6 Mind Blowing Ways 'Starship Troopers' Predicted the Future

[Ian David]

Yes, Starship Troopers. The campy anti-war satire about a race from a distant, desert land, who out of nowhere strikes a civilian target in a way we didn't think was possible, leading to heavy-handed patriotic propaganda, and a headlong rush into a war with a poorly thought-out strategy that results in a quagmire. You don't have to agree with the message to get that it's clearly a satirical send-up of the War on Terror. If anything, it's too on-the-nose.

What's that, you say? The movie was made in 1997, four years before 9/11? Hmmm. That is a problem. We mean, we're not saying Paul Verhoeven traveled forward in time and then traveled back to film a commentary on a future war (because that would be an absolutely HORRIBLE waste of time travel), but... well, yeah, maybe we're saying he did that. Look how they line up:

<snip>

Seriously now, is it just us? The events of the movie match up beat for beat, exactly the way an anti-war satirist would draw it up. But even weirder, we can't find another war that matches up as well (that is, one a non-time traveling Paul Verhoven could have had in mind). Vietnam? That war didn't kick off with a sudden attack on a civilian target. World War II? That didn't turn into an unexpected quagmire. Neither did the first gulf war (ie Operation Desert Storm). Nothing else matches up.

See, that's the thing about Starship Troopers -- to this day, lots of people don't realize it's a satire. They think it's just a really shitty action movie that does a bad job of building sympathy for the protagonists. The reason so many people don't get the satire is because at the time it wasn't clear what war it was satirizing ("A quagmire in the desert, triggered by an attack on the homeland? Shit, when has that happened?") and that's because the war it was satirizing hadn't happened yet.

More:
http://www.cracked.com/article_19259_6-mind-blowing-ways-starship-troopers-predicted-future.html?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=fanpage&utm_campaign=new%2Barticle&wa_ibsrc=fanpage


Even more incredible is that the BOOK was published in 1959.

Starship Troopers
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Starship Troopers is a military science fiction novel by Robert A. Heinlein, first published (in abridged form) as a serial in The Magazine of Fantasy & Science Fiction (October, November 1959, as "Starship Soldier") and published hardcover in December, 1959.

More:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starship_Troopers


Starship Troopers (film)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

More:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starship_Troopers_%28film%29

[demwing]

1. Paul Verhoeven as a time traveler? Nah...

Robert A. Heinlein as a time traveler? Oh yeah, that works...

[Initech]

2. I've always suspected the republicans have used that movie as their template.

I watched it the other day on HBO - it's incredibly eerie how similar the events of that movie play out to the events of 9/11... creepy almost.

[Ian David]

3. Dick Cheney may have used Babylon 5 as a template.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x3454838

[Babel_17]

16. ;)

Intersections in Real Time

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersections_in_Real_Time

Can't find a good link to that episode, but here's a link to an episode that shows how the show can pertain to issues of our time. (war crimes)

http://www.thewb.com/shows/babylon-5/deathwalker/85219799d8

[SeattleVet]

4. But the movie version was most likely purely

loosely based on a cover illustration of one edition of the book. The movie had pretty much nothing to do with any of the words that were in the book.

[Dept of Beer]

8. Very loosely based.

The book was better. Usually they are.

[Tesha]

39. I disagree. The book was typical Heinlein propagandistic tripe.

The movie was a brilliant satire of the glorification
of militarism that so marks/mars the book.

Several of verHoeven's movies have been eerily
prescient.

Tesha

[Kolesar]

5. "Mobile Infantry ... made me the man I am today!"

Says the legless desk jockey.

I loved the public service announcements: "Kill bugs, it's your patriotic duty"

[Sherman A1]

6. "Bugs Mr. Rico"

"Zillions of 'em"

[SheilaT]

7. The original book was definitely NOT satire,

but Heinlein's glorification of war. He took great pride in being a graduate of the Naval Academy, but of course never served in wartime.

The Forever War by Joe Haldeman was essentially written to show that war truly is hell, not the glory that Heinlein thought it was.

