I presume everyone has read this book (if not why not?) and that most people
knew that there was this big budget movie of it being made seeing that SciFi
is in since Incoherence Day was massive..
Well, I've just seen some shots of the movie in the new Empire magazine
(December 1996 edition) and THEY AREN'T WEARING POWERED ARMOUR. They've
got these bizarre swat-grey Aliens style combat wuits on and normal sort
of rifles. In fact they look more like contestants from 'Gladiators' than
marines.
AaaaaaaRRGGHH! The only cool thing about the bloody book and they can't be
bothered with it. No pogoing over houses or any of that, no 30 second
bombs.. Apparently it's ended up like a hi-budget version of the old B-
movie 'Them'. The bugs look cool but frankly I'm severely upset. I always knew
Verhoeven couldn't direct for toffee but the only thing this seems to share
with the book is the bloomin' title..
TTFN
Jon
I thought this movie was plagued with a budget problem; the bugs cost so much
that they couldn't afford power armor.
I also thought maybe a director might be intimidated by trying to tell a story
where you can't see the faces during the fight scenes, but this guy did
Robocop, too, right?
Tom
Are we talking about a film based on Robert Henleins Book? Have I been
living a black hole again and not spotted a bit of Hollywood hype?
And as an added bonus, I've heard that Verhoven/the writers gutted all
of the political context from the book, which were some interesting points
even if you don't share the view. I expected them to gut the books message,
but you would have thought that the PA would be a special effect worth
keeping.....
Later Brian
> Jon writes:
> They've
I was afraid of that! One of my all time favorite books.... :-(
Oh well, I guess we'll have to do our own SGII version! If anyone's
interested, I can dig out my old Starship Troopers board game and list the
TO&E for mobile infantry platoons for conversion to SGII.
> On Fri, 8 Nov 1996 BJCantwell@aol.com wrote:
> And as an added bonus, I've heard that Verhoven/the writers gutted all
Just what is this "political context." I have not read ST yet (I've got a
copy, I just need to set aside the time to read it.) The blurb on the
backcover says that it's considered Heinlien's most "contraversial" novel.
Why, is that?
Later, Mark A. Siefert
"Aye, fight and you may die. Run, and you'll live...at least awhile. And dying
in your beds, many years from now, would you be willing to trade
all the days from this day to that for one chance--just one chance--to
come back here and tell our enemies that they may take our lives but they'll
never take our FREEDOM!"
--Mel Gibson (as Sir William
Wallace) "Braveheart"
> Just what is this "political context." I have not read ST yet
It is hard to see why _Starship Troopers_ would be Heinlein's most
"contraversial", especially when comparted to _Stranger in a Strange
Land_.
As far as political goes, well at one place in ST he suggests that the only
people who have been in the miltary can vote. Of course this is based on my
reading the book over 20 years ago.
Enjoy,
> Man, you'd have to be pretty young to swallow the political
The point of reading fiction is not to indoctrinate oneself into a fiction
writer's perspective of the story, but to appreciate the craft of the book and
what it is attempting to portray.( In my opinion.) I for one have always found
Heinlein to be a Jolly good read!! Starship Troopers was innovative in a
number of ways, especially as to the portrayal of Military Science Fiction.
Anyone who enjoyed John Carpenter's Aliens film should realize that it owes a
big hat tip to ST.
> On Fri, 8 Nov 1996, <cthulhu@csd.uwm.edu> wrote:
The political context of the novel is interesting, because it makes the point
that the Universe is a hostile place to live, regardless of how peaceful
others might want it to be. It stresses that you have to fight for your
freedom if you want to keep it, and if you don't fight then someone (or
something) will take it away from you. Remember, this book
was targeted at 14-18 year old boys, and this was thought to be a strong
message to give to politically naive schoolkids.
It was controversial when it was first published because it postulated a world
government, with the U.S.A. and the U.S.S.R. joining forces at some point in
the future. This is a fairly common convention in a lot of
modern science-fiction, but during the Cold War the very idea of joining
forces with "those evil commies" was thought to be treasonous by some of the
more vituperative guardians of The American Way.
Hmmm...I seem to be slipping back into American politics. Sorry, Alan!
In message <Pine.OSF.3.91.961108112413.21153C@alpha1.csd.uwm.edu> " writes:
> Just what is this "political context." I have not read ST yet
I have recently read ST, for no better reason than the film was being
discussed on the 'net.
