No, Starship Troopers Is Not Brilliant Satire

Tools    





Bright light. Bright light. Uh oh.
Great write-up, Yoda.

Starship Troopers is a social satire in much the same way that Robocop is. It starts by making fun of futuristic media - mostly TV news - which has basically been a sad self-satire most of my life. Then it extends to the self-awareness of some of the characters - usually the "evil" ones, but again, this is an old staple of comic books, which both movies resemble. ST is weaker-acted than RC, just as Showgirls is weaker acted than Basic Instinct, so the follow-ups to both earlier films lose (or is it gain?) some points because Verhoeven can actually be seen as satirizing himself and his own brand of "exploitation" filmmaking as Yoda calls it. Maybe it is wrong to call Starship Troopers predominantly a satire, and I never have, but it is a partial one, and even more, a black comedy. I know that's another phrase which is often used to describe movies which are divisive or have problems with their tones, at least for more than a few people. But since ST is also a sci-fi monster war adventure with [satiric?] fascist imagery, there are plenty of ways to interpret and misinterpret it, from the director on down through the cast and crew to the critics and bloggers who first discussed it to those just watching it for the first time, no matter what one thinks.
__________________
It's what you learn after you know it all that counts. - John Wooden
My IMDb page



Chappie doesn't like the real world
Ah! My people! It's nice to see not everyone drank the kool aid.
I don't like Starship Troopers or Strangelove. For that matter, I don't like Kool Aid either.



Thane of Glamis, Thane of Cawdor, & King Hereafter
Starship Troopers as satire? I just saw it as an average sci-fi movie. Nothing more, nothing less. I should do a review on it.



Master of My Domain
I don't like Starship Troopers or Strangelove. For that matter, I don't like Kool Aid either.
Disliking Starship Troopers and Strangelove is forgivable but...

How can you not like Kool Aid?



Really enjoyed your essay Yoda. Unfortunately I can't comment on whether I think the movie is satire or not because I haven't seen it.I will say the first time I heard someone call Robo Cop satire I thought the notion was absurd. I should probably see it again as an adult to be sure though. The thing about satire is that most comedy is probably considered it by somebody. Pointing out cultural hypocrisies in a pointed or absurd manner is the basis for most comedy, it might be able to be argued all. Anything that is doing this could certainly be considered satire.

Where I agree, is that calling something satire can become an easy out if the material simply isn't very good. I feel the same way about calling a movie or acting "campy". Sometimes it just feels like a way for people to justify loving something that even they know isn't very good. Ultimately I think that an awful lot of movies can be considered satire on some level. Probably almost any comedy.
__________________
Letterboxd



I am saddened that the author missed the satire of the content before their face. No, not Starship Troopers, but these articles about Starship Troopers.

They are sendups of a culture prone to post-hoc intellectual justifications that can come years (even decades) after their gut-level love of media. These brilliant authors are keenly aware of the rampant success that click-bait articles rationalizing away the problems in nostalgic favorites; so they play the part with a knowing smile and a twinkle in their eye.

When Calum Marsh says in the Atlantic article that ST "critiques the military-industrial complex, the jingoism of American foreign policy“ he is masterfully piercing the prevailing use of random disconnected jargon as waving away a need to actually define a position (you and I both know what they are, and we both know they are just really bad...things).

Marsh also delightfully brings up a slogan in the film: "The only good bug is a dead bug!... shades of Animal Farm abound", a wonderful ruse where Marsh pretends to imply that ST is a work in the tradition of Orwellian satire when he knows fully well that "The only good ___ is a dead ___" had been a well established piece of American nomenclature for 70 years before Animal Farm (at the very least!). Particularly when the common use of the phrase that existed was "The only good Indian is a dead Indian" is a real example of American jingoism and would have actually fit much better with his point than trying to force the connection to Animal Farm, of course all of which Marsh knows, this is just more satire.

Marsh might as well scream "This is all satire!" when he brings up Ebert's assertion that " a trivial nothing “pitched at 11-year-old science-fiction fans" because Marsh was 13 when he saw Starship Troopers (and he read at a 12th grade level).

These articles are too clever (by a half) to be anything other than masterworks in contemporary cultural critiques.



Then a disclaimer: any bad composition, grammar, and spelling mistakes in that post and any future post of mine is even more satire.

On an actual note, I think that sometimes saying something is a "kid's movie" is used to shield media from critique in many of the same ways that "satire" is. Satire and kid-movies should still be coherent (unless it's specifically a satire of incoherency, like Adventure Time, arguably).

Loved the write-up.



wanabe movie critique
I fell asleep while watching the first one; waking up to swear never to watch it every again or any of its sequels



Re: Strangelove. Wasn't the facepalm in response to the idea that it wasn't "intelligent and thoughtful"? Saying you didn't find it funny is another thing entirely.

