starship Troopers"
movie and isn't in a hurry to check out any new one

[Michael Black]

There were actually two sequels, I think it stopped there. I did get one
or both of them in a clearance bin of DVDs, but I don't really remember
much about it.

Michael

[Nyssa]

I saw one of the sequels in a clearance bin as well. I gave
it a pass. Not much else in the bin excited me either since
most were newer movies with a lot of "stars" I'd barely
heard of.

I think the last *good* find from one of those bins was
the complete Victory at Sea series for five bucks.

Nyssa, who prefers to pick up older movies from the bins,
but those are getting harder to find

[lal_truckee]

On 11/25/16 6:08 AM, Nyssa wrote:
> I think the last *good* find from one of those bins was
> the complete Victory at Sea series for five bucks.

Worth it just for the music.

[Will in New Haven]

I was thinking the same thing. I wonder if any of it is online.

--
Will now in Pompano Beach
There was no way I was going to end up in the scrum when I came to rugby - you know, waste my pretty looks. Sonny Bill Williams

[Nyssa]

Will in New Haven wrote:

> On Friday, November 25, 2016 at 12:59:02 PM UTC-5,
> lal_truckee wrote:
>> On 11/25/16 6:08 AM, Nyssa wrote:
>> > I think the last *good* find from one of those bins was
>> > the complete Victory at Sea series for five bucks.
>> Worth it just for the music.
>
> I was thinking the same thing. I wonder if any of it is
> online.
>

I have an ancient EP (Extended Play) vinyl record with several
of the pieces from VatS, and more recently I found two CDs
with the entire collection of music from the show spread
across the two of them.

A few years ago I bought a CD of a Rogers and Hammerstein
musical featuring the original cast of "Me and Juliet."
I was shocked to find one of the songs from the show was
a rework of one of the Victory at Sea songs which was one
of my favorites. (Musical = "No Other Love" VatS = "Beneath
the Southern Cross)

After listening to that CD I understood why the musical
flopped. Even the best can have a zonker on a rare
occasion.

Nyssa, who is getting a chuckle over how the thread drifted
so far away from the original topic

[Loupgarous]

On Wednesday, November 23, 2016 at 6:42:21 PM UTC-6, quietcat wrote:
> http://www.blastr.com/2016-11-8/columbia-cruises-interstellar-war-reboot-robert-heinleins-starship-troopers

Thanks! And I was heartened in the comment space to see mostly clueful criticisms of the article and its astounding contention that "Verhoeven's approach to adapting the material in 1997 was perfect for its day."

Actually, no. That movie was dismal when it rolled out, and Hollywood's even less inclined to give us a good adaptation of "Starship Troopers" today.

I submit as "exhibit A" for that contention, the sad demise of Tim Minear's excellent screenplay for "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress" in development Hell, when Hollywood brought in other writers to try to make good work less good and more palatable to producers. As far as I know, the TMIAHM adaptation is still stalled.

It says a lot about Hollywood that they wait until science-fiction authors are safely dead before committing indecent acts with their work on the way to the big screen.

Philip K. Dick could probably have used the money for the movie rights to (and the bump in sales for) his work while he was alive. "Blade Runner" was the only project they did based on one of his stories while he was alive (barely). Carl Sagan died before Hollywood did something with "Contact" (which at least helped his widow Ann Druyan). In fact, "Contact" was a rare case where the screenplay was better than the book (Sagan spent half the novel grinding ideological axes, but not in amusing ways, mostly).

Jubal Harshaw's Law of Editing remains mostly inviolate where cinema adaptations of science fiction are concerned.

[Mike Dworetsky]

There was also an animated series, which has been relegated to minor digital
channels.

--
Mike Dworetsky

(Remove pants sp*mbl*ck to reply)