---David Lee Beowulf
Return to the Starship Troopers Essay
>>----------
>>From: Underdog
>>Sent: Saturday, November 08, 1997 12:19:55 PM
>>To: David Lee Beowulf, MISTER JAMES LAKE, IK, and a couple of others.
>>Subject: Starship troopers away!
>>Auto forwarded by a Rule
>>
>Saw the movie last night -- met and exceeded expectations
>Very violent with just the right amount of breasts.
>
>Can tell the director did Robocop -- style similar
>
David Lee Beowulf says: "...It's the Greatest Science Ficiton Film Ever.
From: IK
To: (David Lee Beowulf), Underdog
>... Greatest Science Fiction Film Ever.
A little extreme, but it was pretty good.
I had one significant problem, though:
If mankind had the technology to develop a star drive, you'd think they'd
have something more impressive than hopped-up M-16s to kill bugs with.
The U.S. had better weapons (and used them!) in the Vietnam war.
Also (this is Heinlein's problem, not the films), there wasn't ever a
real reason to risk human lives battling bugs, since they are not
spacefaring. Send some robots down to squash them! About the only scene
that made sense from a tactical standpoint was the carpet bombing.
Everything else was a stupid waste of human life.
Still, prbably the best F/X film of the last three years.
--Ian
>>... Greatest Science Fiction Film Ever.
>
>A little extreme, but it was pretty good.
>
>I had one significant problem, though:
>
>If mankind had the technology to develop a star drive, you'd think they'd
>have something more impressive than hopped-up M-16s to kill bugs with.
>The U.S. had better weapons (and used them!) in the Vietnam war.
Good point. And that's something a lot of purists took issue with. In the book the bugs are intelligent from the beginning, are tool-using and have a high level of technology. They even have alliances with other planets and sentients. Also, the Mobile Infantry was denied their powered armor that played an important part in the book. I allowed the liberty the film took because they "explained" things by a marked ignorance of Bug society on the part of the Earth. Apparently their military intelligence was wrong otherwise the plasma shots wouldn't have caused any damage. The Bugs weren't that easy to kill because of their numbers and that they had colonized a lot of planets. They also hid underground. Why weren't the planets simply nuked? That's probably harder than possible. They'd need a "Death Star"-type ship too carry that much firepower, which the Terran Fleet didn't have.
>Also (this is Heinlein's problem, not the films), there wasn't ever a
>real reason to risk human lives battling bugs, since they are not
>spacefaring. Send some robots down to squash them! About the only scene
>that made sense from a tactical standpoint was the carpet bombing.
>Everything else was a stupid waste of human life.
>
Well, if Asimov had written it, maybe a "go" on the robots, but with the "three laws" in effect, they'd kill no people (Asimov is dead, GOOD)... However, I suspect the same reason they didn't have armies of robots to do the killing was because the complacent society of liberal pukes who kept fucking up the world with their wars never thought to expend the resources on robot soldiers (working-class slobs are much cheaper). Hence, when the military seized power, there were no robot armies. And why build them? You'd only relegate humans to the couch while any real work was done by robots. A character from Britain's "The Eagle," 19 August 1995 appealing for assitance against an enemy says to Dan Dare, "...the habit of 10,000 years of peace has robbed us of the will to resist..." The bugs were able to defend themselves against space-based weapons, though, and pretty well. I suspect they have a sophisticated psy network that allows them to receive and process radio waves, sub-space beacons and all that crap. Carpet bombing is possible, but they'd still have to send probes down to make sure they hit anything. When your enemey is buried deep, the surface doesn't matter much, and the main purpose of carpet bombing is to reduce the enemy's morale. [Chapter 10 of Starship Troopers provides all the rationale behind not bombing the surface until it's sealed -handy how that's at my side, no?.] If your enemy relies on un-ending numbers, morale doesn't enter the equation, which is how army ants live, same with termites. In Viet Nam the enemy had morale on his side; we could bomb all we wanted, but it only made them dig deeper and fight harder. The bugs were able to colonize a solar system (at least) by shooting their spoores into outer space, probably more efficient than we were at it, too. I suspect the brain bugs are able to communicate between planets.
The problems with the film I saw were: What do the bugs eat? However, since we have Dougie Howser working on bug pysiology day and night, we'll soon know. I also thought they should have given the bugs a sophisticated technology. The bugs have ships in the book.
>Still, prbably the best F/X film of the last three years.
>
I gave the moive so much credit because of their 1) meticulous attention to detail (Total Recall had the same detailed feel, as did Robocop), e.g., the sweat on Zander's brow as they were escaping from P, and the escape from the exploding _Robert Young_. The dirt looked real. Very nice touches. 2) keeping with the Heinleinian essance of the story and 3) keeping as much of the story in the film as they could. The characters are generally the same, they act pretty logically, they're smart and there's as little "soap opera" as possible. I mean, the book is essentially "90210 Against the Giant Cockroaches From Mars." I also thought the acting was on par with what was required. Plus they didn't ruin it with a stupid "marketable" soundtrack.
The film is very balanced, I mean, this is a case of doing it right. My estranged ex-girlfriend, who accompanied me to the film, who has no understanding of nor appreciation for science fiction (odd, she's an engineer,though, you'd think technical fiction would interest her, then again, I remember all the stiffs I went to school with who never cracked book 1 unelss it was required reading) was in awe of the storytelling. She asked "how come Hollywood doesn't tell good stories like this one?" I mean, we weren't subjected to drek like [most movies]. I would really like it if this signals a rennaissance of Hollywood moviemaking where they kill all the non-talented prducers, project managers, etc. and put all the great novels written over the years to film. Screw the lowest common denominator! Starship Troopers shows how you can tell a great story and add amazing effects, guarenteeing a 10:1 return on investment. I mean, we could've had another "Dune" on our hands. I want to see someone do "Paradise Lost" with Dolby sound! then I want to see "Beowulf" and everything else I've read put to screen by Paul Verhoeven!
The sequel should explain the bugs society adding all sorts of things they were able to keep secret from the Dougie Howser 1-900 psychic hotline. In fact, the Klenthandu system the Terran Federation nailed was really, "Klenthandu Lite," that is, it was a clever rouse to take over the economic power of the United States by forcing us to pay twice to see the same movie once...
Subject: Re: Starship Troopers - The verdict...
Sent: 11/10 15:50
Received: 11/11 00:24
From: Underdog,
I had issue with the weaponry too. The choice for the grunt was either to
try to empty an entire clip into one bug in the hopes that it dies, or fire
a nuke and risk blowing up the entire platoon. They seemed to have
addressed the issue at the end of the movie with an introduction of a new
boom stick. The body suits would have been very cool but too expensive to
include in the movie - they played around with some concepts and realized
that it would have cost about 80k a piece.
Tanks or at least infantry fighting vehicles would have made some sense.
