Director:
Paul VerhoevenGuión:
Edward NeumeierCámara:
Jost VacanoMúsica:
Basil PoledourisReparto:
Casper Van Dien, Dina Meyer, Denise Richards, Jake Busey, Neil Patrick Harris, Clancy Brown, Seth Gilliam, Patrick Muldoon, Michael Ironside (más)Streaming (2)
Sinopsis(1)
La Federación te necesita para una arriesgada misión: desde el comienzo de los tiempos el hombre ha gobernado el mundo, pero en un futuro no muy lejano la supremacia interplanetaria de la raza humana será amenazada por el ataque de una raza de insectos alienígenas gigantes. Poco se sabe de estos bichos, salvo que intentan erradicar cualquier rastro de vida humana. En esta guerra la victoria significa supervivencia; la derrota, extinción. (Buena Vista International Spain)
(más)Reseñas (12)
Verhoeven doesn’t mess around much. Starship Troopers was a commercial flop in the US, the Americans found no sympathy for the satirical undertones of the fascistic depiction of the human society of the future and the naturalistic gore scenes. When I went to see it, there was a little girl and her mom sitting next to me. The little girl loved it at first, the story unfolded like a sort of Beverly Hills 90210 from the future. Gradually, however, Verhoven's creepiness began to be revealed and the little girl and her mother couldn't stand it and ran away from the cinema. I, on the other hand, was in my element. State-controlled news and army recruitment, as if cut from the documentaries of the Communist era. Kindergarten children trampling little bugs to the enthusiastic applause of the teacher, it was like seeing our peasants exterminating the American potato beetle in the 1950s. The cerebral elite in long black coats, looking like Gestapo, a female lead dying in pain and with blood in her teeth – tell me, how many times have you seen a female lead die like that in a mainstream film? No, I'm not a pervert who revels in that, I just love Verhoeven's lack of inhibition, which he has demonstrated so many times before and which, in the case of this film, makes for a hard-to-digest affair that can't possibly have a chance at wider commercial appeal. And I get the feeling that Verhoeven doesn't give a toss, and that's what I like about him. Arms, legs and heads fly through the air with such frequency that it must have given the censors a hard time. And on top of that, those amazing visual effects. No, this is not mass entertainment, this is a cult-classic for weirdos.
()
A whip-sharp satire, or is the film really as stupidly militant as it looks? I vote for the first option. Because if my other extreme is true, Verhoeven is not capable, which contradicts his nature. If you watch Starship Troopers with exaggeration and relate it to fictional models of individual genres (a war film, a teen series from “high-school", an action sci-fi, a propaganda documentary), then you just can't help but bow down, because Starship Troopers works great. On the one hand, the film is able to captivate through mass combat scenes and tension on the battlefield, and on the other hand it can entertain with satirical whisks, especially during the inserted sequences from the "period media". Paul Verhoeven cannot be considered anything other than one of the greatest deviants of the silver screen, and the contradictory reception of his works is the best proof that he is doing his job amazingly. In this case, however, it’s a little less amazing, because what it parodies it also absorbs dangerously in places.
()
If Paul Verhoeven had actually made the satire that so many of the reviews keep referring to, I would have enjoyed it; and yet the director isn't making fun of multiple genres at once. Instead, he's combining three genres together to occasionally try, sometimes awkwardly, sometimes decently, to engage the viewer. Still, I would like more than just oscillating between awkward dialogue, unimaginative training sequences, and the film's best aspect, namely the well-executed and action-packed fights with the enemy. I would like to delve deeper into the film, and the resolution of whether the main hero ends up with this one or that one, or pondering the different ways bugs can kill you, will never give me that.
()
I consider this movie a cinematic treat. A masterful example of modern, intricately crafted kitsch with a large budget and advertising. The high rating indicates that it is an exceedingly successful example. If this is a sample of an anti-war film and a satire on dumb series for teenagers, then I become an enthusiastic militarist and a consumer. Paul Verhoeven employs elements from teenage series, cheesy sci-fi movies, and bloody action films, while also using some elements from artworks and creating an impression of satirical exaggeration and criticism. Kitsch is simply something that pretends to be something else, and Verhoeven is a very good player. Those who give the film four or five stars, do it precisely for the outward appearance of action sci-fi movies, for the digital special effects, for the visual aspect of the film, and for those beautiful young actors who took a break from shooting commercials. However, you are aware of the superficiality and need to wrap it in some acceptable, seemingly critical form. Yes, it's dynamic, and colorful, with lots of lovely women. Overall impression: 40%.
