The Movie Thread Reloaded

[Pat]

Saw some of Falcon and the Winter Soldier. Its one idiot plot after another wrapped in woke agenda.
Called it that they would replace Captain America with jackass John Walker Cap.

I think it's amusing that most of the people talking about Falcon & the Winter Soldier think it's woke because of stuff like a patriotic white guy set up as the villain, and the scene where the Falcon is threatened by a cop because he's black. But a significant minority seem to think it's anti-woke, because the white villain gets redeemed, the real villains are basically Antifa, and one of the key scenes has faux-Antifa literally being beaten to death with an American flag (Cap's shield). Critical Drinker is an example in the first category, Tim Pool in the second. I haven't seen it myself, so I can't reconcile the opposing views.

[BoxCrayonTales]

Sometimes they make these movies by slapping the name of one IP on the script for another simply to retain the IP and cut losses on scripts bought.

That's what happened with Starship Troopers. They took an unrelated script and slapped the name on it.

It's really frustrating because the movie is supposedly a satire/parody of the book but utterly fails in every way.

Namely, Johnny is Filipino. Sure, he grew up in Brazil but ethnically his family is Filipino. He speaks Tagalog!

The book is also very progressive for the time in terms of representing racial diversity, women, and persons with disabilities in the military. If Heinlein had written it now, then I suspect he'd include brief references to marines being LGBT+ or autistic.

We don't get a lot of insight into how the Terran Federation is actually run. It's extremely vague and comes across as extremely cynical about human nature in spots (e.g. a teacher dismissing the Declaration of Independence as idealistic nonsense, when ironically nowadays only far leftists think that), but it's definitely not obviously fascist as detractors claim (or dystopian, or utopian, either). It's basically Heinlein saying "I think human nature sucks, I'm angry about that, I'm not sure my fictional government can fix the problems."

I don't know how you could make a genuine satire of the book given that it doesn't provide much material to work with. Maybe depict the Federation as some kind of neutropia/uchronia where it's both militaristic and socialist? I bet that would make heads explode on both sides of the political isle. A society that is both socialist and respects the armed forces couldn't possibly exist, could it?

[oggsmash]

Sometimes they make these movies by slapping the name of one IP on the script for another simply to retain the IP and cut losses on scripts bought.

That's what happened with Starship Troopers. They took an unrelated script and slapped the name on it.

It's really frustrating because the movie is supposedly a satire/parody of the book but utterly fails in every way.

Namely, Johnny is Filipino. Sure, he grew up in Brazil but ethnically his family is Filipino. He speaks Tagalog!

The book is also very progressive for the time in terms of representing racial diversity, women, and persons with disabilities in the military. If Heinlein had written it now, then I suspect he'd include brief references to marines being LGBT+ or autistic.

We don't get a lot of insight into how the Terran Federation is actually run. It's extremely vague and comes across as extremely cynical about human nature in spots (e.g. a teacher dismissing the Declaration of Independence as idealistic nonsense, when ironically nowadays only far leftists think that), but it's definitely not obviously fascist as detractors claim (or dystopian, or utopian, either). It's basically Heinlein saying "I think human nature sucks, I'm angry about that, I'm not sure my fictional government can fix the problems."

I don't know how you could make a genuine satire of the book given that it doesn't provide much material to work with. Maybe depict the Federation as some kind of neutropia/uchronia where it's both militaristic and socialist? I bet that would make heads explode on both sides of the political isle. A society that is both socialist and respects the armed forces couldn't possibly exist, could it?

    He grew up in Argentina.   Which is one reason I suspect they made him white in the movie, because all they knew about him was being from Argentina and his name.   Which I will add, I never gave a thought as to his race and I only remember one character's ethnicity discussed (other than very briefly where they finally mention he is filipino), and that was the Japanese recruit in his company who would test the Drill Instructor in the hand to hand combat sparring.

    But maybe they just made him white because hollywood thought it would sell better, I sort of have doubts they know Argentina is pretty pasty, and I think Buenos Ares is really Pasty.

[Ghostmaker]

The godawful adaptation of Starship Troopers has always been irritating to me, because the CG-animated series was even better and closer to the source material.