No mechanized infantry?? Our current forces would have fared better. The
grunt today has or shortly will have head ups display for tactical display
and information linked to GPS and surveillance satellites. He will see the
whole picture related to his position. The movie presented well trained
but poorly equipped soldiers. The land base that was over run by the bugs
was also a joke. No mines, no long distance weaponry. Considering that
today we have hand held phones that can reach anyone on the planet. Their
lack of distributed commutations was also a small issue at the base anyway.
I guess the problem for me was that they did such a good job that I keep
expecting more
A couple of other technical issues: When the pilot babe first takes flight
she deploys the "wings" of the shuttle. Considering the lack of
aerodynamic forces in space what was the purpose of wings? The star drive
jump they used to get to the planet suggest that its way far away. The
asteroids they were hurling toward earth would have taken 100s of years (at
least) to reach earth -- I don't remember if the book addressed this!
still all in all I agree with David -- one of the best SF films of all
> have something more impressive than hopped-up M-16s to kill bugs with.
>Also, the Mobile Infantry was denied their powered armor
Too expensive -- can't CG it. It would also reduce empathy for the
>Why weren't the
Yes, why weren't they? Why weren't chemical/biological/environmental
>That's probably harder than possible. They'd need a
Star drive, Dave. Star drive. Having interstellar FTL travel and not
>However, I suspect the same reason they didn't have armies of robots to
But they'd spend money on the technology to pressurize ships, and
>"...the habit of 10,000 years of peace has robbed us of the will to
Which brings up another tactical point. The first thing I thought of,
>[Chapter 10 of Starship
I am at a disadvantage.
>If your enemy relies on
I don't think the bugs had any personlity, let alone morale.
>The problems with the film I saw were: What do the bugs eat?
Also noted. THey couldn't have picked crappier planets. But maybe there's
>I also thought they should have given the bugs a sophisticated
I agree with this.
>I gave the moive so much credit because of their 1) meticulous attention
I agree. I hope the movie disturbs people, and makes them think about the
>Plus they didn't
A big bonus!
>...then I want to see "Beowulf"
In production, starring Christopher "Tarzan" Lambert.
--Ian
That's what I figure too. The sequel shoul be even cheaper -- they might
>Tanks or at least infantry fighting vehicles would have made some sense.
I know! Here's your uniform and your gun. Now go kill a creature who's
>A couple of other technical issues: When the pilot babe first takes flight
Channeling star drive forces.
--Ian
Chapter 10 "answers" everything and it mostly has to do with the bugs being so deep down that they'd have to peel the surface off the planet to get at the brains and the queens (the movie didn't have those, no drag queens either), but I figure the robot "manpower" required would quickly be exhausted once the bugs found out either 1) how they worked and thus could reprogram them or 2) too many potential malfunctions. "If you immobilize the man's hand, he can't push that button." Maybe sacrificial robots, but the cost, who knows. I think the military took over at such a time that the idea of using robots for purposes for which a human is made (i.e., war) didn't appeal to the military types so they canned the idea. We can't even get coal miners to quit and go robot.
This is a good point, too, but we'll have to look at the design of the ships. I think their intelligence, which they were confident in, made for the error of packing their ships too closely together. Also, I wonder if they weren't already perpendicular? They didn't look it, but when they approached the planet, which direction is "up" or "down"?
>>[Chapter 10 of Starship
That's right. Which is why carpet-bombing wouldn't have accomplished anything. The bugs would go deep under ground and rise up at the right moment for them, wrong moment for us. I think, though, they were able to reason. I also think they acted rather "tenderly" towards their "children." I'm referencing the scene in the pit where Zander gets his brains sucked out.
>>The problems with the film I saw were: What do the bugs eat?
That's brilliant! I bet they eat dirt! and to feed armies of billions you need a lot of food. Well, consider bees who have the workers produce royal jelly to produce queens from ordinary eggs. That's how I figured the different bugs would be made, by quota, of course, that's how termites and army ants do it. Termites are amazing in that their soldiers spew forth nasty chemicals at intruders. Ants use a lot of chemical warfare, too. Insect societies are pretty sophisticated.
REALLY?! Chris would be good, but he's French, you need a big, red-headed Swede to play Beowulf. Someone like Dolph Lundgren in a wig. Then you need a bunch of Danes to complete the deal.
>Subject: Re: Re: Starship Troopers - The verdict...
>From: His Cheap Moves
First of all, remember that laser weapons are fragile. Even if they had that solved, I bet they'd be too unreliable for the day-to-day soldiering. You're supposed to be able to drag a 1911 .45 through the mud and fire a full clip. The MI would need a weapon they could dismantle easilily in the field and I think the electronics of laser weapons would have rendered them just too unreliable.
I think they could have down something like Tron did as far as the powered suits went, but it would have been a different movie.
>Tanks or at least infantry fighting vehicles would have made some sense.
They showed the MI using GPS or similar technology to locate Carmen and to target the various bases, etc. The heads-up display is too distracting during close combat, they're best for snipers. Encumbering the infantry with stuff is not a good idea. I suggest that the helmets were strong enough to stop the weapons that claimed, whatshisface during training, they were probably some sort of "advanced composite," etc. Obviously, the planets were "hot" enough for light clothing (although I read that the stuff was unbearabley hot). Remeber: the reason Knights wore shining armor was to protect themselves against gun fire - armor came into being during the high middle ages. The armor becae so heavy that the pikemen and others would tip the knight off his horse and kill him easily. Thus, they abandoned the heavy armor and made up new tactics based on speed rather than strength. Also, since the MI was coed (something not in the book), the weaponry had to be handled by men and women interchangebly. Chicks, owing to the cold facts of sexual dimorphism, aren't as strong as men, so you'd have to develop a light enough gun that would still do the job. (Dave, remeber firing that 30-06? You think a babe like X___ could handle it better than you could?) I suggest that the bullets had explosive tips, too.
I think the land base's defenses had been compromised by the bugs both underground and on land, but it happened off-camera. I suggest that the bugs are able to sabotage our communications equipment appropriately and calculated that their numbers would be victorious in ground combat, so they coaxed us in. Give the bugs more credit, Dave!
The MI had good communications, too. They were talking with the Roger Young, in space, while on the surface of P with no time lag, that's pretty good.
>A couple of other technical issues: When the pilot babe first takes flight
1) the wings made the ship look cooler, 2) docking hardpoints, 3) engine housings, steer the plane by enginer power? Maybe they need wings because the little ship would be used in a plantary atmosphere, too?
Well, Buenos Aires was attacked, in the book, not by an asteroid. The bugs located earth through an alliance with the Skinnies (who all look like Manut Bol) and staged a raid with a bunch of ships. It was slick, I guess.. As far as the asteroids being hurled at great distances, well, had they given the bugs ships... The sequel will tell all. I think they'd get about a hundred tanker bugs together to shit super-plasma toward a particular asteroid and whamo! it's on its way. and maybe it did take a couple of years to make it this way? After all, the earth's military intelligence wasn't ready for what the bugs had.