[TheMadMonk]

9. Not so much the glory of war, as the glory of an idealised military.

Much the same theme exists in many of his other books.

Honour. Perfect honour.

[exboyfil]

17. I think the bloom came off the rose of The Forever War

with the sequels. Before those it stood as a stark contrast to Heinlein's book. I still love them both. My favorite Heinlein is still The Moon is a Harsh Mistress. A arguably better book by Joe Haldeman is All My Sins Remembered which had and still has a deep impact on me. I just pray we never have a sequel to All My Sins Remembered.

[11 Bravo]

24. Heinlein graduated from Annapolis in 1929. We weren't at war at that time. He served honorably ...

until his discharge in 1934 due to tuberculosis. The "of course he never served in wartime" is cheap snark.

[SheilaT]

45. Heinlein simply reminds me of

a lot of the current crop of Republican right wing idiots who have never served at all but work very hard to send other people's children off to war. There has always been something very self-righteous in his extreme conservatism and his glorification of the military.

[TheWraith]

47. We reading the same Heinlein?

The Moon is a Harsh Mistress? Coventry? One might not find merit in everything Heinlein wrote, but blankly labeling it as extreme conservatism doesn't quite mesh with the works he wrote emphasizing collective libertarianism.

[SheilaT]

49. Heinlein supports

the extreme right wing, with zero compassion for those in need. If he were alive today he'd be running for President. Okay, so he'd be 104 if he were alive, but my point is there would be no distance whatsoever between him and those who are gleefully planning to shut down our country next month.

Several of his later books verge on creepy pornography. The women his men bed with tend to get younger and younger, until they are barely into adolescence.

He also has a weirdly unrealistic view of women, despite (or maybe because of) his three marriages. He gets credit for being a feminist, or at least a supporter of feminist ideals because he portrays women as smart and tough, but he also invariably portrays them as desperately eager to make babies. Usually about twenty minutes after they meet Our Hero.

I have gotten into some pretty intense arguments over the years about this, and if you simply don't see what I'm getting at, so be it.

[TheWraith]

50. You seem to be tossing out random assertions, without addressing my specific points.

If you have some citations where he endorses the Tea Party, lay them on me. Otherise, you're trying to shoehorn someone's complex--and potentially over a lifetime changing--views into a narrow cookie cutter stance, apparently because you don't like some of his work.

If you'd read two pieces I'd mentioned, "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress" and "Coventry," you might recognize that such a simplistic view is unrealistic in the extreme. You might not like some of his ideas, but I'm fairly confident that if he were still kicking, the Tea Party types would be very high on his shit list.

"Coventry" alone is about as subtle as a hand grenade in destroying piece by piece the entire idea of "rugged individualism" in a modern age, and how the concept of limited or no government is absurdly naive, as well as defining a distinction between government's role in personal life--pretty much nonexistant, from his perspective--and it's role in society, which is very significant.

You have the same theme, about the difference between the practical belief in non-government and it's utter unattainability, made a gentler way in "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress," which also has some scathing indictments about what happens when government and profit motive go hand in hand, as well as openly mocking and deriding people who want to legislate morality. He also depicts almost all the heroes of said book as being of mixed race, and one character gets arrested while visiting Earth in part because of the "range of color" in his family photograph, which is later described as a "barbaric local prejudice." This is from a book published in 1966. Not exactly the image of the cookie cutter conservative you've laid out.

[SheilaT]

51. I know he died long before the Tea Party came about,

so to ask me to cite where he endorses the Tea Party is silly.

I have read everything he ever wrote that got published. He obviously thought a well-armed society was a polite society, a stance I disagree with. And he obviously did not anticipate our somewhat less racially bigoted culture. I remember that line about someone being arrested because of the "range of color" in the family, and that was written some years after laws against interracial marriage had been struck down by the Supreme Court (Loving v. Virginia, 1967). Either he did not pay enough attention to know about that decision, or willfully pretended it didn't exist.

He frequently sets up less than completely believable situations like that so he can parade his own supposedly liberal take on things.