It isn't very good, although I do realise that I'm above the age group that it
is aimed at. I thoroughly recommend not reading it.
Man, you'd have to be pretty young to swallow the political bullshit Heinlein
peddles. He portrays a sort of utopia where the
young are indocrinated with right-thinking "moral philosophy". At
one point the main character is required to demonstrate *mathematically* some
point of morality. Perhaps the irony just went over my head?
So we have an account of a young man's military career written specifically to
illuminate points of "moral philosophy" and just basically ram it down your
throat.
Other than that there is no point to the book, no real plot. A faithful film
of it could not be done, although a crafty writer could have satirised it
nicely (leaving Mr.Rico as a slavering brainwashed xenophobic psycopath at the
film's end).
Mr.Verhoeven, being, I think, a Dutchman, may a have a somewhat different
viewpoint to Mr.Heinlein. Heinlein had a jolly good WWII, being an American
invalided out of Annapolis. Holland had a pretty poor WWII, what with all
those enemy soldiers swanning
about with all their character-building martial values.
Tom Granvold writes,
> > Just what is this "political context." I have not read ST yet
The
> > blurb on the backcover says that it's considered Heinlien's most
It depends on your point of view. In the 60's, when both book were published,
_Stranger's_ free-love anti-religeon themes were almost mainstream. (Of
course, I'm oversimplifying a fairly complex book here.)
> As far as political goes, well at one place in ST he suggests that
Right, only veterans can vote (tho' active duty military can't). The book also
advocates capital punishment (hanging), corporal punishment (flogging), and
has some generally unfavorable things to say about modern social
liberalism. His military views are also seriously out-of-step with
conventional wisdom -- and I mean that as a compliment!!
When I was in the Army (not *too* long ago), _Starship Troopers_ used to
routinely show up on recommended military reading lists -- the only
sci-fi I
ever saw do so. Well worth the read.
> It isn't very good, although I do realise that I'm above the age
[SNIP]
While I don't agree with the rest of the poster's anti-military
diatribe, I agree wholeheartedly that Heinlein couldn't write a convincing
birthday card. He's a hack.
The basic political message of Starship Troopers is that the voting franchise
is not a right that one simple gets by being a citizen, but one that must be
earned. In the book, everyone is a citizen with full protection and rights of
the law. However, in order to earn the right to vote, an individual must
serve the government/people in some way, be that the military or some
civil service. There are a few other ideas in there, but that one is one of
the biggest. Read the book, its one of Robert A's best.
Brian
We handle SGII, Dirtside, and Full Thrust. (as well as other only vaguely
related criteria.) I think we sometimes digress because many people have been
with the list for a long time and we are conversationally inclined with one
another. Generally we start out with something that relates to one of the
games, but sometimes the
posts take a left turn. I like a little non-game conversation
occasionally and find that it helps me get inside the head of the people who
are creatively posting rules addenda.. To each their own!
No offense but how does this relate to Full THrust again? I must of missed any
message that relates the two. There might be a hint of sarcasm here but I
subscribed to a Full Thrust
Mailing list not a Starship Troopers/American Polictics/Lets see what
else besides Full Thrust wee can talk about.
+++++++++++++++
+------------+ +----------------+
> Eric Fialkowski wrote:
I agree with your message. I am new to this mailing list and I was wondering
if you could answer a question for me.
Does this group also handle material for Star Grunt II? I do not own Star
Grunt yet (I have a copy of Full Thrust and a NSL HVY Cruiser and a
Battle Cruiser - from CMD miniatures).
I plan on buying Dirtside II and Star Grunt II in the next few days.
Thanks,
G.C.
Mike,
"a little non-game conversation" is fine.
However, since I joined the list, the signal to noise ratio has been very
poor. Perhaps 1 "real" message for every 2 I receive from the list... which
generates quite a fair bit of traffic... (granted that's a shade better than
USENET)
so, it looked like fun, but I'm outta here. I figure by occaisonally searching
for "Full Thrust" on the web I'll end up with the useful ideas you guys
generate. I'll be putting up a Full Thrust segment to my page hopefully
sometime in the future, so hopefully I'll still be able to contribute. A
friend of mine is on the list, so hopefully it'll calm down in a while and
I'll jump back on.
cya,
-dunk
> We handle SGII, Dirtside, and Full Thrust. (as well as other only
---
> At 11:26 PM 11/8/96 GMT, David Brewer wrote:
writes:
> I have recently read ST, for no better reason than the film was
THANK YOU! With all the praises it was getting on the list, I thought it was
just me that didn't much like it. I read it AFTER I got the board game and
immediately after reading Haldeman's _The Forever War_ as I'd heard that
ST was an inspiration for Haldeman's book.