Subject: Re: Re: Starship Troopers - The verdict...
>>The body suits would have been very cool but too expensive to
they should have used the powered suits, but they'd also have to give the bugs weapons to match. I say the earth's being played with until all energy is expended fighting this kind of was, so the bugs on K-prime can all have a good laugh and then wipe us out with their real technical capabilities.
>
Humans spent millions of years evolving to kill, too. So did sharks. The bugs died quickly if you hit them in the right spot, but they move too quickly so you'd have to expend a lot of shots.
Subject: Re: Re: Starship Troopers - The verdict...
From: Ian, who publishes Ink Nineteen
Electronics are more durable than mechanisms. No moving parts, easy to
To me, all these technological projections and back-asswardness seem
>I think the land base's defenses had been compromised by the bugs both
Something else that bothered me -- the base seemed to have nary an aerial
>The MI had good communications, too. They were talking with the Roger
Psychics. Don't forget the acknowledgement of Psy forces.
>I think they'd
The only way that asteroid could have been sent is if the bugs had FTL
Subject: Re: Re: Starship Troopers - The verdict...
From: Ian, who publishes Ink Nineteen
Most of humans' formidable kill capacity has evolved in the last hundred
>So did sharks.
Sharks are better at it, because they don't have things like hands and
--Ian
Yeah, but can you immerse electronics in water? What if the water-tight seals break? What about shocks? These aren't large-scale things like rocket computers that can be cusioned to the nth degree, pluse they may not have the stopping power needed. Frying power, yes.
They also didn't have teleportation, which they'd have to wait until Star Trek to get. Teleportation would change everything. But this isn't Ringworld or Null-A or other stuff that comes much later and in a different universe. I'd also thing filed-charging laser and plasma weapons wouldn't be easy enoguh for infantry. If they were on tanks, yes, because you could carry all the crap with you, but for reliability in infantry, bullets, I say!
>>I think the land base's defenses had been compromised by the bugs both
They had those heavy guns on a mast,though. Their rader had been compromised, as was the wall. I chalk it up to poor military intelligence. They were outsmarted by the bugs.
OH, yeah, but that's really unreliable (and classified, too).
>
Alpha Centuri is "only" 4 light years away and that one asteroid sneaked up on the Roger Young during that training mission Carmen was on that destroyed the ship's communications station. Also, I have a feeling the asteroids were really ships in disguise, once within drop range, the ship would jettison (or, since they're bugs, it's a suicide mission) and BOOM! I bet the bugs actually have a secret base on Io (just to get back at Arthur C. Clarke) where they grab asteroids from our own aseroid belt and hurl them quickly at us. You'd think we'd have enough warning from something a year away to do something about it. I mean, consider the physics of targeting an asteroid at earth. Either the producers didn't have enough scientists on payroll (not surprising...) or there's more to the bugs than we ever imagined. They're not from Klenthandu, they're from Xanadu and Oliva Newton-John is their leader!
>From: Ian, who publishes Ink Nineteen
Killing ourselves is what we do best. More people die on the roads than they do in wars
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Starship Troopers - The verdict...
From: Ian, who publishes Ink Nineteen
>Killing ourselves is what we do best. More people die on the roads than
And we do it so much better with technology....
From: Ian, who publishes Ink Nineteen
If you seal them in thermally-conductive solid plastic, yes. A 20th
>What if the water-tight
If right now, we can drop a probe on Mars (it hit pretty hard, from what
>but for reliability in
Hey, nothing beats a bow and arrow! When did you ever hear of an arrow
>They had those heavy guns on a mast,though.
Human guided. Useless. The navy has better weapons on their current
>Their rader had been
They were outsmarted, but they also seem to have been underequipped.
>I bet the bugs actually have a secret base on Io (just to get back at
This is plausible, and I concede. Any military stupid enough to invade
>You'd think we'd have enough warning from
Why didn't the RY's gravity alarms go off before the field was strong
>...there's more to
"We must capture the Dudley Moore-bug that is intoxicating our troops!"
--Ian
> #1 -- it's like having radar with an effective range of 10 yards.
I believe the cup of coffee is the gravity alarm. Electronic gravity
They could of used Oliver Cromwell -- the soldiers could have eaten
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: Starship Troopers - The verdict...
>From: Ian, who publishes Ink Nineteen
I still think the chance of seal rupture makes them unreliable. Also, if they need to be taken apart in the field for servicing there would be problems. In scuba diving equipment, your' not supposed to open any of the electronics (camera, etc.) until everything is thorughly dry. You're supposed to be able to open an infantry rifle in the rain, fix it, and fire it right away. I've seen this done with a Glock 19, too. [Crazy Tekes in 1988 were testing out their new guns in the FIT jungle - true story.] Laser sightings are available (and really cool looking) but they aren't very popular for rifles (I've never seen one in use), the best sights are traditional scopes or the simple "bead."
>
The mass of the Mars probe was larger and they could afford a big expense on shock absorbing material (it was like a super ball). It also had to hold up under one or two major shocks (taking off and landing - multiple shocks), once in use everything is pretty slow and easy. Infantry weaponry is subjected to repetitive shocks throughout its useful life. I figure a laser or plasma weapon would be as rugged as a Nikonos camera, which is water tight, but you don't want to drop it a lot. I have a book on how to make hand-held lasers. It's a new (1992) book and it appears that the electronics required are too cumbersome for pratical application on a large scale. Of course, these problems might have been solved in the future, but it may have been more economical to develop lightweight, low-recoil 50 caliber machine rifles (one shot and half your body is gone) with large clips of explosive bullets for use on planets with earth-like atmospheres. I mean, if you're fighting in zero-gravity and especially on board a pressurized spaceship you don't want projectile weapons and lasers would be best there. We'll see how the sequel handles this.
>>but for reliability in
I thought of this and reminisced about Captain Kirk's ingenuity when fighting the Gorn. Yeah, B&A is good for sniping, but bad if you need rapid-fire and heavy stopping power. An arrow will kill you, but only after you sit there bleeding to death for an hour, which would give you plenty of time to keepon shooting, etc. Bows break, strings snap, arrows miss. Few working parts but much to go wrong in the actual usage.
>>They had those heavy guns on a mast,though.
The depleted uranium bullets might have been what the MI were using, never know. "Cop Killer" bullets could be made from lightweight titanitum alloys. Depleted Uranium is good against armor, but the bugs had no armor and were moving too quickly and there were too many of them to effectively target, even with a battery of stationary guns, that could be disarmed by the bugs. You're better off using the infantry. Where were the missles? I saw a guided nuclear warhead (was it?) that the MI fired from a bazooka. I don't know if missles would have been useful against an enemy that's underground most of the time. In desert storm they had definite targets for their missles. I don't think the bugs would make good missle targets and they were too close to the infantry when they make themselves known.
