Invasión

This film is about the ignorance of conquerors and the fact that war makes fascists of us all. Now that doesn't sound like a lot of fun, does it. But guess what: it is fun (by the truckload - at least if you have a pitch-black sense of humour and you do realise what this film is and what it wants to achieve).

Paul Verhoeven was a master at making Sci-Fi films which worked both as perfect mainstream popcorn cinema and as very intelligent social commentary on the direction - he felt - society was headed. And despite the fact that the over-the-top satirical elements and highly political undercurrents in his two previous sci-fi extravaganzas Robocop and Total Recall were only appreciated by a few critics at the time, those two films became huge hits at the box office: because they also offered great action, amazing special effects and overall great entertainment.

My guess is that Verhoeven felt encouraged by that success, and so with Starship Troopers, he didn't just sneak in some subversive parts: he went full-blown satire. Sadly, that didn't go down too well with audiences and critics alike; apparently most viewers didn't get the film at all (the - seemingly - good guys wear Nazi uniforms? What the heck?). Verhoeven even got accused of being a fascist, and it took the director's commentary on the DVD to finally make it once and for all clear what Starship Troopers is about and what the writer's and the director's intentions were.

I wonder whether the studio execs realised what Verhoeven was up to with that film; maybe the director just took their 100 million dollars and ran with it. The result, in any case, is a unique oddity that I personally feel is on par with films like District 9 or even Stanley Kubrick's Dr. Strangelove. It's a masterpiece. And much like another glitch in the Hollywood machine, David Fincher's Fight Club, films like that rarely get made (and not with such budgets), because more often than not, they end up as flops.

Apart from the underlying themes, on the surface Starship Troopers also has a lot going for it: amazing effects that still hold up very well and insanely intense battle scenes with more blood and guts than even the meanest gore-hound could wish for. So no matter how it came about that a studio ever green-lit this and gave Verhoeven a 100 million dollars - I for one will forever be grateful for this unique subversive masterpiece. My vote: 10 out of 10

Favorite films: IMDb.com/list/mkjOKvqlSBs/

Lesser-Known Masterpieces: imdb.com/list/ls070242495/

Favorite Low-Budget and B-Movies: imdb.com/list/ls054808375/

Favorite TV-Shows reviewed: imdb.com/list/ls075552387/

When "Starship Troopers" came out, one of my friends told me that it bore little relation to the novel on which it was based: the novel had a plot, the movie was an excuse to show naked women. But one of my mom's friends said that although the movie did lapse into a video game, it had sort of an interesting story. When we finally saw the movie a few months later, we found it fairly interesting. You see, more than simply a silly action/sci-fi flick (but make no mistake about it, those two are certainly a factor), the movie pokes fun at 1950s sci-fi flicks, what with all the "Know your enemy! Do your part!" stuff. I'm actually not surprised that Paul Verhoeven made a good movie with this one, given how well he did with "Soldier of Orange" and "Robocop".

So yes, the movie rips at militarism and jingoism (the essential elements of fascism), while also finding time to show the sorts of things that easily appeal to teenage boys: pumped up action and naked babes. Casper Van Dien, Dina Meyer, Denise Richards, Jake Busey and Michael Ironside have plenty to be proud of in this movie. Worth seeing.

This movie has levels. You can appreciate the action sequences and special effects just as much as the subtle, and not so subtle, undertones. Like Orwell's Animal Farm, with Starship Troopers you need to sometimes dig a little deeper into your IQ to more completely appreciate its genius.

I am blown away by how well this movie holds up after all this time. Don't get me wrong this is a solid B movie dressed up to look like a blockbuster. It has got some really cheesy moments but it all works really well. This movie is campy where it needs to be, cheesy and serious all at the same time.

It's clear they used a LOT of practical special effects wherever they could, mostly in human body parts and blood. This is a very gory movie, which I tend to shy away from, but in the way it is used here it works well. I love some of the lines like "they sucked out his brains!" it reminds me of campy 50's sci fi.

