Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv
Subject: Re: A fresh take on the Star Wars films
Date: Mon, 13 May 2024 12:46:27 +1200
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 61
Message-ID: <v1rnt2$32nnl$1@dont-email.me>
References: <v1dol9$3cllm$1@dont-email.me> <7gf24j141hlm65kkk6u86tdielv150lsrl@4ax.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 13 May 2024 02:46:28 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="10a6878bd4e56efded626bc5af46b1d5";
	logging-data="3235573"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/QIi1en7W+aypdUS3R2jTN3E9bSPYiVxc="
User-Agent: Unison/2.2
Cancel-Lock: sha1:AFvD91moBGSVYibQ1cic93stdSM=
Bytes: 4096

On 2024-05-12 22:10:39 +0000, shawn said:
> On Sun, 12 May 2024 12:10:47 -0700, anim8rfsk <anim8rfsk@cox.net>
> wrote:
>> Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
>>> On 5/12/2024 3:14 AM, shawn wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 12 May 2024 06:54:55 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman"
>>>> <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>>>>> shawn <nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Sat, 11 May 2024 22:35:20 -0700, The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> wrote:
>>>>>>> Fri, 10 May 2024 19:06:45 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Well, *somebody* with wit had to have been behind it.  That much
>>>>>>>> tongue-in-cheek can't have been accidental.  Fwiw, the Internet seems 
>>>>>>>> rather definite that Verhoeven (a dedicated Liberal) was satirizing.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Got a cite on that? Sounds like an interesting article or two.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> https://collider.com/starship-troopers-review-satire-at-its-best/
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The cold hard truth of Starship Troopers, Paul Verhoeven's 1997
>>>>>> follow-up to his infamous 1995 Showgirls, is painfully obvious from
>>>>>> the start: this is not Oscar bait. The acting is wooden, especially
>>>>>> from lead actor Casper Van Dien. Denise Richards' performance is also
>>>>>> suspect, playing aspiring pilot Carmen Ibanez. The only actors that
>>>>>> stand out are the steady veterans Clancy Brown and Michael Ironside.
>>>>>> What Starship Troopers is, though, is satire at its best, with
>>>>>> Verhoeven masterfully weaving social commentary and potshots
>>>>>> throughout the film.
>>>>> 
>>>>> But the novel he was adapting wasn't satire, and the social commentary
>>>>> was different. Quite frankly, I didn't care for the movie. I thought
>>>>> the potshots he took were against easy targets. For that reason, I've
>>>>> seen the movie once and never revisted it and had no interest in the
>>>>> sequel.
>>>> 
>>>> No doubt. He took the name of the book and some of the ideas from the
>>>> book to make a very different movie. So there's no way you can judge
>>>> the book by the movie because they are so different. I've seen the
>>>> movie a few times as background noise but never a serious watch
>>>> because it isn't something one should take seriously. Even his satire
>>>> is so broad it prevents me from even taking his obvious potshots
>>>> seriously. I have the sequels on my list to watch some day just to see
>>>> what they are like but I'm clearly in no rush to see any of them.
>>> 
>>> The sequels are cheap "sci-fi" horror direct to video productions.  If
>>> you like deliberately bad movies you _may_ want to check them out.
>>> Otherwise don't bother.  (From someone who has watched them.)
>> 
>> Agreed
> 
> Which is why I haven't gotten around to watch them. I enjoy cheap
> sci-fi movies but I have the feeling those are truly bad but not bad
> enough to be enjoyable for how bad they are based just on the still
> images I've seen.

I haven't seen the sequel movies either.

Reportedly the animated Starship Trooper movies are much better, but I 
haven't gotten around to watching those either.