>
That's a good question, but their intelligence told them that P had been cleared of bugs before the base had been set up, so I fault being out smarted rather than underquiped. As far as the short-sleeves, I think they opted for less cumbersome gear in favor of quickness in using their weapons than in any protection heavier armor woould've given them. Then again, they should've gong with the powered suits. Kevlar is effective against bullets, but not sharpe knives, which the bugs pincers obviously were. Nothing will stop a sharpe knife except for shooting the wielder before he gets near you. A tanto knife will pierce a car door.
>>I bet the bugs actually have a secret base on Io (just to get back at
Being military, they're subject to favor quick desicions rather than giving a good, long think about something. (They fucked up the first mission in the book, too.) This is important because it makes "clear" that the world of Starship Troopers is not perfect and the people aren't superhuman; Heinlein wasn't advocating a world military government, just exploring it. If the book had been written by E.E. Smith, the troopers would have all been 6'4" brawny, determined maniacs with 200 IQs who couldn't be fooled by anything. Luckily, he only wrote 9 Lensman books. The one movie from them (Anime) is just OK.
>>You'd think we'd have enough warning from
That is one flaw I kind of cringed at. I gave them the benefit of the doubt in that the asteroid sneaked up on them so fast that --- ONLY Carmen could save the day. And for her reward, she has to sleep with me!
>>...there's more to
Boy, that would really bug the audience.
>
I would have liked it if they faced the bugs naked. The bugs faced us naked. The infantry, being known as the "Queen of the Battlefield" is how wars are won, indeed, you need someone to hold the ground.
>They could of used Oliver Cromwell -- the soldiers could have eaten
Well, since Oliver Cromwell outlawed Christmas when he took power... Dave, what are you doing? Dave, I think you need to settle down, take a stress pill and... Dave, Stop! Stop, Dave!
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: Starship Troopers - The verdict...
From: Ian, who publishes Ink Nineteen
If a weapon is hit hard enough to break a solid epoxy seal around the
>Also, if
"Hold the bugs back while I the soldering iron warms up..." Electronic
>it may have been more economical to develop lightweight,
This is probably closer to what they were using. But I still find it
>especially on board a pressurized spaceship you don't want projectile
"Outland"
They would have been handy against the flying bugs, though.
>I don't think the bugs would make
Why? Slower than MiGs...
>and they were too close to the infantry when they
Slower than MiGs...
>That's a good question, but their intelligence told them that P had been
I fault bad tactics. You never set up a command post in enemy territory
>>"We must capture the Dudley Moore-bug that is intoxicating our troops!"
Not as much as the Yahoo Serious-bug, responsible for psychological
--Ian
From: Ian, who publishes Ink Nineteen
Brilliant. I consider the matter closed.
--Ian
>>I still think the chance of seal rupture makes them unreliable.
Good point, but how do you open the seal for servicing? Are the guns disposable? That might work, but it'd be costly.
>
Another good point but I still wonder about what you'd need to replace, battery packs? Proton bolts?
>>it may have been more economical to develop lightweight,
The idea sealed bullets have only been around for a little more than a hundred years and they're still being perfected. All that energy in a little case.
>>especially on board a pressurized spaceship you don't want projectile
Interesting how the bodies floating out of the Roger Young didn't blow up like Radar did.
>
I was thinking about that, whould they home in on... what? Wing Vibrations? Brain waves?
>>I don't think the bugs would make
Smaller, too. And no heat signature unless they're flatulent. Too quick for hand-held. Maybe the MI couldn't bring pressuirzed weapons down with them so they opted out for flame-throwers.
>>and they were too close to the infantry when they
Smaller and no heat signature. But a shotgun would get 'em.
>>That's a good question, but their intelligence told them that P had been
Yeah, but they were overwhelmed by a superior enemy. they may have been well-equiped but used it all up on the first wave of bugs not knowing how many to expect, those arrogant terrans.
>>>"We must capture the Dudley Moore-bug that is intoxicating our troops!"
[This is much more intelligent than what's onthe Starship Troopers message board, BTW. We should send our deconstruciton to Paul Verhoeven, maybe he'll credit us in his next film. Or we can sue him if he doesn't]
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Starship Troopers - The verdict...
Servicing? Is it worth it to haul a broken field combat component back to
>Another good point but I still wonder about what you'd need to replace,
Think of the energy required to move ships the size of the RY. They gotta
>I was thinking about that, whould they home in on... what? Wing
Contrast. Computer vision.
>Yeah, but they were overwhelmed by a superior enemy. they may have been
I particularly enjoyed the Mormon colony detail.
>[This is much more intelligent than what's onthe Starship Troopers
"Dude, it was like, when the first bug like chomped that reporter
I know we're being too scientifically rigorous here. But I'm a skeptic to
S*N*O*W C*R*A*S*H
directed by Paul Verhoevven
Hiro: Michael Jordan (if he can act...)
--Ian
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Starship Troopers - The verdict...
>>Good point, but how do you open the seal for servicing? Are the guns
Well then how many guns do you bring in the field with you? Twenty?
>>Another good point but I still wonder about what you'd need to replace,
(noise? in a vacuum? explosions?) From an energy and economy and stopping power standpoint, bullets might be optimal. Who knows? Just because lasers look sexy doesn't mean they would be the best thing for the infantry. The Roger Young might rely on nuclear power, which wouldn't necessarily be the most practicable thing to make a gun around. Same with solar power. The energy stored in gunpowder might be a lot higher than the laser. Star Trek had them little phasers, which could vaporize, but didn't "stop" very well. I think you'd be over whelmed quicker by the bugs if you had a phaser. A bullet (assume +.50 caliber, which will cut someone in two), even if it misses, would tear into the bugs, who, even though they appear to not feel too much pain, leaving a pile of parts, obstructing their advance. Knocking them down is important.
>
That might do it. We'll see in the sequel. Laser-targeted bullets, guided by someone with a joystick would do it, too. But, maybe the MI didn't expect to confront too many of the flying bugs (silly, arrogant MI). I still think they counted on superior marksmenship with their machine guns to do all the killing. Which is why I wonder how come Radczak didn't kill theflying bug, or at least shoot off an appendage or two when he did that bit of mercy killing.
>>Yeah, but they were overwhelmed by a superior enemy. they may have been
I laughed so hard! "Fort Joe Smith" HAHAHAHAHA! Of course, no one else in the audience got the joke.
>>[This is much more intelligent than what's onthe Starship Troopers
Unfortunatley, this is expected.
