The book was from Heinlein's golden era. I really loved it when I read it long long ago. When I heard it was being made into a movie, I was initially excited. I can't stand the movie. I know it was intended as antiwar satire, but..ugh. I'll stick with the book.
Watch the DVD with the director's commentary turned on. Verhoven thought he was making an ANTI-WAR, ANTI-TOTALITARY state movie. He thought he was being sarcastic! Its a stitch!
I love the book and it could have made a great movie.
Robert Heinlein was a member of the D.I. and so we often get asked what he would have thought of the movie. He would have loved the naked women, he would have loved the amount of money his lovely wife Ginny was paid for the rights.
He would have HATED the totally fucked up military tactics and he would have hated the butcher job they did on the political commentary he threaded through the book.
What I found, and still find extremely interesting, is that the satire was glaringly obvious to the European public, while the American public seems to generally have missed it.
There is probably something meaningful in there about how wide the cultural gap between each side of the Atlantic is. We just don't see things the same way.
I'm not being sarcastic :). You make a good point, and it's possibly the same reason Americans rarely have a true understanding of irony and ironic comedy.
I would like to know just what in a culture leads people to take things at face value or not. It's an important question; I think it's probably the same cause that led the rest of the world to disagree with you guys on the matter of WMDs in Iraq. Clearly, there is something cultural going on, but damn if I can tell what.
I believe it was one of the Nazis who coined the phrase "if you repeat a lie long enough, it becomes truth", and I think that's what happened in the WMD thing. People in the Bush administration kept chanting "WMDs" over and over that people began to think it was true, even people inside the Bush administration.
> Watch the DVD with the director's commentary turned on. Verhoven thought he was making an ANTI-WAR, ANTI-TOTALITARY state movie. He thought he was being sarcastic!
I got the sarcasm quite well. But if you read the book it was much more serious. The book really made you think. The book was a LOT better than the movie and focused more on the society than the war. The fighting was just a counterpoint to the story.
Oh, and the movie blew rancid goats because it didn't have the powered body armor that the book did. If you like powered body armor, check out a sci-fi book titled, "Armor" It's excellent.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
(no subject)
Date: 2006-05-17 09:44 pm (UTC)Yeah, I just read the book recently. It was badass.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-05-18 12:56 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-05-17 09:46 pm (UTC)I love that movie. The absolutely awesome thing about it is that it was actually filmed before 9/11.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-05-18 12:17 am (UTC)I love the book and it could have made a great movie.
Robert Heinlein was a member of the D.I. and so we often get asked what he would have thought of the movie. He would have loved the naked women, he would have loved the amount of money his lovely wife Ginny was paid for the rights.
He would have HATED the totally fucked up military tactics and he would have hated the butcher job they did on the political commentary he threaded through the book.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-05-18 12:19 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-05-18 08:30 am (UTC)There is probably something meaningful in there about how wide the cultural gap between each side of the Atlantic is. We just don't see things the same way.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-05-18 03:45 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-05-19 08:15 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-05-19 08:36 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-05-21 10:29 pm (UTC)Also, cute icon! :)
(no subject)
Date: 2006-05-21 10:31 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-05-18 02:18 pm (UTC)You mean he didn't?
(no subject)
Date: 2006-05-18 12:58 pm (UTC)Oh, and the movie blew rancid goats because it didn't have the powered body armor that the book did. If you like powered body armor, check out a sci-fi book titled, "Armor" It's excellent.