Starship Troopers is a great, action-packed, shoot-'em-up, kill-the-bad-guys (bugs) science fiction adventure film with lots of great special effects. The battles scenes, both in space and on the ground, are graphic, complex, and exciting. It begins on Earth, in the future, with a political system that blends democracy with meritocracy. In order to have all the privileges and rights of citizenship, a person must provide a valued service to the state. For many, that means military service.

As the movie begins, Earth is at war with a space faring race of giant, sentient insectoids. They are colonizing planets, and the government of Earth feels compelled to stop them. A young man, Johnny Rico (Casper Van Dien) joins the military, at least partly to honor his favorite teacher, Jean Rascal (Michael Ironside), who is a wounded veteran. The movie follows Johnny’s career as he quickly rises in rank, aided by the attrition-by-death of those ranked higher. Meanwhile, a one-time friend, Carl Jenkins (Neil Patrick Harris) who is a genius in the intelligence branch of the military.

Can the humans defeat the bugs? How many will die on both sides? Will Johnny get a chance to fall in love, or have sex, or both? Will Carl figure out the bugs?

The movie is supposedly based upon Robert Heinlein's science fiction classic, written in 1959. Heinlein had three goals:

1) Put forth the idea that a true American patriot could be anti-war and need not be fanatically anti-Communist, a la Joe McCarthy.

2) Satirize war by glorifying it in a tongue-in-cheek manner and by shoving its horror in your face, much like "Saving Private Ryan" did seriously, and much like Archie Bunker did comedically to racism and bigotry.

3) Put forth the philosophy that freedom and responsibility are inextricably linked. Many people today have forgotten that, and moral decline is the result.

What does the movie do with these ideas? It misses the point entirely and sarcastically (not satirically) attacks war, patriotism, AND responsibility. It does this by turning the whole story into a farce, and by minimizing the role of the teacher, Jean Rasczak, of responsibility and sometimes portraying him as a bitter fanatic.

The cast, composed mainly of attractive young men and women, whom I initially saw as lacking in talent, actually probably did the best they could with a script that sometimes sounded like it belonged in a Saturday morning cartoon. In their defense, I would guess that most of the cast read the script and not the book. They also did not live through the threat of global war, which was fanned as much by McCarthy's inflammatory anti-Communist rhetoric and fanaticism as it was by Stalinism, Leninism, and Marxism. What defense does the producer and the director have? Or, was this a political statement? Most likely, it was just an attempt to rake in some dough and, as it did fairly well at the box office, and spawned a sequel, it succeeded at that.

The voice-over narration was a big mistake. It furthered the effect of having this film become a caricature of the book, and it was totally unnecessary. There is also a huge hole in the logic of the story, as it was portrayed in the movie. The aliens seem endless in number and highly prolific. However, all the planets shown in the movie looked almost completely devoid of any food-source to support those teeming hordes of huge bugs.

If you want to watch a good science fiction adventure film with lots of special effects, action, and gore, this movie is for you. But, please do not take it seriously or think that it represents Heinlein's book faithfully. If you want to think about this movie and its ideas, please do two things first: read the book it was supposedly based upon, and either read the history of the era that birthed the book or talk with someone born before 1934 at length about the era.

Recommended:
No

Viewing Format: VHS
Video Occasion: None of the Above
Suitability For Children: Not suitable for Children of any age