Starship Troopers Reboot: Why the Novel Deserves a Faithful Adaptation

by

As a collaborator on ebaster.ru, Jamison Ashley’s argument that a Neill Blomkamp-directed reboot of Starship Troopers is ill-advised largely misses the point. While I share his view that the 1997 film adaptation by Paul Verhoeven, based on Robert Heinlein’s 1959 novel of the same title, has acquired a cult status, it appears Ashley values Verhoeven’s interpretation over the original work penned by Heinlein.

Even after all these years, the movie continues to be revered as a timeless cult favorite due to its sharp satire, black comedy, and daring critique of fascism and militarism. Trying to reimagine or surpass its legacy with a fresh take could potentially diminish what made the original so lasting.

But the original is Heinlein’s, not Verhoeven’s.

28 years ago, I watched Verhoeven’s movie in the cinema, and as it unfolded, my initial excitement gradually turned into dissatisfaction. It certainly wasn’t the story by Heinlein that I was expecting, I found myself thinking angrily. Though Verhoeven occasionally hinted at elements from the book, particularly Michael Ironside’s character (Colonel DuBois in the novel), lecturing his students about citizenship, the film lacked the sharp satire and incisive critique of fascism and militarism that were central to the original work.

Ashley is right in pointing out that if a reboot occurs, there’s a possibility that Neill Blomkamp might unintentionally glorify the concepts that Verhoeven aimed to criticize, and in doing so, potentially drive away fans of the original franchise (ST). Additionally, it may not be his strong suit to execute satire effectively.

I believe it’s worth the risk.

Revisiting Heinlein’s work, particularly focusing on the theme of “duty” and its implications for both personal life and societal control, might provide many modern viewers with an intriguing perspective on contemporary politics.

As I wrote on this website four years ago:

In a particular classroom setting, students were shocked to learn that city parks were controlled by gangs during the 20th and early 21st centuries, making it unsafe for children to play there.

These circumstances arose primarily due to two factors: firstly, the parents of these wayward individuals often neglected them, showed indifference, or held unrealistic expectations that their children could do no harm; secondly, elected officials and bureaucrats failed to impose consequences on the delinquents.

DuBois explains to his students that while some psychologists from the 20th century believed that humans inherently possess a moral instinct, he disagrees. Instead, he argues that human morality is not something innate but rather something that we learn and develop over time through training, experiences, and mental effort. In other words, humans do not arrive with a moral sense; it is something that we acquire as we grow and interact with the world around us.

Moral foundations are built upon the principle of responsibility or duty, which holds a similar significance to self-interest at an individual level for a group. Unfortunately, these children weren’t taught duty in a way that resonated with them – through discipline, let’s say. Instead, they heard about their ‘entitlements’ repeatedly.

Readers of the novel can see that the events mentioned accelerated the fall of governments during the 21st century, particularly due to the disdain world leaders had towards their troops they sent into wars. The reason the political system in Starship Troopers was established is because of this paragraph – today’s leaders mostly prioritize themselves.

In this fictional society, known as the ST, the offspring of veterans who sought change made it obligatory for individuals to serve a term before being granted the privilege to vote, which is equivalent to citizenship. Citizenship in this context also conveys the right to vote. Non-citizens possess all other rights that citizens do in the ST universe; however, they are not allowed to vote because they haven’t yet demonstrated commitment or duty.

If you find the current system undemocratic, consider this perspective from Heinlein’s book: The right to vote has always been restricted in some manner. As it stands now in the U.S., one must be at least 18 years old. This restriction might seem questionable when compared to some other qualifications (ST’s), for as Col. DuBois puts it, isn’t it illogical to let an adult who may be mentally inferior vote, while a brilliant teen is barred from voting?

Lastly, consider what Spider Robinson wrote 45 years ago:

The label ‘fascist’ is commonly associated with Robert Heinlein within the fandom community, especially among the less informed. Typically, I choose not to engage in such discussions, but given the context, I will respond. Sir or Madam, I encourage you to visit your local library and consult a dictionary for the definition of fascism. Additionally, delve into the history of fascism, using the librarian’s assistance with any complex terms. Afterward, read Robert Heinlein’s extensive collection of works. If you can find even a hint that suggests Heinlein or his characters endorse fascist ideologies in more than forty-two of his books, I will eat my copy of ‘Heinlein in Dimension.’

Fans of Heinlein, individuals who served their country by wearing its uniform, and devoted followers of his work, all deserve a film that stays true to the original novel. It’s hoped that Neill Blomkamp will achieve this.

Read More

2025-03-25 14:45