Sure the combat scenes (and there are precious few considering the book's
title) were enjoyable, but there was a lot of muck that you had to wade
through. I was supremely disappointed by the end of the book as I was
expecting a climactic combat scene. Heinlein should have just written a
political essay and been done with it. _The Forever War_ was a much
better novel.
> Mr. Verhoeven, being, I think, a Dutchman, may a have a somewhat
Well put. While I think Verhoeven's dropping the power armour will probably
leave me as cold as the stillsuits with no hood in the Dune movie, there is no
way that a fully faithful adaptation of Heinlein's book would make it to the
theatres.
Does anyone know where I can see a complete description (including political
structures) of the NAC, ESU, etc...
In "Starship Troopers", I believe the franchise one earned from military
service pertained to interstellar government. The local planatary governments
were not affected. What happened after the long war when the power to control
space (Interstellar Government) was in the hands of former
military - arguably like-minded individuals. Maybe the instellar
government would be looked upon as a kind patriarch, certainly right after the
war when public opinion is high.
Such a minority controlled goverment could lead to rebellion, factionalization
of the interstellar leaders (Alexander, 323 B.C.) the possibilities are
endless. Heinlen had a terrible idea, voter registration through military
service, but the circumstances of such a government creates a multitude of
Full Thrust campaigns:)
I can see the Border Wars waging.
> Allan Goodall writes:
@:)... I... didn't much like it.
@:) _The Forever War_ was a much better novel.
I remember being indifferent to _Starship_Troopers_ and liking
_The_Forever_War_ but I still think _Armor_ was the best of the
bunch. Forget all this political stuff - for that matter forget
interstellar war - just go down there and kill bugs. And kill them
again. And again. And again. Wonderful study in stress-related
mental illness plus lots of blood, gore and snappy dialogue. Highly
recommended, despite my probably less-than-encouraging review. John
Steakley.
A little off track, but I agree with Henleins idea. If you want to take
an active role in the state then you need to put something other than just
being born!
----------
From: FTGZG-L[SMTP:FTGZG-L@bolton.ac.uk]
Sent: 11 November 1996 21:22
To: FTGZG-L
Subject: Re: Starship Troopers
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> Joe A. Troche wrote:
creates
> a multitude of Full Thrust campaigns :)
Actually....
If memory serves me, Military Service was not the requisite: a period of
involuntary service in whatever area the government needed was. No-one
was excluded due to physical or mental incapacity. They'd find something for
you to do, E.g. "counting caterpillar fuzz by touch or something equally
useless". Note there was NO draft. Entry into all such service was voluntary,
just required if you wanted to vote. Considering over 50% of the enrolled
electorate in the USA didn't bother to vote in the last election, I
don't think they'd be over-run with applicants.
---------------------- <> <> How doth the little Crocodile
| Alan & Carmel Brain| xxxxx Improve his shining tail?
| Canberra Australia | xxxxxHxHxxxxxx _MMMMMMMMM_MMMMMMMMM
---------------------- o OO*O^^^^O*OO o oo oo oo oo
By pulling Maerklin Wagons, in 1/220 Scale
> A little off track, but I agree with Henleins idea. If you want to
we do... no matter how little I like what the governement does, I still
pay for it. just like you wouldn't let me spend 1/4 of your gross pay
without some say in how I do it, I deserve a say in the government for my
$750/month
At 9:35 AM 11/11/96, Joachim Heck - SunSoft wrote:> Allan Goodall
writes:
> @:) ... I ... didn't much like it.
Absolutely, Haldeman was a lot more subtle whith his political viewpoints. He
was also more qualified to write about it than Heinlein was. Joe Haldeman saw
combat in Viet Nam, where Heinlein went to Annapolis and served in destroyers
long enough to contract... tuberculosis (?).
There was even a Forever War game from Mayfair many moons ago. It was a pretty
decent game system, although I am loath to punch a signed copy to actually
play the thing.
