Starship Troopers

Eine Satire, scharf wie eine Peitsche, oder ist der Film wirklich so schwachsinnig militant, wie er es vorgibt zu sein? Ich stimme für die erste Variante. Da Verhoeven zu diesem zweiten Extrem nicht fähig ist, widerspricht es meiner Meinung nach seiner Natur. Und wenn man sich Starship Troopers mit Übertreibung ansieht und es mit den etablierten Modellen des jeweiligen Genres (Kriegsfilm, Teenager-"Highschool"-Serie, Action-Science-Fiction, Propaganda-Dokumentation) in Beziehung setzt, dann kann man sich ein Lächeln nicht verkneifen, denn Starship Troopers funktioniert wunderbar. Einerseits fesselt er mit massiven Schlachtszenen und Schlachtfeldspannung, andererseits unterhält er mit satirischen Sprüchen, vor allem bei den eingefügten Sequenzen aus "period media". Paul Verhoeven kann nicht anders als einer der größten Perversen der Leinwand sein, und die widersprüchliche Rezeption seiner Werke ist der beste Beweis dafür, dass er seinen Job perfekt macht. In diesem Fall handelt es sich eher um einen Doppelgänger, da das, was auf eine Parodie hindeutet, diese bisweilen auch auf gefährliche Weise absorbiert. (12.09.2004)

Auf der einen Seite hat Starship Troopers gute visuelle Effekte und eine gute Dosis Action, aber auf der anderen Seite ein unglaublich dummes Drehbuch, das einen die Augen in alle Richtungen rollen lässt. Fast alle Charaktere waren in unterschiedlichem Maße unsympathisch, so dass ich nicht einmal mit ihnen mitfiebern konnte - die einzige Ausnahme war Michael Ironside als Rasczak (!SPOILER!). Schließlich muss ich noch eine Bemerkung über das seltsame Aussehen des Haupthirns der Käfer machen, das ein wenig (mehr) an eine bestimmte Körperöffnung erinnert. (01.08.2019)

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. (11.05.2003)

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%. (14.08.2007)

If Verhoeven had actually made the satire that many comments refer to, I would have enjoyed it, but the director doesn't make fun of multiple genres at once. Instead, he combines three genres together to occasionally try, sometimes clumsily, sometimes decently, to engage the viewer. However, I would like more than just oscillating between awkward dialogues, unsurprising training, and the film's best aspect, namely 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 or that, or pondering how beetles can kill in different ways, can never provide that. (15.08.2007)