Heinlein, IMO, holds to the view of the 'constrained vs unconstrained' (as per Thomas Sowell). Short form, humans are fallible, mortal, and prone to fuckery; so we should build our institutions in such a way that if we DO get a bad egg in there, we can limit the damage they do. This is the 'constrained' viewpoint. In SST, there's a hard gate to any form of elected office or the franchise: tangible service to said government. Think of it as 'skin in the game'. It's not perfect, but it acts as a filter for petty time-servers and sociopaths.

[BoxCrayonTales]

The godawful adaptation of Starship Troopers has always been irritating to me, because the CG-animated series was even better and closer to the source material.

Heinlein, IMO, holds to the view of the 'constrained vs unconstrained' (as per Thomas Sowell). Short form, humans are fallible, mortal, and prone to fuckery; so we should build our institutions in such a way that if we DO get a bad egg in there, we can limit the damage they do. This is the 'constrained' viewpoint. In SST, there's a hard gate to any form of elected office or the franchise: tangible service to said government. Think of it as 'skin in the game'. It's not perfect, but it acts as a filter for petty time-servers and sociopaths.

Roughnecks: Starship Troopers Chronicles was closer in the sense that it didn't hate its source material, but it's only very loosely similar to the source material. It essentially takes place in the same setting as the novel, but the plot is completely new. Which I think is for the better, because the novel can get pretty boring.

Too bad the show is so difficult to get ahold of now. It's not available on streaming and the DVDs are OOP.

[Pat]

... because the novel can get pretty boring.

The slim novel that's packed with action is... boring?

Getting back to the movie, I liked it. It's an entertaining satire in itself. It's just not a good adaptation of the novel.

[Zelen]

... because the novel can get pretty boring.

The slim novel that's packed with action is... boring?

Getting back to the movie, I liked it. It's an entertaining satire in itself. It's just not a good adaptation of the novel.

The movie is interesting mostly in that it presents itself as a propaganda film, whose its schtick is that it's supposed to subvert the propaganda you're viewing. However, if you take the movie at face value on what it presents -- Then a reasonable viewer is probably going to look at what's going on and say that the society we see isn't so bad, and makes sense in a world with humans fighting for survival against a sophisticated and deadly alien threat.

The film ends up revealing its own subversive message as the real propaganda. It's a tremendous self-own that I'd almost say was genius if I had any confidence at all that Verhoeven intended it.

[Omega]

Saw some of Falcon and the Winter Soldier. Its one idiot plot after another wrapped in woke agenda.
Called it that they would replace Captain America with jackass John Walker Cap.

I think it's amusing that most of the people talking about Falcon & the Winter Soldier think it's woke because of stuff like a patriotic white guy set up as the villain, and the scene where the Falcon is threatened by a cop because he's black. But a significant minority seem to think it's anti-woke, because the white villain gets redeemed, the real villains are basically Antifa, and one of the key scenes has faux-Antifa literally being beaten to death with an American flag (Cap's shield). Critical Drinker is an example in the first category, Tim Pool in the second. I haven't seen it myself, so I can't reconcile the opposing views.

It is weird really as it ping pongs back and fourth like theres two opposing writers or something. As for my ref to Walker, was more that it was a given they'd toss him in as the next cap. He was part of the 90s iteration of SJW push. Though in the comics hes a jerk and doesnt much change that attitude all the way to becomming USAgent. Pretty much a Guy Gardner wanna be. Only much less abrasive and utterly unlikable. Still unlikable though. But then Gardner set a really low bar to beat. If they can pull Walker out of the gutter thats ok.

But the background is just, ugh. Unfortunately anything Marvel/Disney related is pretty much doomed anyhoo. If it isnt fucked up. They WILL fuck it up.

[Shrieking Banshee]

But a significant minority seem to think it's anti-woke, because the white villain gets redeemed, the real villains are basically Antifa,

In situations like these, I generally think about the person (or entity) making the product.
Disney is in general woke, I would say believes 70% of what they say, but also make generally tepid takes and are primarily motivated by money over any other principle.
If the money split was equal, and they had a choice, I believe they would support wokeness all the way. Thats how your 'friends' tell you to think in hollywood.