> I remember being indifferent to _Starship_Troopers_ and liking
I've always liked "Armor,: it has a small cult following aroud the Bay
Area. I even knew people who made t-shirts ( Die ant, die !). Its got
some absolutely smashing combat scenes, and the stress-psychology is
excellent. I no longer have any idea how many times I've reread my copy. Grab
it and read it.
> Joe A. Troche wrote:
Actually....
If memory serves me, Military Service was not the requisite: a period of
involuntary service in whatever area the government needed was. No-one
was excluded due to physical or mental incapacity. They'd find something for
you to do, E.g. "counting caterpillar fuzz by touch or something equally
useless". Note there was NO draft. Entry into all such service was voluntary,
just required if you wanted to vote. Considering over 50% of the enrolled
electorate in the USA didn't bother to vote in the last election, I
don't think they'd be over-run with applicants.
---------------------- <> <> How doth the little Crocodile
UK list members might be interested to know that Sky One are supposed to
be showing the SST animated series starting next Monday at 7:30 am - set
those VCRs now!
(this info' came via Steve Blease of the SFSFW)
In a message dated 1/7/00 4:54:37 AM Central Standard Time,
> tony@glassghost.com writes:
<< UK list members might be interested to know that Sky One are supposed to
be showing the SST animated series starting next Monday at 7:30 am -
set those VCRs now!
(this info' came via Steve Blease of the SFSFW) >>
is it more of Vanderhoven's crap, or is it Starship Troopers?
> Popeyesays@aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 1/7/00 4:54:37 AM Central Standard Time,
You must have missed the earlier dissuasions on this. SST the series
(Roughnecks: The Starship Trooper chronicles) is some of the best SF out
there. It's more like the book with power armo, and what not but also takes
the best parts of the movie concept, primarily the concept of various bug
types like plasma bugs hoppers and what not. There are some changes. For
instance Carl Jenkins is assigned to the roughnecks as the teep. Flores is
still a chick (and hot). Effects are way better than anything out there in the
CGI
series-world
today (Voltron, Beast Wars, War planets etc), the writing is very good,
relationships between characters excellent and well developed and good
stories. The SF is hard too, as if some stargrunt or dirtside curmudgeon was
doing the development. Basically it gets nearly everything right. (Though it
is NOT a direct port of the book.)
For some freak reason I have been getting the series on my local cable,
(It's
still in production only half the episodes are done) perhaps because I've
never won the lotto or anything and the Universe usually tries to achieve
equilibrium by one means or another.
One of the prime reasons Verhoven claimed for no power armor was teh thing
about not being able tos e ethe actors faces but this series proves that was
just a load of horseshit. ALso there's lots of great tech. If the humans run
into a major problem, fuck it, pop a nuke. And teh infnatry weapons are
actually lethal and well though out. Orbital drops, Walkers, Ortillery and
fighter combat, various interesting environments etc etc. It's all there.
In a message dated 1/7/00 3:59:45 PM Central Standard Time, los@cris.com
writes:
<< Orbital drops, Walkers, Ortillery and fighter combat, various interesting
environments etc etc. It's all there.
> [quoted text omitted]
All right! Hope it comes where I can see it!
Good news, bad news, indifferent news...but news nevertheless.
"The Starship Troopers roleplaying game, based on Mongoose Publishings own
innovative, exciting and Open Game system, will be released in the last
quarter of 2004. Providing a wealth of information on the Mobile Infantry, the
totalitarian government of Earth and the alien races clamouring for dominance
of the galaxy, the Starship Troopers RPG will provide the ultimate immersive
experience of the far future. Supported by high quality supplements detailing
characters, aliens and equipment, the survival of the species will be down to
you.
Join up now!
The Starship Troopers miniatures wargame will bring you face to face with the
very worst the galaxy has to throw against Mankind. Supported by a complete
range of plastic and metal miniatures, players will command entire armies of
Mobile Infantry, Fleet Expeditionary Forces, Arachnids, Skinnies and many
more. Released as a large box set in the first quarter of 2005, the Starship
Troopers wargame will contain the main rulebook with enough Mobile Infantry
and Arachnids to begin your fight for the galaxy. Further miniatures, vehicles
and armies will be released throughout 2005 and beyond, all with their own
specialist army books describing the structure of their forces, unique
technologies, painting guides and, of course, their army lists."
*****
That there will be miniatures pleases me. The rest, I can give or take.
The game will, apparently, be based on a mixture of book, movie, and the CGI
series...which is probab ly more gameable than the book alone, but still
disapointing.