The case has been made that the main character in his book "Tunnel in the Sky" is an African American simply because he seems attracted to another character who is described as (if I recall correctly) a Zulu. Other than the Zulu woman obviously being a black African, there is simply no indication whatsoever that Rod, the main character, might himself be black.

[Occulus]

25. I'm not so sure...

It's been a long, long time since I read the book, but I remember thinking at the time that no military force was ever like that, and I've never even served.

I think an argument could be made that it's dark satire. Dark, in the sense that the satire is obscured.

[WatsonT]

28. I suspect you misread it then

It was a glorification of personal sacrifice and recognition of duty.

[MicaelS]

37. Heinlein made it quite clear

He was glorifying the infantry. The PBI, the "Poor Bloody Infantry" as he put it. He was glorifying them much as Kipling did in his poem "Tommy". And a previous posted stated Heinlein was invalided out because of TB. Heinlein DID serve in the Philadelphia Navy Yard during WWII as a civilian, and his wife Virginia served in the Navy. So inferring Heinlein was some sort of Chickenhawk is a cheap shot.

TOMMY

by Rudyard Kipling (1865-1936)

I went into a public-'ouse to get a pint o' beer,
The publican 'e up an' sez, "We serve no red-coats here."
The girls be'ind the bar they laughed an' giggled fit to die,
I outs into the street again an' to myself sez I:
O it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, go away";
But it's "Thank you, Mister Atkins", when the band begins to play,
The band begins to play, my boys, the band begins to play,
O it's "Thank you, Mister Atkins", when the band begins to play.

I went into a theatre as sober as could be,
They gave a drunk civilian room, but 'adn't none for me;
They sent me to the gallery or round the music-'alls,
But when it comes to fightin', Lord! they'll shove me in the stalls!
For it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, wait outside";
But it's "Special train for Atkins" when the trooper's on the tide,
The troopship's on the tide, my boys, the troopship's on the tide,
O it's "Special train for Atkins" when the trooper's on the tide.

Yes, makin' mock o' uniforms that guard you while you sleep
Is cheaper than them uniforms, an' they're starvation cheap;
An' hustlin' drunken soldiers when they're goin' large a bit
Is five times better business than paradin' in full kit.
Then it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, 'ow's yer soul?"
But it's "Thin red line of 'eroes" when the drums begin to roll,
The drums begin to roll, my boys, the drums begin to roll,
O it's "Thin red line of 'eroes" when the drums begin to roll.

We aren't no thin red 'eroes, nor we aren't no blackguards too,
But single men in barricks, most remarkable like you;
An' if sometimes our conduck isn't all your fancy paints,
Why, single men in barricks don't grow into plaster saints;
While it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, fall be'ind",
But it's "Please to walk in front, sir", when there's trouble in the wind,
There's trouble in the wind, my boys, there's trouble in the wind,
O it's "Please to walk in front, sir", when there's trouble in the wind.

You talk o' better food for us, an' schools, an' fires, an' all:
We'll wait for extry rations if you treat us rational.
Don't mess about the cook-room slops, but prove it to our face
The Widow's Uniform is not the soldier-man's disgrace.
For it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Chuck him out, the brute!"
But it's "Saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot;
An' it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' anything you please;
An' Tommy ain't a bloomin' fool -- you bet that Tommy sees!

[nadinbrzezinski]

44. Funny I never took that as glorification of war

but that is just me.

What I took it is... this is what happens when you ignore the vets you produce in war time.

[Drale]

10. I am still convinced that the greatest enemy mankind will ever face is giant bugs. /nt

[Ian David]

12. Or bears. n/t

[Drale]

13. OMG I forgot about bears

yeah they are evil bastards as well.:rofl:

[Maru Kitteh]

15. Especially the "bitchy" ones. nt

[Ready4Change]

36. Or Bugbears!

Oh my!

[Ian David]

38. Fuckin' bugbears...

[Ready4Change]

42. Old school.

:thumbsup:

[WatsonT]

29. The small ones are bad enough

on the plus side you can't really feel any guilt in that war.