Similarly, finding Starship Troopers fun or funny isn't really mutually exclusive with what I'm saying. It may be enjoyable for any number of reasons, but I don't see any reason to call it intelligent or thoughtful. Thoughtful satire wouldn't dress anyone up as Nazis, methinks.



I am saddened that the author missed the satire of the content before their face. No, not Starship Troopers, but these articles about Starship Troopers.

They are sendups of a culture prone to post-hoc intellectual justifications that can come years (even decades) after their gut-level love of media. These brilliant authors are keenly aware of the rampant success that click-bait articles rationalizing away the problems in nostalgic favorites; so they play the part with a knowing smile and a twinkle in their eye.

When Calum Marsh says in the Atlantic article that ST "critiques the military-industrial complex, the jingoism of American foreign policy“ he is masterfully piercing the prevailing use of random disconnected jargon as waving away a need to actually define a position (you and I both know what they are, and we both know they are just really bad...things).

Marsh also delightfully brings up a slogan in the film: "The only good bug is a dead bug!... shades of Animal Farm abound", a wonderful ruse where Marsh pretends to imply that ST is a work in the tradition of Orwellian satire when he knows fully well that "The only good ___ is a dead ___" had been a well established piece of American nomenclature for 70 years before Animal Farm (at the very least!). Particularly when the common use of the phrase that existed was "The only good Indian is a dead Indian" is a real example of American jingoism and would have actually fit much better with his point than trying to force the connection to Animal Farm, of course all of which Marsh knows, this is just more satire.

Marsh might as well scream "This is all satire!" when he brings up Ebert's assertion that " a trivial nothing “pitched at 11-year-old science-fiction fans" because Marsh was 13 when he saw Starship Troopers (and he read at a 12th grade level).

These articles are too clever (by a half) to be anything other than masterworks in contemporary cultural critiques.
First off: great post. Great points.

I definitely considered some of this. Specifically, that Hall's headline in particular is deliberately clickbaity. Headlines that promise more than the text delivers are a pet peeve of mine, but in this case the text itself is just as audacious. I suppose that could be to generate discussion, but I'm not sure, so I'm inclined to think he's not inflating his actual opinions much. But I don't know for sure.

This is definitely A Thing, though: the inability to distinguish between someone's views and the views they inflate (or maybe even adopt outright) because it figures to be of interest to people. I'm of the mind that anyone who does this long enough stops asking themselves altogether and sees their job as simply adopting a position for the sake of others' entertainment. Like an actor. But we still expect non-fiction articles and editorials to respect earnestly held opinions, and I feel like we're just starting to learn not to do that. At least not automatically.

All that said, I do know people who really think these things (all of them young men around the same age, I feel compelled to point out), so my operating theory is still that it's mostly genuine.



Re: Strangelove. Wasn't the facepalm in response to the idea that it wasn't "intelligent and thoughtful"? Saying you didn't find it funny is another thing entirely.
I wasn't saying it wasn't itellegent and thoughtful. I was saying it wasn't fun. I thought I'd made that quite plain.

Similarly, finding Starship Troopers fun or funny isn't really mutually exclusive with what I'm saying. It may be enjoyable for any number of reasons, but I don't see any reason to call it intelligent or thoughtful. Thoughtful satire wouldn't dress anyone up as Nazis, methinks.
__________________
5-time MoFo Award winner.



I wasn't saying it wasn't itellegent and thoughtful. I was saying it wasn't fun. I thought I'd made that quite plain.
Hmmm, I think this part is what confused things:
"After all, how often is satire brilliant? Well thought out, intelligent and thoughtful? Sure. but it needs to be more than that, doesn't it? Starship Troopers certainly isn't that. Nor's Dr. Stranglove
I read that was "Nor is Dr. Strangelove intelligent and thoughtful." Fair enough, though, if that's not what you were saying.

References to the Nazis can be fine, but having people parade around in SS uniforms is a bit different than having one give the salute, which is short, easier to miss, and in the case of Strangelove actually dovetails with something we already knew about his character (the trick arm). It's not the best example of thoughtfulness in the film, but I'd still put it light years ahead of this:




All that said, I do know people who really think these things (all of them young men around the same age, I feel compelled to point out), so my operating theory is still that it's mostly genuine.
Agreed. Also my attempt at doubleplusgood satire made me me look like I had more of a real argument than I really had (or maybe less, satire is actually hard to write). I was pretty much making fun of them both without thoughtful rebuke (your post did that fine). Though I focused on the first article because he had the audacity to imply that Animal Farm connection.

Satire is such an open device that can be applied to anything with enough willpower. The limits of where satire starts and ends is dependent on the party's willingness to control where they let it go. There's a ton of movies with a satirical bent that are still overall genuine movies. I can still give The Incredibles real critique on its plot without being told that I'm missing the point because there's not a defensive attitude about the movie; it's well loved. I believe you're right that these articles were written with a defensive attitude. They identify that there are obvious satirical parts, but then clearly overuse the application of which parts are satire, which to me, takes away from the meaning of the term. To steal from The Incredibles, if everything is satire; nothing is.