> On 6 Feb 2004, at 16:04, John C wrote:
Didn't Avalon Hill or someone similar do a board game based on the books? Ages
ago mind.
TTFN
Jon
> Jonathan White wrote:
Yes.
I still have my copy. :-)
Mk
Avalon hill did a board game based on the book (way, way, way before the movie
and CGI series came out). I have a copy. It did a fairly good job of capturing
the feel of the book for combat, especially where the bugs were concerned. The
MI are tough hombres (and hombrettes), but the bugs, if played well, can
manage to take them out by swarming.
Did the announcement for the game include the figure scale anywhere? I did't
see it from reading through...
J
John K. Lerchey Computer and Network Security Coordinator Computing Services
Carnegie Mellon University
> On Fri, 6 Feb 2004, Jonathan White wrote:
> On 6 Feb 2004, at 16:04, John C wrote:
> On Fri, 06 Feb 2004 11:14:19 -0500 Indy <kochte@stsci.edu> wrote:
> Jonathan White wrote:
> Didn't Avalon Hill or someone similar do a board game based on
> Yes.
> I still have my copy. :-)
Me, too. Not bad as a representation of the book, and with some
interesting background stuff scattered around the rules -- though I
still have trouble dealing with a girl/woman with the name Carmen
Ibanez as a platinum blonde... <B-)
On a point of order, so to speak, the Terran Federation was not portrayed as a
totalitarian government in the book; it was a democracy, but full citizenship
and voting rights had to be earned by doing what was, in peacetime, a short
term of Federal Service, and the military was only one of a long list of
options. I wouldn't even have said the film had that; about the only real
indication we get of anything to do
with the gummint, IIRC, is the News/Propaganda bulletins -- and it is
wartime. Dunno anything at all about the series.
Still, the mini game might be interesting -- but only if they have the
PA! MI without their suits just isn't right.
Phil
----
"I think... I think I am! Therefore I am... I think?"
-- The Moody Blues
> I still have my copy. :-)
I have my old battered copy in the basement somewhere...fun game.
I fear admitting it...but I have the new version as well.
> At 4:32 PM +0000 2/6/04, Phillip Atcliffe wrote:
"Starship Troopers, a Movie based on the back cover of a book by Robert
Heinlien."
> Still, the mini game might be interesting -- but only if they have the
MI with out PA are just crunchies...slow ones at that...
> Phillip Atcliffe wrote:
> Still, the mini game might be interesting -- but only if they have the
If they follow the book, it will be rather dull. A MI platoon on the bounce is
spread over a very wide front. Your left and right buddy would
be a kilometer (or was it even more?) away. And if you want to follow the
movie, just bring out the figures. 40K would be the game system most suited
for it (shudder).
> And if you want to follow the movie, just bring out the figures. 40K
Actually...I'd think that if you want to play the MI by the book it would make
for some good skirmish gaming...
High quality, High mobility, armed to the teeth...
> At 6:13 PM +0100 2/6/04, ludo toen wrote:
Actually, it sounds like it would work well for Dirtside. 10" separation
between infantry stands. Figs for MI would be easy, 1 figure for a stand. Bugs
would be a problem...lots and lots of bugs...
> >>Still, the mini game might be interesting -- but only if they have
During the second ECC (or was it third?) Los and I think Magic had brought
Starship Troopers with them and were playing it in miniature one evening. Los
had picked up a massive bag of plastic ants for the Bugs (and then at the end
of the weekend he donated them to the con for future prizes; we're still
giving them out!). I don't remember if they were doing a modified SGII game,
or DSII, or something of their own creation.
Mk
Just so everyone is clear, there was a square chit, 'bookcase' board game out,
I believe, in the early 70's, fairly close to the book, though that's
a style of game a lot of folk find dry. There was a movie tie-in that
had
plastic stand-up piccies as figs; some folk find that kind of game a
little simplistic.
Comments on the book and movie continue to have already been covered ad
nauseum, and as poorly as presently.
The_Beast
The one bit of good news that's occured to me about this is that if the
Troopers *are* based on the movie, and if they're in 25mm or 28mm
scale....
Well then, you've got some PERFECT miniatures for the Alliance soldiers from
"Firefly".
Gotta love those recycled props.
Correct -- I believe it was the second as I remember looking for the
game in stores in St Louis after the con (by 3 I had moved to Virginia).