>I know we're being too scientifically rigorous here. But I'm a skeptic to
I think it's important becuase this particular movie had a lot of expectations to meet. There are so many works of great SF that should be put to the screen, but there's too much risk of them being destroyed by idiot screenwriters. This appears to be a really good effort on the part of the team to keep withthe story and not tamper.
You should have seen my mother after hearing what they did to The Scarlet Letter. 1) Nate Hawthorne is her favorite author, 2) the director didn't like the book, so he changed things, 3) result: tops inthe voting for worst movie of the year, bombed even with Demi Moore and Daniel Day Lewis. This could've happened to SST. I really hope this means more good movies to come. I may decide to see more of them.
> Probably why I enjoy Neal
No, is it gool? (good + cool)
>
Excellent choice.
> YT: ???
> Raven: Pete Steele
Of course.
> Uncle Enzo: Anthony Hopkins
All good.
Not guns, components. You'd have to bring: 2 x (failure rate of
> (noise? in a vacuum? explosions?) From an energy and economy and
That's right -- who knows. For example, today's speaker designs are
My point is not "they wouldn't have bullets, they'd have lasers, plasma
>Which is why I wonder how come Radczak didn't kill
I didn't get that either. He was obviously good enough to nail the
>This appears to be a really good effort on the part
I agree! Even all this techno-knocking we're doing... Heinlein glossed
>>Have you read The Diamond Age?
>No, is it gool? (good + cool)
Not as comic as Snow Crash, but just as well-developed. It's in paperback
>>
I just hope he can act. I haven't seen Space Jam.
>> YT: ???
Too old.
>> Raven: Pete Steele
>Of course.
No other option!
>> Uncle Enzo: Anthony Hopkins
>This should happen. Send PV a note!
We should interview PV for Ink Nineteen....
--Ian
We'd need further reliability analysis. Extensive fault tree analysis. this is analogous to bringing along a number of loaded clips to slip into the gun.
>> (noise? in a vacuum? explosions?) From an energy and economy and
Black Talon bullets will do amazing damage. Tracer bullets will do even more. I would say they'd use .50 caliber dum-dum bullets with some sort of explosive chemical embedded into the metal.
>My point is not "they wouldn't have bullets, they'd have lasers, plasma
M16s are pretty good, mind you. Better than AK-47s. More compact. Actually, what you'd want is a MAC-10, favorite of drug lords, but they aren't manufactured any more. From what I'm reading every month in my NRA magazine I think there's some grusome killing power in the high-caliber range.
>>Which is why I wonder how come Radczak didn't kill
Isn't that odd.
he doesn't need to act, he's Michael Jorden. Just tell him where to put the sword.
OK, how about Kristy McNichol with a face job.
>
time. This movie will be enjoyed for a long time to come -- with sequels
to follow. Its was as true to the book as budget and time length could
allow.
----------
> From:
> To: David Lee Beowulf, Underdog
<>
> Subject: Re: Starship Troopers - The verdict...
> Date: Monday, November 10, 1997 5:55 AM
>
> >... Greatest Science Fiction Film Ever.
>
> A little extreme, but it was pretty good.
>
> I had one significant problem, though:
>
> If mankind had the technology to develop a star drive, you'd think they'd
> The U.S. had better weapons (and used them!) in the Vietnam war.
>
> Also (this is Heinlein's problem, not the films), there wasn't ever a
> real reason to risk human lives battling bugs, since they are not
> spacefaring. Send some robots down to squash them! About the only scene
> that made sense from a tactical standpoint was the carpet bombing.
> Everything else was a stupid waste of human life.
>
> Still, prbably the best F/X film of the last three years.
>
> --Ian
From: "Underdog" <>
To:
Subject: Re: Starship Troopers - The verdict...
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 1997 14:11:05 -0500
>that played an important part in the book.
troopers.
>planets simply nuked?
weapons exploited? As far as I could tell, the bugs were sitting ducks.
>"Death Star"-type ship too carry that much firepower, which the Terran
>Fleet didn't have.
having something better than nukes is like having howitzers without ever
having developed bullets.
>do the killing was because the complacent society of liberal pukes who
>kept fucking up the world with their wars never thought to expend the
>resources on robot soldiers
building shuttles, and feeding armies, etc. -- building and designing a
robot army does not cost more than training, billeting and feeding a
human one. Star drive, Dave.
>resist..." The bugs were able to defend themselves against space-based
>weapons, though, and pretty well.
when the flak started, was why didn't the Earth ships turn perpendicular
to the surface, allowing a much smaller target and more efficient means
of escape?
>Troopers provides all the rationale behind not bombing the surface until
>it's sealed -handy how that's at my side, no?.]
>un-ending numbers, morale doesn't enter the equation
stomach bugs, whose purpose it is to reduce rock into slurry and energy.
Or even geothermal bugs -- if they can launch projectiles into space
(they looked nuclear, BTW), they can surely find a source of energy.
>technology. The bugs have ships in the book.
>to detail (Total Recall had the same detailed feel, as did Robocop),
>e.g., the sweat on Zander's brow as they were escaping from P, and the
>escape from the exploding _Robert Young_. The dirt looked real. Very nice
>touches. 2) keeping with the Heinleinian essance of the story and 3)
>keeping as much of the story in the film as they could.
price of freedom.
>ruin it with a stupid "marketable" soundtrack.
From: His Cheap Moves
To: Underdog, (David Lee Beowulf)
>The body suits would have been very cool but too expensive to
>include in the movie - they played around with some concepts and realized
>that it would have cost about 80k a piece.
need to model some new bugs, but 80% of the work is done.
>No mechanized infantry??
spent millions of years evolving to kill.
>she deploys the "wings" of the shuttle. Considering the lack of
>aerodynamic forces in space what was the purpose of wings?
From: His Cheap Moves
To: "Underdog" David Lee Beowulf"
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Starship Troopers - The verdict...
Sent: 11/11/97 01:12
To: Ian, who publishes Ink Nineteen
Underdog,
>
>Which brings up another tactical point. The first thing I thought of,
>when the flak started, was why didn't the Earth ships turn perpendicular
>to the surface, allowing a much smaller target and more efficient means
>of escape?
>
>>Troopers provides all the rationale behind not bombing the surface until
>>it's sealed -handy how that's at my side, no?.]
>
>I am at a disadvantage.
>
>>If your enemy relies on
>>un-ending numbers, morale doesn't enter the equation
>
>I don't think the bugs had any personlity, let alone morale.
>
>
>Also noted. THey couldn't have picked crappier planets. But maybe there's
>stomach bugs, whose purpose it is to reduce rock into slurry and energy.
>Or even geothermal bugs -- if they can launch projectiles into space
>(they looked nuclear, BTW), they can surely find a source of energy.
>
>
>>...then I want to see "Beowulf"
>
>In production, starring Christopher "Tarzan" Lambert.