Despite this being a B(ish) movie they do a pretty good job at developing the characters. We see them as recent high-school graduates moving onto college or in this universe military training. We see them develop and grow as the story progresses. You end up caring what happens to these characters which for me is a mark of a well told story. Plus most of the human characters are used as cannon fodder against an unending tidal wave of baddies.

I would recommend this to anyone who likes action/sci fi movies with a TON of gore. Think of a cheaper, cheesier version of Aliens but with larger outdoor battle scenes that give the feeling of scale. Don't get me wrong this is not close to being as good as Aliens but it is still worth a watch.

"This year we explored the failure of democracy, where the social scientists brought our world to the brink of chaos. We talked about the veterans, how they took control & imposed the stability which has lasted for generations since."

Starship Troopers is a cheeky inversion of Star Trek's post-currency, post-scarcity universe, one where wartime becomes further obsolete and diplomats are valorized over generals, and where social castes are non-existent. Instead, it imagines a post-democratic universe, where war is the only industry, conquest is the only culture, where jingoism is the common language, and where basic human rights, whether it be the right to vote or the right to procreate, are gatekept behind castes defined by one's usefulness to the totalitarian state, where the entire population is divided into civilians and citizens, and the only viable way to gain citizenship is by throwing one's bodily autonomy to the behest of the state:

"Rasczak: why are only citizens allowed to vote.

Rico: It's a reward. Something the federation gives you for doing federal service.

Rasczak: No. Something given has no value. When you vote, you are exercising political authority, you're using force. And force my friends is violence. The supreme authority by which all other authorities are derived."

Another quote pulled from the beginning of the movie: "Dizzy: My mother always told me that violence doesn't solve anything.

Rasczak: Really? I wonder what the city founders of Hiroshima would have to say about that.

Carmen: They wouldn't say anything. Hiroshima was destroyed.

Rasczak: Correct. Naked force has resolved more conflicts throughout history than any other factor. The contrary opinion, that violence doesn't solve anything, is wishful thinking at its worst. People who forget that always die."

I have no idea why I felt the need to add this quote because I'm just now realizing I have no commentary to add to it. It really speaks for itself. Rasczak is the embodiment of every hyper-nationalistic, militaristically cavalier conservative, as I've heard that very argument verbatim about Hiroshima at least half a dozen times. Rasczak is only slightly exaggerated in that he's so brazenly honest in his love of violence and nation state imperialism. It just blows my mind how badly misread this movie was upon release, because it has all the subtlety of a sledgehammer to the face.

Also cheekily inverted is the character development of any movie in the vein of Born on the Fourth of July, in which a character is rapturously taken with blind nationalism through wartime propaganda, only to begin questioning their nationalism when confronted by the reality and horror of war. Rico's questioning phase doesn't come after his first experience in battle, but in the very beginning. He doesn't necessarily buy into the jingoism shoved down his throat through his education:

"Rasczak: Rico. What is the moral difference, if any, between a civilian and a citizen?

Rico: A citizen accepts personal responsibility for the safety and the body politic defending it with his life. A civilian does not.

Rasczak: The exact words of the textbook. But do you understand it? Do you believe it?

Johnny Rico: I don't know.

Jean Rasczak: No, of course you don't. I doubt anyone here would recognize civic virtue even if it reached up and bit you in the a**!"

Rather than beginning the story as an obedient little fascist who comes to question the state, Rico begins questioning the state and is unsure whether he believes in their dichotomy between civilian and citizenship, only to become a hardened, obedient little fascist as soon as he first encounters the horrors of war, a firmer believer in the obviously evil cause he's fighting for, a character arc I can't say I've experienced depicted through a main character very often. The only example that comes to mind is Bill Hader's Barry, which still doesn't fit, because Barry doesn't exactly become a believer in the state so much as he just finds fulfillment in being good at something (killing people). So if anybody has any other solid examples of an inverted character arc quite like this, please let me know, because I genuinely don't know if this has been done with the same intentionality anywhere else before or since.