IIRC, they used the board game rules for movement of the bugs underground and
then used SG2 combat resolution. Looked pretty neat but I don't think they
were too satisfied with it.
nick
[quoted original message omitted]
> In a message dated 2/6/04 11:05:34 AM EST, john1x@hotmail.com writes:
<<..which is probab ly more gameable than the book alone, but still
disapointing.
> [quoted text omitted]
The dead giveaway was the reference to the "totalitarian government of earth".
I'll probably check it out, but the miniatures had better be damned good.
Regards,
Scott
On Fri, 6 Feb 2004 13:51:47 -0500 Ryan Gill <rmgill@mindspring.com>
writes: <snip>
> Actually, it sounds like it would work well for Dirtside.
Oh Good, provide a little MORE temptation would you? <Grin>
10"
> separation between infantry stands. Figs for MI would be easy, 1
Ryan, I think you need at least two more "Lots" in there... I think the best
source for (or is that gore) that many figures are plastic ants from the
dollar store...
Gracias,
> John C wrote:
Well, if by mixture they mean "we melted down all copies of the film and
used it for cover lamination and miniatures," then I think a mixture would be
ok.
***
Well, if by mixture they mean "we melted down all copies of the film and used
it for cover lamination and miniatures," then I think a mixture would be ok.
***
Sort of like burning books; good plan...
The_Beast
On Fri, 6 Feb 2004 18:31:19 -0600 Doug Evans <devans@nebraska.edu>
writes:
> ***
Not.
And when a wacko "Bush is a fiscal L-L-L-Liberal" Conservative says
that... <grin> Seriously, I never watched the movie but some people liked it.
Or at least they said they did.
Something like P.J.'s version of LOTR trilogy...
Gracias,
> At 6:31 PM -0600 2/6/04, Doug Evans wrote:
Keep a few copies around.....for the film students to watch as examples of
really bad films.
If there's a Cyberboard set for that we ought to get an email game going.
> Indy wrote:
> Jonathan White wrote:
I think it was Los and Weaselboy (Krr't) and they were doing a modified
Stargrunt thing with the bugs. We did a bunch of this during that year.
Magic
> --- Indy <kochte@stsci.edu> wrote:
[quoted original message omitted]
On Sun, 8 Feb 2004 13:04:59 +0100 KH.Ranitzsch@t-online.de
> (K.H.Ranitzsch) writes:
That was hyperbolic tongue in cheek (what is the icon for that?) not to be
taken too seriously. Never saw The Movie for S.T. since some pretty reliable
people who regualrly go to movies (I see 2 to 3 a year on a good year) I know
actually demanded their money back for the first time ever (ands they have
seen some real dogs.)
I liked LOTR as a stand alone series {"A-"} (well the extended DVD
version of TT and the first movie [both versions, extended much better]) but
it was a "C" as a 'book to movie' and a "B" as it was.
Gracias,
I would have demanded my money back too when I first saw it. However, I got
into see the movie on a free pass. However, that's two hours of my life I will
never get back.
Later, Mark A. Siefert
[quoted original message omitted]
Glad you clarified that:) Check out
http://www.kentaurus.com/troopers.htm
for anyone interested in a pretty in depth discussion of the film vs the book.
> -----Original Message-----
> On Sun, 8 Feb 2004, Mark A. Siefert wrote:
> I would have demanded my money back too when I first saw it. However,
Well, I enjoyed the movie on its own merits (not in comparison to the book)
but I suppose that's a topic for discussion on some other mailing list.
-P.
> On 8 Feb 2004, at 19:25, Paul M. M. Jacobus wrote:
If it wanted to be taken on it's own merits it probably shouldn't have taken
the books title, premise and several of the characters...
TTFN
Jon
What... you didn't like "Mobile Infantry 90210"?
Sorry Mark, I had to!
I know I wouldn't have minded so much if the movie actually had anything in
common with the book (other than bugs).
> -----Original Message-----
Jon
> --
I'm curious - how many of you have seen the animated series?
It also misses a number of crucial plot elements, but it is extremely
well-done for a kidzflick, and (IMHO) closer to the original than the
movie.
Being unable to show blood/death/destruction and being limited to the TV
length cramped their style somewhat, but it is actually pretty enjoyable.