()
An incredibly entertaining parody of everything that stood in Paul Verhoeven's way at that time. Brilliant internet interludes, brutal and unprecedented bloody action scenes that are almost flawless, likeable protagonists, excellent one-liners, Michael Ironside as the ultimate badass, and fantastic looking bugs. This is how an action-packed masterpiece should look, skillfully alternating suspense with light-heartedness. I admire the director, he truly wasn't afraid to use large amounts of blood and scored with that. If nothing else, even the skeptics will remember this movie because of all the severed limbs and heads. Brilliant fun and excellent score by Basil Poledouris.
()
Verhoeven on drugs. :) It’s almost incredible how well this film works. Here we have a futuristically oriented mockery of militaristic nationalism, a bunch of schoolboys in love, sets like from Star Trek, and waves of nasty bugs spreading death in a very brutal and gory way. But most importantly, we have an avalanche of amazing insight, outrageously entertaining execution of both the individual action scenes and the concept of the narrative as a whole (the TV spots featuring the mindset of the society and the physicality of the bugs are not to be missed), Casper Van Dien as the male lead and a downright gorgeous Denise Richards as the female lead. A nostalgic sci-fi flick which, if we accept in time that we are watching a deliberate insane B-movie, is an almost inexhaustible source of entertainment. 80%
()
Starship Troopers has on the one hand decent visual effects and a good dose of action, but on the other hand it has an incredibly dull script that makes you roll your eyes in all directions. Almost all of the characters are unlikeable to varying degrees, so I couldn't even root for them to survive – the only exception being Michael Ironside as Rasczak. (SPOILER!) Finally, I have to nitpick about the bizarre appearance of the bugs' main brain, which (not so) slightly resembled a certain body orifice.
()
How to stay true to the idea and structure of Henlein's premise while epically wiping your ass with it and its entire author. The inability of critics of the time to recognize the satire in a film steeped in Reiefenstal-esque angles and the sectarian milieu of a utopian Earth, not to mention the cast, demonstrates time and again the importance of building a sensitivity to the form of film, the Achilles heel of most film theorists. ___ Update 2021: I am convinced that there is no such thing as immunity to visual propaganda, and whoever thinks they have it is saying so in the name of propagandizing others. After years of rising above the propagandistic nature of Starship Troopers, it only just dawned on me that the proper reading is to succumb to it for a lovely 129 minutes and, through cheering on those beautiful young people, to enjoy that sense of power and purpose. It's an important cathartic experience that ultimately helps you be more sensitive to the natural need to fall for that propaganda and marketing in real life.
()
One of the best anti-war films ever as far as I’m concerned. Shiny happy people brainwashed by propaganda that even Goebbels would envy fight to the last limb against sneaky repulsive bugs. The film's main positives definitely include the direction, excellent costumes whose legacy is crystal clear, the endless enthusiasm of all the soldiers, the comedic propaganda shots with chilling subtext, and the great supporting characters of Clancy Brown and Michael Ironside. Verhoeven failed to disappoint me again.
()
A beautiful example of how it's possible to make a B-movie with significant depth. And also a demonstration of how critics mostly don't get it. The question is whether Verhoeven really made such a groundbreaking B-movie or if the critics are right. I'd lean more towards the first option because, by the way, even the visual aspect is great, and the battles with the bugs are fantastic.
()
A remarkable contrast of high school romance and the utopian vision of a fascistized society that is nicely Verhoeven in its satire and fitting brutality. The illustration of the possibilities of television propaganda here is absolutely magnificent, and in many ways follows in the footsteps of Robocop. There is no doubt that Paul Verhoeven pulled the wool over the eyes of Hollywood a number times in the 90s and that he must have pissed off a good number of pseudo-intellectuals with his specifically decadent style. [90%]
()
Only a few movies have as polarizing ratings as Starship Troopers from 1997. A lot has been written about it, numerous podcasts have discussed it (I recommend the one from Movie Witches), and yet, my opinion hasn't changed - it's one of the best movies, a personal favorite, love at first sight that endures :)) Sure, the effects are now more on the funny side (although for that time and budget, they were absolutely awesome), the story is somewhat almost naive, the source material and the book have been compared a thousand times, and there's also the debate about its satire on fascism and societal hierarchy. However, if you simply view it as a nearly thirty-year-old sci-fi masterpiece, it's still cool as hell and it works. Personally, I've probably seen it about 15 times, and each time, maybe even thanks to the elapsed time and some sort of mental development (LOL), I discover something I missed before or understand it differently. At the end, it doesn't matter if I'm ten, twenty, or thirty-five yrs old - the brain-sucking scene is just twistedly awesome, and Casper is Casper. So, Oorah! :D
()
Anuncio