[jhkim]

But a significant minority seem to think it's anti-woke, because the white villain gets redeemed, the real villains are basically Antifa,

In situations like these, I generally think about the person (or entity) making the product.
Disney is in general woke, I would say believes 70% of what they say, but also make generally tepid takes and are primarily motivated by money over any other principle.
If the money split was equal, and they had a choice, I believe they would support wokeness all the way. Thats how your 'friends' tell you to think in hollywood.

I don't think that Disney as a *company* believes even a 10% fraction of what they say. They might put forward some creative types who are 70% believers and lean Democrat, but the corporate controllers just want to make money - and that is the primary function.

Minor spoilers for the series, but I thought it hit a bunch of conservative themes as well as liberal ones. They'd played up Sam as a small-town Southerner just trying to help his working-class family. And Bucky was obsessed with redeeming his past of horrific communist mind-control. And both of them are military veterans. As Pat notes, the main villains are antifa - and the revealed extra villain at the end is the political elite.

It seems to me that Disney is doing a very skillful dance of blending in different themes, such that people can see the side that they want to in it. Black Panther was masterful in this - winning praise as one of the most conservative films of the decade in multiple lists, while also winning lots of liberal praise.

[Shrieking Banshee]

I don't think that Disney as a *company* believes even a 10% fraction of what they say. They might put forward some creative types who are 70% believers and lean Democrat, but the corporate controllers just want to make money - and that is the primary function.

True. But from my familiarity with the corporations, they believe more of their BS than people say. Especially on the creative team side.

As for the series: I don't give a rats behind. I was done with marvel superheroes since the first avegers. Everything since then has just been more noise and general blandness.

[oggsmash]

  When we say Disney as a *company* we mean the top officers of the corporation and the Board of directors right?  Well list off who those people are and lets dig into what they do or do not believe.  I will bet my left pinkie over 70 percent of them contributed money to the democratic party.  Like lots of democrats, especially the ones with shitloads of money, they keep their finances super conservative but sure to trumpet out about those liberal causes and what "is good for small folk".   I mean they gave millions of dollars to BLM.   Parse what you will about a person's super secret real thoughts, but when you give millions to an openly marxist organization, I think that says a whole lot more about you than whatever super secret "real" belief you may have.

[jhkim]

True. But from my familiarity with the corporations, they believe more of their BS than people say. Especially on the creative team side.

As for the series: I don't give a rats behind. I was done with marvel superheroes since the first avegers. Everything since then has just been more noise and general blandness.

I thought a number of the later movies were actually less bland than the original ones. The originals were mostly origin stories without much individual style. But some of the later individual movies were a lot more stylish. Guardians of the Galaxy with its in-character 70s soundtrack was great fun, and Doctor Strange had its amazing psychedelic visuals, Ant-Man with its size-changing and perspective-changing gimmicks, and Spider-Man was a refreshing take on the teen superhero. One of my favorites was Thor: Ragnarok with its quirky humor and heavy metal soundtrack, though I know some people hated it.

I did think that the big event movies were noisy and bland - Ultron, Civil War, and especially Infinity War which I hated. I did like Endgame, but I had low expectations after Infinity War.

[Shrieking Banshee]

I thought a number of the later movies were actually less bland than the original ones.

It's like a 5% difference to me. Structure, art, direction, design, story...Nearly everything but a slight gimmick-wise, all the marvel films are near indistinguishable.
It's a mass-manufactured malibu Stacy, with a different hat. Every film feels like its just fiddling with the comedy/action/drama knobs just a little bit, with maybe a minor aesthetic twinge. But execution wise everything is nearly the same.

[Ratman_tf]

... because the novel can get pretty boring.

The slim novel that's packed with action is... boring?

Getting back to the movie, I liked it. It's an entertaining satire in itself. It's just not a good adaptation of the novel.

The movie is interesting mostly in that it presents itself as a propaganda film, whose its schtick is that it's supposed to subvert the propaganda you're viewing. However, if you take the movie at face value on what it presents -- Then a reasonable viewer is probably going to look at what's going on and say that the society we see isn't so bad, and makes sense in a world with humans fighting for survival against a sophisticated and deadly alien threat.

The film ends up revealing its own subversive message as the real propaganda. It's a tremendous self-own that I'd almost say was genius if I had any confidence at all that Verhoeven intended it.

The only way I can enjoy the film is as a self-own. It's an unintentional parody of a satire of fascism.