> I know I wouldn't have minded so much if the movie actually had
> On Mon, Feb 09, 2004 at 08:42:31AM +0900, Edward Lipsett wrote:
Not bad. As far as I'm concerned, the book is "about" what it means to be a
citizen, not what it's like to fight in power armour, and the series is
definitely in the latter camp. On that basis, it's acceptable but didn't
really enthuse me all that much.
Well, without all the combat stuff, he could have summed up his views on being
a citizen in a dynamite short story... That may be the philosophical
core of the book, but face it - it doesn't account for much %wise.
Still, I suspect this is not the place to debate it...
> Not bad. As far as I'm concerned, the book is "about" what it means to
Please stop; this has been on this list before, solved nothing. I've even been
pointed to the Kentaurus site several times before.
Leave at, the author was disappointed, and I consider him lacking in certain
qualities of judgement.
The_Beast
> Edward Lipsett wrote:
[...]
You gotta be kidding... all those indoctrination sessions that Rico had to
attend, as a device to allow the author to lecture the reader directly about
the book's message in the shrillest voice possible? They were dreadful.
I hope the cartoon didn't feature them.
> Doug Evans wrote:
I think it's been updated. There's more on the film now, and it correctly
identifies Verhoeven as Dutch (and not Danish).
None. It has a number of incidents from the training school, but they deal
more with having Rico grow up, learn respoonsibility etc. He is about to quit
the school when his parents are killed in Buenos Aires, however, and Carmen
remains his sweetheart. Carl, his friend who goes into research and is killed
on Pluto in the book, becomes a PSI specialist attached to the unit, which has
its own plot twists. There is also a skinny in the unit, BTW.
> I hope the cartoon didn't feature them.
Useful tip: don't read David Gerrold, *especially* the Chtorr series. If
you do, don't discuss it here - we tried to warn you.
The cartoon is clean.
> David Brewer wrote:
> You gotta be kidding... all those indoctrination sessions that
***
> Please stop; this has been on this list before, solved nothing. I've
I think it's been updated. There's more on the film now, and it correctly
identifies Verhoeven as Dutch (and not Danish).
***
Yes, yes, some of the stupidest factual errors, but he still misrepresents
Heinlien as the man's own words indicate from numerous con interviews. And, of
course, he totally misses the genius of the movie.
As I said, this is pointless, wrong for this list, and you continue to be way
out of line.
The_Beast
Really, there's no need to get touchy about it. I certainly didn't mean to
offend you by offering another view. Not all of us have been on the list since
its inception and know that it has been brought up before.
> -----Original Message-----
***
Really, there's no need to get touchy about it. I certainly didn't mean to
offend you by offering another view. Not all of us have been on the list since
its inception and know that it has been brought up before.
***
Absolutely right. Apologies for my boorish behavior.
The_Beast
Not casting aspersions on whoever started this thread, but since this is
a recurring topic which generates much noise and little light, and I'm pretty
sure many of us would rather never hear of SST:The Movie ever again, perhaps
the Keeper of the List FAQ would consider adding an item
to the effect of "that dead horse has already been beaten--look it up in
the archives if you wish".
> Not casting aspersions on whoever started this thread, but since this
> effect of "that dead horse has already been beaten--look it up in the
Oy. I just thought game, miniatures, Starship Troopers...people will be
interested.
Should have known that it would ignite the inevitable controversy.
Maybe it's safer to note that there's an Honor Harrington RPG in the works as
well. No associated miniatures, though, so far as I know.
> On Mon, 09 Feb 2004 05:19:15 +0000 "John C" <john1x@hotmail.com> writes:
Well, you would have thought so but you missed the war of the SF Worlds from
the archives... LOL!
> Should have known that it would ignite the inevitable controversy.
Like LOTR and any other book that has achieved a good level of popularity.
> Maybe it's safer to note that there's an Honor Harrington RPG in the
Oh good, that seems safe... <chuckle>
> John Crimmins
Relax, John, it's an "unmarked mine field" subject - you couldn't have
known... Usually posters who have missed the (archived 'rolling thunder' of
past posts from a subject) pick a less volatile one. You must have missed all
the "fun" John A. did in the past too. July 4th (or was it 14th?) material
there...
Gracias,
> At 6:42 PM -0600 2/9/04, <warbeads@juno.com> wrote:
Speaking of, anyone hear from him lately?
> Speaking of, anyone hear from him lately?
Damn, Ryan, I thought you were keeping track of him... ;->=
Seriously, wondering how he's doing, likewise.
The_Beast