>
>--Ian
>
>To: "David Lee Beowulf" < @ >,
> "Underdog" <>
>I had issue with the weaponry too. The choice for the grunt was either to
>try to empty an entire clip into one bug in the hopes that it dies, or fire
>a nuke and risk blowing up the entire platoon. They seemed to have
>addressed the issue at the end of the movie with an introduction of a new
>boom stick. The body suits would have been very cool but too expensive to
>include in the movie - they played around with some concepts and realized
>that it would have cost about 80k a piece.
>
>No mechanized infantry?? Our current forces would have fared better. The
>grunt today has or shortly will have head ups display for tactical display
>and information linked to GPS and surveillance satellites. He will see the
>whole picture related to his position. The movie presented well trained
>but poorly equipped soldiers. The land base that was over run by the bugs
>was also a joke. No mines, no long distance weaponry. Considering that
>today we have hand held phones that can reach anyone on the planet. Their
>lack of distributed commutations was also a small issue at the base anyway.
> I guess the problem for me was that they did such a good job that I keep
>expecting more
>
>she deploys the "wings" of the shuttle. Considering the lack of
>aerodynamic forces in space what was the purpose of wings? The star drive
>jump they used to get to the planet suggest that its way far away. The
>asteroids they were hurling toward earth would have taken 100s of years (at
>least) to reach earth -- I don't remember if the book addressed this!
>
Sent: 11/11/97 01:50
To: Ian, who publishes Ink Nineteen
Underdog,
>>include in the movie - they played around with some concepts and realized
>>that it would have cost about 80k a piece.
>
>That's what I figure too. The sequel should be even cheaper -- they might
>need to model some new bugs, but 80% of the work is done.
>>Tanks or at least infantry fighting vehicles would have made some sense.
>>No mechanized infantry??
>
>I know! Here's your uniform and your gun. Now go kill a creature who's
>spent millions of years evolving to kill.
>
Sent: 11/11 09:28
Received: 11/11 13:09
From: Ian, who publishes Ink Nineteen
To: @
Underdog,
To: @ (David Lee Beowulf), (Underdog)
>I think the electronics of laser weapons would
>have rendered them just too unreliable.
seal, less to break. No wear and tear. Lenses are another matter, but...
contrarian to the premise that, well, we have a star drive. Think of it
this way -- could humans have developed today's low-cost earth-orbit
satellites without concurrently developing cellular telephones, the
Internet, digital television, radar, radio telescopes, etc... I think
that once you have faster than light travel, most technologies short of
the fantastic (say, matter teleportation) would be easily attainable.
Durable field lasers? No problem. Plasma weapons? No problem.
>underground and on land, but it happened off-camera.
defense. Yet there was no surprise when troop first encountered the
flying bugs. Shitty design, I guess. Spent all their R&D on making
projectile weapons with explosive ammo light enough for women.
>Young, in space, while on the surface of P with no time lag, that's
>pretty good.
>get about a hundred tanker bugs together to shit super-plasma toward a
>particular asteroid and whamo! it's on its way. and maybe it did take a
>couple of years to make it this way?
travel (obviously not), or command of forces that could accelerate such a
large chunk of rock to near-lightspeed. Even then, with the asteroid
traveling at .99c, it would take more than a couple of years.
Sent: 11/11 09:28
Received: 11/11 13:09
From: Ian, who publishes Ink Nineteen
To: @
Underdog,
To: @ (David Lee Beowulf), (Underdog)
>Humans spent millions of years evolving to kill, too.
years. Evolution is no match for technology when it comes to killing.
language to worry about.
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Starship Troopers - The verdict...
Sent: 11/11/97 13:27
To: Ian, who publishes Ink Nineteen
Underdog,
>>I think the electronics of laser weapons would
>>have rendered them just too unreliable.
>
>Electronics are more durable than mechanisms. No moving parts, easy to
>seal, less to break. No wear and tear. Lenses are another matter, but...
>
>To me, all these technological projections and back-asswardness seem
>contrarian to the premise that, well, we have a star drive. Think of it
>this way -- could humans have developed today's low-cost earth-orbit
>satellites without concurrently developing cellular telephones, the
>Internet, digital television, radar, radio telescopes, etc... I think
>that once you have faster than light travel, most technologies short of
>the fantastic (say, matter teleportation) would be easily attainable.
>Durable field lasers? No problem. Plasma weapons? No problem.
>
>>underground and on land, but it happened off-camera.
>
>Something else that bothered me -- the base seemed to have nary an aerial
>defense. Yet there was no surprise when troop first encountered the
>flying bugs. Shitty design, I guess. Spent all their R&D on making
>projectile weapons with explosive ammo light enough for women.
>
>>The MI had good communications, too. They were talking with the Roger
>>Young, in space, while on the surface of P with no time lag, that's
>>pretty good.
>
>Psychics. Don't forget the acknowledgement of Psy forces.
>>I think they'd
>>get about a hundred tanker bugs together to shit super-plasma toward a
>>particular asteroid and whamo! it's on its way. and maybe it did take a
>>couple of years to make it this way?
>
>The only way that asteroid could have been sent is if the bugs had FTL
>travel (obviously not), or command of forces that could accelerate such a
>large chunk of rock to near-lightspeed. Even then, with the asteroid
>traveling at .99c, it would take more than a couple of years.
>
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Starship Troopers - The verdict...
Sent: 11/11/97 13:29
To: Ian, who publishes Ink Nineteen
Underdog,
>To: @ (David Lee Beowulf),
>>Humans spent millions of years evolving to kill, too.
>
>Most of humans' formidable kill capacity has evolved in the last hundred
>years. Evolution is no match for technology when it comes to killing.
>
Sent: 11/11 13:20
Received: 11/11 23:25
From: Ian, who publishes Ink Nineteen
To: @
To: @ (David Lee Beowulf)
>>Most of humans' formidable kill capacity has evolved in the last hundred
>>years. Evolution is no match for technology when it comes to killing.
>they do in wars
-From: His Cheap Moves
To: "David Lee Beowulf" < @ >
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Starship Troopers - The verdict...
Sent: 11/11 13:44
Received: 11/11 23:25
From: Ian, who publishes Ink Nineteen
To: @
Underdog,
To: @ (David Lee Beowulf), (Underdog)
>Yeah, but can you immerse electronics in water?
century solution, but hard to beat.
>seals break? What about shocks?
I understand), we can make rugged, shock-proof field electronics. We may
already have this technology, and the goevernment isn't telling us.
Bottom line is, it wouldn't be that hard to make a rugged field
laser/plasma weapon/whatever. Expensive, maybe. Impossible, no.
>infantry, bullets, I say!
jamming?
destroyers -- those pods that fire spent uranium ammo. Missiles, too.
Where were the missiles?
>compromised, as was the wall. I chalk it up to poor military
>intelligence. They were outsmarted by the bugs.