[Tesha]

40. Republicans (which are a lot like bugs, or at least blood-sucking ticks) (NT)

[Bluenorthwest]

11. I saw the film as a satirical take on the all too jingo book

If you enjoy the film, you should take a look at his 1977 Solider of Orange, set during the German occupation of Verhooven's native Holland. Then just keep watching his films, Spetters, also very good. In America, he made a whole different run of films, starting with Robocop.
But see Solider of Orange for sure. Tonight, if possible.

[Prophet 451]

22. That's how I saw it too n/t

[provis99]

14. vastly different from the book.

If the movie was anti-war, the book was pro-war and crypto-fascist. The book was basically an allegory for the Cold War, arguing that to beat the communists (Bugs), we had to become Nazis (neglecting of course, the problem that the Nazis were beat by the communists).

[ThoughtCriminal]

19. Or maybe the movie WAS pro war

But was made so heavy handed that it seemed like satire. Red Scare films from the 50's (like Big Jim McClain) sort of have a cult following for the same reason. Wait, are they making fum of commie hunters, or were they serious? OMG, they were serious!

[Recursion]

18. The book wasn't remotely a satire

A lot of the fans didn't like the fact that the movie was basically a send-up of the book.

[On the Road]

20. 6 Mind-Blowing Ways

and the author didn't mention "Service Guarantees Citizenship"?

[kelly1mm]

21. I am still waiting for the co-ed showers! HAHA! nt

[Ian David]

23. It seems like most military sci-fi now has co-ed showers and quarters.

Battlestar Galactica, Space: Above and Beyond, Alien, Starship Troopers.

[Occulus]

26. Well, to be fair,

Galactica was a special case; they only had the one military ship and space was at a severe premium. If they hadn't already been used to the co-ed facilities, they would have had to get used to it with a quickness.

I think that's what happened, actually- after the fleet and the colonies were destroyed everything changed.

[kelly1mm]

32. On Battlestar, the campy original did not have co-ed facilities but you

are correct in general, didn't really think about it, but your right. Interesting to think how we could get from 'here' to 'there'.

[Blue_Tires]

27. +1000

I had a former co-worker years ago who was in the army during the U.N. peacekeeping of Bosnia, and he swore there were times they had co-ed showers with the Dutch or Swedish women soldiers...

Then again, he was a bullshitter about a lot of other things, but I never knew if he was being truthful or not...

[WatsonT]

30. The director admitted he didn't even read the book

A shame he used the title.

It was as much about that book as avatar was about pride and prejudice.

[BOG PERSON]

31. it's a strange movie

where there should be some kind of moral center (e.g. the native aliens should be more sympathetic, more human, or the leading man should take the side of the native aliens, or there should be some kind of obvious + profound rot at the core of the human social and economic order, etc), there is only a void. and the acting is unremarkable. but it's a terrific movie all the same.

[marmar]

33. A lot of people hated the movie, but I liked it.....

And the campy portrayal of a dystopian, fascist future.

[Ready4Change]

35. I liked both the book and the movie.

But for different reasons.

I grew up reading Heinlein. Frankly, his science fiction was what got me reading in the first place. Before that, reading anything was a chore I avoided whenever possible. As a grew up I recognized his work generally contained themes of duty, patriotism (when deserved) and liberty/freedom. 'Stranger in a Strange Land' is the only thing that would make me every consider he meant any of that to be tongue in cheek commentary.

The movie, on the other hand, applied those ideals to a society that BLINDLY applied them, with results which, in fiction, are hilarious to me. (The sort of humor which stems from knowledge of how horrifying such results are in reality.)

[Snoutport]

46. me 2

[Javaman]

34. The book was amazing. the movie was pure ass.

the best part of the book comes at the end...

Spoiler.

When the hero meets his dad as a "fresh" recruit in the never ending war.

[AnnieBW]

41. Great Book, Shitty Movie

Only good things about the movie were Clancy Brown and Michael Ironsides.

[nadinbrzezinski]

43. Read the book

and try to understand that Heinlein did not predict the future. He saw some of that in his own life time.

[greyl]

48. Read the Cracked link in the OP, and see that the article and headline is about the movie. ;) nt