There has to be actual ridicule of the ideas to be satire. Instead it shows a mostly working system where a couple of retarded moves are made (which exists in any system) but they still completely succeed in the end.
The movie gives no evidence of the "asteroid was a false flag, we are the invaders!" plot people love to claim. So it shows a couple of jingoistic cut ins and then just expects you to fill in the blanks with "THIS IS AMERICA/NAZIS ITS THE MOST TERRIFYING THING."
And on the flip side, its filled with dozens of heroic moments that every man craves to live up to and even while cutting the most badass parts of the book (like the power armor that has influenced nearly every sci-fi military since) still fails to make them look any worse than a generic military movie.
It's notable that the pilot chick dodges the asteroid and no one tries to raise the alarm. False flag is out, but intentionally allowing an attack to happen for propaganda is still valid. 1/6? 9/11? Pearl Harbor?
Because the asteroid sheers the comms tower off the ship as they avoid it. It's gimmicky as a plot device but it's still sensible why they don't warn anyone.
Edit: further to that, when this happens it's only Carmen and the guy pilot on the bridge at the time because of shifts. Carmen even mentions how much she dislikes what is essentially a night shift on an expected milk run. So when they suddenly find themselves confronted by an out of place gravity well/shadow they don't have much time to do anything except not get crushed like a drinks can.
Yeah but if my memory of the timeline is still right, they were already on full invasion of the bugs. Usually those events they needed those as the element to start the war, not just randomly to motivate.
While its certainly an idea, it has almost no evidence in its favor. None against it either mind you, but if we have to fill in huge gaps ourselves to make the "satire" work then its a failure of satire.
There is still the possibility that Paul Verhoeven intended it seriously with subtle critiques of liberalism, but saying so out loud would kill his socioeconomic status.
The movie is a satire of the book. The book is trying to present some interesting ideas on how citizenship should be tied to responsibility.
Sometimes I wonder if things would be better if voting was restricted to people who pay income tax.
The movie is an attempt of satire of the book.
There has to be actual ridicule of the ideas to be satire. Instead it shows a mostly working system where a couple of retarded moves are made (which exists in any system) but they still completely succeed in the end.
The movie gives no evidence of the "asteroid was a false flag, we are the invaders!" plot people love to claim. So it shows a couple of jingoistic cut ins and then just expects you to fill in the blanks with "THIS IS AMERICA/NAZIS ITS THE MOST TERRIFYING THING."
And on the flip side, its filled with dozens of heroic moments that every man craves to live up to and even while cutting the most badass parts of the book (like the power armor that has influenced nearly every sci-fi military since) still fails to make them look any worse than a generic military movie.
It's notable that the pilot chick dodges the asteroid and no one tries to raise the alarm. False flag is out, but intentionally allowing an attack to happen for propaganda is still valid. 1/6? 9/11? Pearl Harbor?
Because the asteroid sheers the comms tower off the ship as they avoid it. It's gimmicky as a plot device but it's still sensible why they don't warn anyone.
Edit: further to that, when this happens it's only Carmen and the guy pilot on the bridge at the time because of shifts. Carmen even mentions how much she dislikes what is essentially a night shift on an expected milk run. So when they suddenly find themselves confronted by an out of place gravity well/shadow they don't have much time to do anything except not get crushed like a drinks can.
Yeah but if my memory of the timeline is still right, they were already on full invasion of the bugs. Usually those events they needed those as the element to start the war, not just randomly to motivate.
While its certainly an idea, it has almost no evidence in its favor. None against it either mind you, but if we have to fill in huge gaps ourselves to make the "satire" work then its a failure of satire.
There is still the possibility that Paul Verhoeven intended it seriously with subtle critiques of liberalism, but saying so out loud would kill his socioeconomic status.