Would you have dropped down such a scantily-clad base in the midst of a
bug-ridden planet?
>Arthur C. Clarke) where they grab asteroids from our own aseroid belt and
>hurl them quickly at us.
Klendathu with M-16s will overlook an intra-system source for the
asteroid. Saved for the sequel, I'm sure.
>something a year away to do something about it.
enough to affect a glass of liquid on the bridge? Gravity is ship's enemy
#1 -- it's like having radar with an effective range of 10 yards.
>the bugs than we ever imagined. They're not from Klenthandu, they're from
>Xanadu and Oliva Newton-John is their leader!
-From: His Cheap Moves
To: "David Lee Beowulf" < @ >,
"Underdog" <>
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Starship Troopers - The verdict...
Sent: 11/11 13:59
Received: 11/11 23:25
From: Underdog,
To: Ian, who publishes Ink Nineteen
From: (Underdog)
To: Ian, who publishes Ink Nineteen , @ (David Lee Beowulf)
>
> Why didn't the RY's gravity alarms go off before the field was strong
> enough to affect a glass of liquid on the bridge? Gravity is ship's enemy
>
alarms are not reliable enough. They can't stand the rigors of warp
travel. The "cup of coffee" alarm keeps with the theme of trying to use as
much technology from the 1960s as possible. As the Gulf war demonstrated
-- high tech weapons do not work. Grunts with rifles in ditches is the
only way -- I'm surprised they even had helmets and uniforms -- why not
face the bugs naked --- in the way of the barbarians....
genetically altered beans that enable on demand explosive flatulence. As a
bug approaches you turn and let lose a stream of "bug spray" -- which would
of coarse be completely harmless to humans -- at least in the short term.
In ten years we would start to see cases of anal cancer caused exposure of
the bug gas.
To:
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Starship Troopers - The verdict...
Sent: 11/12/97 00:12
To: Ian, who publishes Ink Nineteen
Underdog,
>To: @ (David Lee Beowulf),
>>Yeah, but can you immerse electronics in water?
>
>If you seal them in thermally-conductive solid plastic, yes. A 20th
>century solution, but hard to beat.
>>What if the water-tight
>>seals break? What about shocks?
>
>If right now, we can drop a probe on Mars (it hit pretty hard, from what
>I understand), we can make rugged, shock-proof field electronics. We may
>already have this technology, and the goevernment isn't telling us.
>Bottom line is, it wouldn't be that hard to make a rugged field
>laser/plasma weapon/whatever. Expensive, maybe. Impossible, no.
>
>>infantry, bullets, I say!
>
>Hey, nothing beats a bow and arrow! When did you ever hear of an arrow
>jamming?
>
>
>Human guided. Useless. The navy has better weapons on their current
>destroyers -- those pods that fire spent uranium ammo. Missiles, too.
>Where were the missiles?
>>Their rader had been
>>compromised, as was the wall. I chalk it up to poor military
>>intelligence. They were outsmarted by the bugs.
>
>They were outsmarted, but they also seem to have been underequipped.
>Would you have dropped down such a scantily-clad base in the midst of a
>bug-ridden planet?
>
>>Arthur C. Clarke) where they grab asteroids from our own aseroid belt and
>>hurl them quickly at us.
>
>This is plausible, and I concede. Any military stupid enough to invade
>Klendathu with M-16s will overlook an intra-system source for the
>asteroid. Saved for the sequel, I'm sure.
>
>>something a year away to do something about it.
>
>Why didn't the RY's gravity alarms go off before the field was strong
>enough to affect a glass of liquid on the bridge? Gravity is ship's enemy
>#1 -- it's like having radar with an effective range of 10 yards.
>
>>the bugs than we ever imagined. They're not from Klenthandu, they're from
>>Xanadu and Oliva Newton-John is their leader!
>
>"We must capture the Dudley Moore-bug that is intoxicating our troops!"
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: Starship Troopers - The verdict...
Sent: 11/12/97 00:16
To: Underdog,
Ian, who publishes Ink Nineteen
>
>>
>> Why didn't the RY's gravity alarms go off before the field was strong
>> enough to affect a glass of liquid on the bridge? Gravity is ship's enemy
>
>> #1 -- it's like having radar with an effective range of 10 yards.
>>
>
>I believe the cup of coffee is the gravity alarm. Electronic gravity
>alarms are not reliable enough. They can't stand the rigors of warp
>travel. The "cup of coffee" alarm keeps with the theme of trying to use as
>much technology from the 1960s as possible. As the Gulf war demonstrated
>-- high tech weapons do not work. Grunts with rifles in ditches is the
>only way -- I'm surprised they even had helmets and uniforms -- why not
>face the bugs naked --- in the way of the barbarians....
>
>genetically altered beans that enable on demand explosive flatulence. As a
>bug approaches you turn and let lose a stream of "bug spray" -- which would
>of coarse be completely harmless to humans -- at least in the short term.
>In ten years we would start to see cases of anal cancer caused exposure of
>the bug gas.
>
Sent: 11/12 11:13
Received: 11/13 00:22
From: Ian, who publishes Ink Nineteen
To: @
Underdog,
To: @ (David Lee Beowulf), (Underdog)
>I still think the chance of seal rupture makes them unreliable.
electronics, I don't think the soldier attached to it will be in a
condition to use it.
>they need to be taken apart in the field for servicing there would be
>problems.
components in field service are usually modular -- replace the faulty
component.
>low-recoil 50 caliber machine rifles...
primitive and anachronistic when held against all of the other
technological accomplishments presented in the movie.
>weapons...
>I don't know if missles would have been useful against an
>enemy that's underground most of the time.
>good missle targets
>make themselves known.
>cleared of bugs before the base had been set up, so I fault being out
>smarted rather than underquiped.
that isn't well-equipped. You have to be prepared for anything, and they
weren't.
>
>Boy, that would really bug the audience.
warfare.
From: His Cheap Moves
To: "David Lee Beowulf" < @ >,
"Underdog" <>
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Starship Troopers - The verdict...
Sent: 11/12 11:48
Received: 11/13 00:22
From: Ian, who publishes Ink Nineteen
To: Underdog,
To: (Underdog), @ (David Lee Beowulf)
>I believe the cup of coffee is the gravity alarm. Electronic gravity
>alarms are not reliable enough. They can't stand the rigors of warp
>travel.
From: His Cheap Moves
To: "Underdog" <>,
"David Lee Beowulf" < @ >
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Starship Troopers - The verdict...
Sent: 11/13/97 00:48
To: Ian, who publishes Ink Nineteen
Underdog,
>
>If a weapon is hit hard enough to break a solid epoxy seal around the
>electronics, I don't think the soldier attached to it will be in a
>condition to use it.
>>Also, if
>>they need to be taken apart in the field for servicing there would be
>>problems.
