Neat. Good thing the one movie described in the title won’t allowed in my region cause sony has an hard on for discriminating against us.
“Go back to the original novel…” and then do something completely different.
So many questions.
Are they going to call the movie “Helldivers 2”? because I haven’t seen Helldivers 1 yet.
Does this writer not know that there are already FIVE Starship Troopers movies, each worst than the last? News of a 6th film isn’t exactly stirring excitement in my loins.
Does Sony think claiming they’re “going back to the original book” is a good thing in this case? Heinlein’s novel has none of the political satire that Verhoeven injected into the story, and that audiences associate with the property. Starship Troopers played straight is… well, it would be the original Starship Troopers, but not nearly as interesting.
. Starship Troopers played straight is… well, it would be the original Starship Troopers, but not nearly as interesting.
politely disagree.
the verhoeven film only explored the attack on earth superficially; they don’t include the other species at all - skinnies (iirc?) and don’t touch on the mobile infantry tech like the armor systems, flight, mini-nukes etc.
In the right hands, I think they could flesh stuff like this out to create a lot of interesting nuance and film fun.
Knowing hollywood it’ll probably be wretched tho.
Maybe they’ll do it like ‘Troll 2’ and just go right to the sequel
Starship Troopers the novel was very interesting. It just wasn’t the half-comedy the movie was.
Making a video game movie and starting the first one off with “2” in the title would be a very video game thing to do.
Street Fighter definitely could have used the opportunity. It’s one of those games that most people learned about from the second in the series and not the original game.
Does that mean we will get helldivers2: the movie: the game?
I’m interested in what the sequel would be called, “Helldivers2 2: dive hellier”?
I viewed the movie as a play on the propaganda within the universe of the book (roughly the equivalent of films like “black hawk down”).
A movie playing it straight could be interesting. My only concern is how it will resonate with the current political situation. The original book was far more subtle in its view on fascism. It could easily turn into a fascist call to arms.
Verhoeven made the choice to make the movie a farce because he realized that making the movie serious would likely be interpreted as saying nice things about Nazis.
But they’re the same thing
“Corporate needs you to find difference between this (motion) picture and this (motion) picture”
But Helldivers is based on Starship troopers the movie not the book but the new Starship troppers movie will be based not on the movie, so, the book?
The book and the movie are wildy different, the movie was made by someone that didn’t bother reading the full book so just winged the story and made his own kida thing.
That is leaving out the reason the movie isn’t cloessly following the book. It’s facistic. Like very much so.
iirc the the creative who made the movie is quoted “I didn’t finish the book, it was too boring”
Yes, the books is heavy on the facisism, so a true movie adaptation that isn’t going the route of satirical parody wouldn’t read so well, and nowadays it might be a little to close to reality.
The 1959 novel was wildly different but I think it perhaps won’t be well received.
Wasn’t the original novel just pro fascist, but the movie made it into a ‘pro fascist’ satire? Or am I remembering that wrong?
Having read some other Heinlein, I don’t think the man was capable of being pro-fascism (see The Moon is a Harsh Mistress and Stranger in a Strange Land). The book, in only my personal opinion, seemed more like a thought experiment, like most science fiction
Heinlein experimented with loads of governmental and social structures, Starship Troopers was one such experiment.
I was curious, cuz I wasn’t sure either. Wikipedia has a summary:
It won the Hugo Award for Best Novel in 1960,[3] and was praised by reviewers for its scenes of training and combat and its visualization of a future military.[11][12] It also became enormously controversial because of the political views it seemed to support. Reviewers were strongly critical of the book’s intentional glorification of the military,[13][14] an aspect described as propaganda and likened to recruitment.[15] The novel’s militarism, and the fact that government service – most often military service – was a prerequisite to the right to vote in the novel’s fictional society, led to it being frequently described as fascist.[14][16][17] Others disagree, arguing that Heinlein was only exploring the idea of limiting the right to vote to a certain group of people.
Lol And then for the 1997(!!) movie it says:
The film was directed by Paul Verhoeven (who found the book too boring to finish)
It had the stated intention of treating its material in an ironic or sarcastic manner, to undermine the political ideology of the novel.
You should read the novel yourself.
The first chapter is one of the best battle scenes I’ve ever read.
Also, the political system is democratic. The caveat is that in order to vote you have to demonstrated a willingness to put something ahead of your personal comfort. Anyone can do Service. It explicitly says in the book that “a blind man in a wheelchair” would be given tasks within his ability to perform in order to vote.
The book was satire.
