Re: [OT] Re: Tired of the stupid comments about SST...

In message
<Pine.OSF.4.02A.9903061744300.18042-100000@ccins.camosun.bc.ca> Brian
Burger writes:

> The movie has silly satire pretending to be politics, military tactics
at
> the 'drooling moron' level of sophistication, and so many
inconsistencies
> as to be laughable. 
[...]

I often wonder that people don't more often connect the first
clause in this sentence, with the second.

The tactics are at a "drooling moron" level... do you think the
(*ex-marine*) director was trying to make a point or two? This is
a satirical film, after all.

> Try reading Heinlein's book some time.

My advice would be, if you're over fifteen, don't bother. It's not
really a book for adults. So many people make so much fuss over
the book because it's such a childhood favourite. Much of the book
consists of ranting polemic, of which the rest of the book exists
only to validate. There is no plot worth the name.

> You'll be surprised at how much
> Verhoven got wrong. True story: Verhoven has never even read
> the book, and was only interested in the fairly-well-known name to
front
> his own version of the story, which contains what he claims are the
> 'essential elements' of the book's story.

Not true. Verhoeven states that he read part of the book. You
don't, so to speak, have to eat the whole apple to know that it's
rotten. One presumes that he read numerous treatments and scripts.

The point Verhoeven made time and time again in interviews is that
he made the film because he was interested in how this crypto-
fascist society of Heinlein's would be very successful at
repelling an external threat. The film's political message is
wonderfully ambiguous.

It was the producers who jumped on SST as a vehicle for a giant
insect sci-fi film.

> This is from "The Making of SST" which has an interview w/ Verhoven.

A *very* funny book. The producers claim that they are only
interested in maing a faithful version of the book. They then get
to explain why almost all of it gets thrown out. Verhoeven at
least rescues the politics, IIRC he stuck in one or two of the
diatribes almost word-for-word from the book.

> This is very OT, and YMMV,

Likewise.

Does anyone know if Verhoeven is back to working on his Hitler
biopic?

-- 
David Brewer