>
>"Hold the bugs back while I the soldering iron warms up..." Electronic
>components in field service are usually modular -- replace the faulty
>component.
>
>>low-recoil 50 caliber machine rifles...
>
>This is probably closer to what they were using. But I still find it
>primitive and anachronistic when held against all of the other
>technological accomplishments presented in the movie.
>
>>weapons...
>
>"Outland"
>
>>I don't know if missles would have been useful against an
>>enemy that's underground most of the time.
>
>They would have been handy against the flying bugs, though.
>
>>good missle targets
>
>Why? Slower than MiGs...
>
>>make themselves known.
>
>Slower than MiGs...
>
>>cleared of bugs before the base had been set up, so I fault being out
>>smarted rather than underquiped.
>
>I fault bad tactics. You never set up a command post in enemy territory
>that isn't well-equipped. You have to be prepared for anything, and they
>weren't.
>
>>
>>Boy, that would really bug the audience.
>
>Not as much as the Yahoo Serious-bug, responsible for psychological
>warfare.
Sent: 11/13 09:42
Received: 11/14 00:04
From: Ian, who publishes Ink Nineteen
From: Ian, who publishes Ink Nineteen
To: @ (David Lee Beowulf)
>Good point, but how do you open the seal for servicing? Are the guns
>disposable? That might work, but it'd be costly.
base on the chance it *might* be fixable?
>battery packs? Proton bolts?
have something better.
>Vibrations? Brain waves?
>well-equiped but used it all up on the first wave of bugs not knowing how
>many to expect, those arrogant terrans.
>message board, BTW. We should send our deconstruciton to Paul Verhoeven,
>maybe he'll credit us in his next film. Or we can sue him if he doesn't]
in half... DUDE!"
begin with, so it takes a lot to please me. Probably why I enjoy Neal
Stephenson so much -- he surrounds the implausible with a lot of
realistic supporting detail, *then* layers on the awesome plot and
characters. Have you read The Diamond Age?
YT: ???
Raven: Pete Steele
Uncle Enzo: Anthony Hopkins
Lagos: Richard Libertini/John Lithgow
Da5id: Daniel Stern
Vitaly: Bruno Kirby
Think I'll re-read Snow Crash a third time...
From: His Cheap Moves
To: "David Lee Beowulf" < @ >
Sent: 11/14/97 00:56
To: Ian, who publishes Ink Nineteen
>>disposable? That might work, but it'd be costly.
>
>Servicing? Is it worth it to haul a broken field combat component back to
>base on the chance it *might* be fixable?
>
>>battery packs? Proton bolts?
>
>Think of the energy required to move ships the size of the RY. They gotta
>have something better.
>>I was thinking about that, whould they home in on... what? Wing
>>Vibrations? Brain waves?
>
>Contrast. Computer vision.
>
>>well-equiped but used it all up on the first wave of bugs not knowing how
>>many to expect, those arrogant terrans.
>
>I particularly enjoyed the Mormon colony detail.
>
>>message board, BTW. We should send our deconstruciton to Paul Verhoeven,
>>maybe he'll credit us in his next film. Or we can sue him if he doesn't]
>
>"Dude, it was like, when the first bug like chomped that reporter
>in half... DUDE!"
>
>begin with, so it takes a lot to please me.
>Stephenson so much -- he surrounds the implausible with a lot of
>realistic supporting detail, *then* layers on the awesome plot and
>characters. Have you read The Diamond Age?
> S*N*O*W C*R*A*S*H
>
> directed by Paul Verhoevven
>
> Hiro: Michael Jordan (if he can act...)
The babe who played Dizzy.
> Lagos: Richard Libertini/John Lithgow
> Da5id: Daniel Stern
> Vitaly: Bruno Kirby
>
>
>
>Think I'll re-read Snow Crash a third time...
This should happen. Send PV a note!
>
>--Ian
>
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Starship Troopers - The verdict..
Sent: 11/14 10:31
Received: 11/15 03:56
From: Ian, who publishes Ink Nineteen
To:
From: Ian, who publishes Ink Nineteen
To: @ (David Lee Beowulf)
>Well then how many guns do you bring in the field with you? Twenty?
components) x (total number of guns).
>stopping power standpoint, bullets might be optimal. Who knows?
terribly inefficient. Only about 10-20% of the energy they consume is
translated into sound. Bullets might still be the optimal solution
hundreds of years from now, but they would be so much better that they
wouldn't be recognizable as "bullets" anymore (which in ST they clearly
were). They'd be some sort of formidable projectile weapon.
or somthing else" but "they'd have something way better than hepped-up
M16s."
>theflying bug, or at least shoot off an appendage or two when he did that
>bit of mercy killing.
soldier's heart on the first go. The bug wasn't any farther away.
>of the team to keep withthe story and not tamper.
over a lot of details in his book, something which you can get away with
in literature but not in film.
now.
>> S*N*O*W C*R*A*S*H
>>
>> directed by Paul Verhoevven
>>
>> Hiro: Michael Jordan (if he can act...)
>
>Excellent choice.
>The babe who played Dizzy.
>> Lagos: Richard Libertini/John Lithgow
>> Da5id: Daniel Stern
>> Vitaly: Bruno Kirby
>
>All good.
ubject: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Starship Troopers - The verdict...
Date: Fri, 14 Nov 97 10:16:02 -0000
From: His Cheap Moves
To: "David Lee Beowulf" < @ >
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Starship Troopers - The verdi
Sent: 11/15/97 04:35
To: Ian, who publishes Ink Nineteen
>>Well then how many guns do you bring in the field with you? Twenty?
>
>Not guns, components. You'd have to bring: 2 x (failure rate of
>components) x (total number of guns).
>
>>stopping power standpoint, bullets might be optimal. Who knows?
>
>That's right -- who knows. For example, today's speaker designs are
>terribly inefficient. Only about 10-20% of the energy they consume is
>translated into sound. Bullets might still be the optimal solution
>hundreds of years from now, but they would be so much better that they
>wouldn't be recognizable as "bullets" anymore (which in ST they clearly
>were). They'd be some sort of formidable projectile weapon.
>
>or somthing else" but "they'd have something way better than hepped-up
>M16s."
>
>>theflying bug, or at least shoot off an appendage or two when he did that
>>bit of mercy killing.
>
>I didn't get that either. He was obviously good enough to nail the
>soldier's heart on the first go. The bug wasn't any farther away.
>
>>>
>>> Hiro: Michael Jordan (if he can act...)
>>
>>Excellent choice.
>
>I just hope he can act. I haven't seen Space Jam.
>
>>> YT: ???
>>The babe who played Dizzy.
>
>Too old.
>>> Raven: Pete Steele
>>This should happen. Send PV a note!
>
>We should interview PV for Ink Nineteen....
Well? You're the one with the Harlan Ellison connection! Perhaps..
Return to the Starship Troopers Essay