Robert Heinlein

[DanS]

He was also a prime mover for SDI, IIRC.

[CapitanGarlic]

I liked the one book of his I read.

[BeBMan]

Never read Starsip Troopers, but they run the movie today here - how close it is to the book? Or is it just another hollywood "toast the insects" scifi?

[Imran Siddiqui]

Apparently it's a Hollywood 'adaptation', BeBro. I haven't read the book, but many Heinlein fans were pissed.

[Lorizael]

I have a strong desire to kill everyone involved with the making of the motion picture that dared to use the name of Heinlein's book.

That give you an idea of how close the two are?

[TCO]

Originally posted by St Leo
After reading Starship Troopers, I was seriously considering demanding that anyone who volunteers for the military have their right to vote taken from them.:P

Like to see you enforce it, Sidgames *****.

[TCO]

A Heinlein adaption that was much closer was The Puppet Masters. They ditched a couple of scenes which would have been killer (like Mary in the chair) for money reasons. But the overall thing retains the feel of the book.

Starship Troopers was done by a director who felt that the book was fascitic. It is a bit of a spoof. And has typical dumbing down and jocking up of a Hollywood picture.

[TCO]

RAH was wrong about the Moscow population. No huge foul there. He showed an intriguing set of methods for trying to calculate this thing. He was pretty right to suspect statistics out of Russia. Communist economic figures were notorious for inaccuracy. And you have to give him props for going and actually inspecting the thing that he hated (communism) in so much detail. Actually the trip turned him into a conservative. Before he was a Democrat.

[VetLegion]

Originally posted by BeBro
Never read Starsip Troopers, but they run the movie today here - how close it is to the book? Or is it just another hollywood "toast the insects" scifi?

It is not close to the book, it is very different. Book is good.

The movie is good, but think of it as ... a long music video. It has a naive feel to it, and parodic. Paul Verhoeven (sp?) said he did so in purpose and that his movie is a critique of something, I forgot what

Anyway, good movie and good book, but they are not similar.

[Richard Bruns]

I have read quite a bit of Heinlien, and the best way I can describe him is "militant libertarian." The one thing he hates more than anything else is rules and laws telling people what to do, and he has a very strong "might makes right" mentality.

He more or less bluntly states in "The moon is a harsh mistress" that the way to make an ideal society is to let people kill each other off until only about a fifth of the population is left.

He is a good writer, and sometimes very subtle. He is a good propagandist, and can worm his attitude and beliefs into the readers' minds if they are not careful. But they are still fun books to read, if you understand and avoid his attempted manipulation of your beliefs.

[St Leo]

Originally posted by TCO


Like to see you enforce it, Sidgames *****.

[Ben Kenobi]

Mindtricks that Heinlein plays?

I would have to cite To Sail beyond the Sunset, with just a little bit of eugenics, in trying to create the best people from the best breeding stock.;

He really is a good author, I will have to dig out some of his books again.

[laurentius]

Originally posted by st_swithin
J. Michael Stracynski is still better than all of 'em put together (he's the guy who originally created "Babylon 5").

WORD

[Richard Bruns]

Originally posted by obiwan18


Mindtricks that Heinlein plays?

I suppose all authors do it to an extent, but sometimes I feel that Heinlien is using his books as nothing more than a tool to advance his worldview. The good and heroic characters, and the ideal societies, always have the same beliefs and attitudes. Sometimes they overtly preach them, and sometimes it is just a subtle insinuation, hinting that we would have a perfect society of only we followed a certain set of beliefs.

[TCO]

Originally posted by Richard Bruns


I suppose all authors do it to an extent, but sometimes I feel that Heinlien is using his books as nothing more than a tool to advance his worldview. The good and heroic characters, and the ideal societies, always have the same beliefs and attitudes. Sometimes they overtly preach them, and sometimes it is just a subtle insinuation, hinting that we would have a perfect society of only we followed a certain set of beliefs.

He seems to overvalue courage and intelligence. Not much crying and ****-holding