Hmmm, I think this part is what confused things:
"After all, how often is satire brilliant? Well thought out, intelligent and thoughtful? Sure. but it needs to be more than that, doesn't it? Starship Troopers certainly isn't that. Nor's Dr. Stranglove
I read that was "Nor is Dr. Strangelove intelligent and thoughtful." Fair enough, though, if that's not what you were saying.
It wasn't really what I meant, but it certainly reads that way. There's a sentence or two missing there. That's my fault. That said, I don't think that the satire in Strangelove is of great note. I don't think it's particularly clever, is what I'm trying to say. Though there's no reason that it should be and I'm not saying it's stupid. Where it really fails is in being funny. To call it a comedy is extremely generous, IMO.

Is satire ever really clever? And, if it is and isn't spotted, is it still satire? If so, is there any point to it if it's not spotted? mark mentioned black comedy before and it's something I've asked of that, too.

References to the Nazis can be fine, but having people parade around in SS uniforms is a bit different than having one give the salute, which is short, easier to miss, and in the case of Strangelove actually dovetails with something we already knew about his character (the trick arm). It's not the best example of thoughtfulness in the film, but I'd still put it light years ahead of this:

So subtlety is better satire? Maybe. I can certainly see that as an arguement. Though a character desperately trying not to give a Nazi salute and calling the President "Mein Furher" isn't exactly sublte, IMO. I think the two most iconic moments of the film (Strangelove saluting and Slim Pickens riding the bomb) aren't at all subtle. Maybe that's why they're the most iconic moments?

At no point have I said that Starship Troopers is better satire/more satirical than Strangelove. I merely picked it because it's often held up as a good/great example of satire in film, especially when satirising war, government, the military, etc

I'm not denying that Verhoeven is using it as a blunt weapon, bludgeoning the audience ala Oliver Stone's commentary on violence in Natural Born Killers. That's in part why I've found it a little strange when people say they didn't see it as satire. He's hardly being subtle, but maybe that's to do with a non-American view of the US as opposed to a US view?

It's been a long time since I last saw Strangelove. Is it more satirical thatn Starship Troopers? Probably. Does that matter? No. Not to me.

I don't know who's calling Starship Troopers brilliant satire, but I don't agree with them but what is brilliant satire? Personally I think Starship Troopers satirises the US attitude to the military and military service very well. That it isn't subtle about it doesn't make it poor or clumsy, IMO. It hits its target. My only question would be whether it's possible to make a 'brilliant satire' about something which is almost, if not completely, beyond satire?



....Thoughtful satire wouldn't dress anyone up as Nazis, methinks.
References to the Nazis can be fine, but having people parade around in SS uniforms is a bit different than having one give the salute, which is short, easier to miss, and in the case of Strangelove actually dovetails with something we already knew about his character (the trick arm). It's not the best example of thoughtfulness in the film, but I'd still put it light years ahead of this:

I don't like seeing cruelty to animals! So if I watch a film that people like, but it has cruelity to animals, I will dislike it for that reason. In fact I might even hate it.

I would say Yoda's beef with the film is the pseudo Nazis, based on his above quotes. Which is fine, we're all entitled to have reactions to film images. I know I do.

In my review here at MoFo (did anyone bother to read it?) I said this of Starship Troopers:

"On the surface Starship Troopers works as an action packed, special effects movie. But look deeper and it's a clever parody of ultra-militarism."

I didn't use the word satire. Maybe even parody isn't the correct text book word. But it's clear that the director was attempting to show more than just an action film. I say he succeeded.



VFN
Winter Calls Thy Name
Some did see satire when it was released so any claims to the contrary are wrong. One, a director's assistant, even offers a reason why so many missed things. And if, indeed, so many did miss things from a director who also made Robocop, a widely recognized satire, the question becomes whose fault is that.

Well written piece. Both an interesting and engaging read.



VFN
Winter Calls Thy Name
I would say Yoda's beef with the film is the pseudo Nazis, based on his above quotes. Which is fine, we're all entitled to have reactions to film images. I know I do.
From a piece I linked to:

"Many critics...have noted the film's predominant Nazi imagery (primarily the telltale costumes), but chalk it up either to the influence of Robert A. Heinlein's novel, or by saying that Verhoeven really is a fascist, an argument that conveniently ignores that Verhoeven actually lived under Nazi occupation as a child; to believe a survivor of German conquest would genuinely promote a fascist future is absurd.

"Thus while the aesthetics of "Starship Troopers" are derived from Nazi Germany, the mentality the movie truly explores and exposes through satire is that of warmongering, a condition certainly not limited to fascist dictatorships. The film can in fact be read as a textbook demonstration of how a typical Hollywood action flick can be subtly infected with ideas that can subvert the common morality."