Your Favorite Directors

[MT2008]

Originally Posted by mpe2010

Not to mention it was filmed within an hour of where I live.

That's interesting. Is it true that people in your area still find spent .223 blanks lying around from all of the gunfire scenes? (I once read that "Starship Troopers" set a record for blank ammunition fired on a movie set.)

Originally Posted by funkychinaman

I don't think Starship Troopers the book is filmable. It's a political science book with some sci fi thrown in. I think if Verhoeven simply called it "Alien Bug Hunt" or whatever, people would've seen it for what it was and enjoyed it more.

Exactly. And the problem is that Heinlein's brand of politics hasn't aged very well (either today, or 15 years ago when the movie was filmed). It's pretty hard to make a movie out of a utopian novel where the author actually admires the utopian world he's conceived. Verhoeven's approach was a satirical depiction of the novel's militaristic society, which is (I think) probably the best anyone could have done. I realize that "Starship Troopers" is regarded as a classic, but so were Mike Hammer novels (which came out around the same time), and I think it would be quite difficult to make a movie adaptation of those, in this day and age.

Originally Posted by funkychinaman

All this talk of Starship Troopers, and yet only one mention of Total Recall. But yes, Verhoeven, like Brian De Palma, have had many dry years of late.

I'm actually not the biggest fan of "Total Recall", though it is an enjoyable movie in its own right.

[Swordfish941]

Starship Troopers would of been cooler if they gave the soldiers those powered armor suits.

[funkychinaman]

Originally Posted by Swordfish941

Starship Troopers would of been cooler if they gave the soldiers those powered armor suits.

I wonder what's keeping the studio who owns the rights to Starship Troopers from doing a reboot that goes back to the roots with power suits and nukes? I would think a massive, 3-D, CGI-filled summer blockbuster would make more money for the franchise than yet another straight-to-video crapfest.

[MT2008]

Originally Posted by funkychinaman

I wonder what's keeping the studio who owns the rights to Starship Troopers from doing a reboot that goes back to the roots with power suits and nukes? I would think a massive, 3-D, CGI-filled summer blockbuster would make more money for the franchise than yet another straight-to-video crapfest.

Because "Starship Troopers" was unsuccessful (in the U.S., its box office receipts covered only about half of its production budget). It would probably be pretty hard to get investors behind a big-budget reboot.

[funkychinaman]

Originally Posted by MT2008

Because "Starship Troopers" was unsuccessful (in the U.S., its box office receipts covered only about half of its production budget). It would probably be pretty hard to get investors behind a big-budget reboot.

And yet they've pumped out two DTV sequels. The original was rated R with a B-movie cast with a B-movie script yet made with a blockbuster budget. Put a name in it, with a hot girl, pump it full of SFX, keep it PG-13, and you won't even need to write a good script. Hell, it worked for Transformers. (This is in no way an endorsement of Michael Bay or a suggestion that Michael Bay remake Starship Troopers.)

[BurtReynoldsMoustache]

Originally Posted by funkychinaman

And yet they've pumped out two DTV sequels. The original was rated R with a B-movie cast with a B-movie script yet made with a blockbuster budget. Put a name in it, with a hot girl, pump it full of SFX, keep it PG-13, and you won't even need to write a good script. Hell, it worked for Transformers. (This is in no way an endorsement of Michael Bay or a suggestion that Michael Bay remake Starship Troopers.)

R rated Transformers would have owned.

[S&Wshooter]

Originally Posted by BurtReynoldsMoustache

R rated Transformers without Michael Bay and better writers would have owned.

Fixed that for you

[MT2008]

Originally Posted by funkychinaman

And yet they've pumped out two DTV sequels. The original was rated R with a B-movie cast with a B-movie script yet made with a blockbuster budget. Put a name in it, with a hot girl, pump it full of SFX, keep it PG-13, and you won't even need to write a good script. Hell, it worked for Transformers. (This is in no way an endorsement of Michael Bay or a suggestion that Michael Bay remake Starship Troopers.)

Spawning low-budget sequels is not a good sign. "The Punisher", for instance, got a direct-to-DVD sequel even though it wasn't a huge box office success. Or, look at all of the "Universal Soldier" sequels that didn't get theatrical releases. Usually, if a big-budget movie has several lower-budgeted sequels, that's an indication that investors are only confident that the franchise has appeal to hardcore fans of the original and/or the source material, not mainstream audiences (where the big $$$$ are). That's the situation with "Starship Troopers" now - the novel may have fans, but for most people (even sci-fi lovers), it's a relic of the Cold War era. If I were a producer, I would be hard-pressed to convince my investors that such material has enough box-office appeal to be worth $150 million of their money.

Attaching some big Hollywood names (director, actors, F/X houses, etc.) might help, but it's still hit-or-miss when the material has such limited appeal to contemporary audiences. "Transformers" may have done well, but look at, say, last year's "Land of the Lost".

[BurtReynoldsMoustache]

Originally Posted by MT2008

Attaching some big Hollywood names (director, actors, F/X houses, etc.) might help, but it's still hit-or-miss when the material has such limited appeal to contemporary audiences. "Transformers" may have done well, but look at, say, last year's "Land of the Lost".

They Will Ferrelled that movie to Hell and back.