Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Starship Troopers (film)/archive2
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The article was promoted by David Fuchs via FACBot (talk) 10 October 2024 [1].
- Nominator(s): Darkwarriorblake (talk) 19:42, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
This article is about 1997 science fiction film Starship Troopers, one of director Paul Verhoeven's last works in the western studio system and the unofficial third and final installment in his anti-authority trilogy including RoboCop and Total Recall. The film was widely derided on its release as a pro-fascist film despite its intention to satirize fascism, which was blamed both on poor marketing and contemporary cultural leanings. It's reputation has grown over time once the satire became evident and is now considered a cult classic. Last nomination had no participation, pinging Bneu2013 who expressed an interest in reviewing prior to its closure. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 19:42, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
ThaesOfereode
[edit]I can't believe no one reviewed it last time given the love this movie has accrued over the years, especially compared to its negative release. I've never seen this movie, nor read the book, so feel free to push back on anything I misunderstand or critique improperly. Beginning with prose:
- Lede
- science fiction action film – WP:SEAOFBLUE. Recommend de-linking action film.
- Johnny Rico and his friends – More comrades than friends, no?
- an alien species of Arachnids – Consider an alien species called Arachnids, since they aren't arachnids. Optional, link alien species?
- Despite these efforts development was slow, with studios hesitant [...] – Comma after efforts.
- Plot
- highly evolved – Hyphen
- mobile infantryman – Is this somehow different than a regular infantryman?
- Carl Jenkins joins Military Intelligence – Why "military intelligence" capitalized here but not anywhere else in the whole article?
- while Isabelle "Dizzy" Flores, who is in love with Rico, deliberately transfers to his squad – Consider endashes here to break up the commas.
- Carmen
eventuallyends her relationship with Rico - for fellow pilot Zander Barcalow → for a fellow pilot, Zander Barcalow
- Rico impresses drill sergeant Zim → Rico impresses the drill sergeant, Zim or Rico impresses his drill sergeant, Zim – If this is a rank, capitalize. But don't mix caps as drill Sergeant.
- However, a mistake during – A mistake or Rico's mistake?
- Rico quits but – Comma after quits.
- leading to thousands of casualties – Human casualties? Both sides?
- lieutenant Jean Rasczak – Capitalize lieutenant.
- "Roughnecks" – I don't think this needs quotations, unless they have another official name in the movie (e.g., 151st Armed Batallion, etc.).
- Rico's valor in battle earns him the rank of Corporal, particularly after he defeats a gigantic "Tanker Bug" on Tango Urilla, and he develops a romantic relationship with Dizzy. → After Rico defeats a gigantic "Tanker Bug" on Tango Urilla, he is elevated to the rank of corporal for his valor and begins a romantic relationship with Dizzy. – In its current form, it is structurally ambiguous (i.e., that he earned his rank both from his valor on the battlefield and from his relationship with Dizzy). Perhaps a goofy rationale, but I think this sentence flows better anyway.
- rank of Corporal – Decapitalize Corporal.
- distress signal on Planet P – What is Planet P? Human-owned? Unclaimed?
- but not before Dizzy is mortally wounded and Rico mercy kills the mutilated Rasczak. – How is Dizzy wounded? Surely, if Rico kills Rasczak (as a mercy), he is mortally wounded too, no? Consider Dizzy and Rasczak are mortally wounded and, after Dizzy succumbs to her wounds, Rico mercy kills a mutilated Rasczak. instead.
- Reviewer comment - IIRC, Rico kills Rasczak before Dizzy is both mortally wounded and dies. Both are fatally wounded by two separate arachnids. Rico is not wounded, and shoots Rasczak after Rasczak asks him to do so. The best I remember, there is a scene earlier in the film where Rasczak mercy kills another character, and explains that he would expect others to do the same to him. Bneu2013 (talk) 00:31, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
- The group returns to the fleet assembled in orbit above P, where Dizzy is eulogized. – But Rasczak isn't? Odd.
- an intelligent Arachnid strategically directing the others – If this is a hive-mind, consider saying so and linking as appropriate.
- Arachnids, and the escape – Change and the to but an.
- the Brain Bug, and the – Remove comma.
- Cast
- I'd do away with the colon structure here and replace it with a comma. If you keep the colon or not, all those a's and an's should be lowercase.
- Not much else to critique here, but you're missing Timothy Omundson's role as a psychic in the movie. It may be worth mentioning since he later played Carlton Lassiter in the show Psych, who is a curmudgeonly detective who doubts the psychic ability of the show's lead, and the show poked fun at Omundson's role reversal a few times IIRC.
- Production
- Link jingoistic. Consider linking xenophobia and war film.
- TriStar executives determined that to move forward – Soft recommendation to put a comma after that.
- comic-book–style – I think it's just comic book–style
- filming locations but rejected – Comma before but.
- Link Hell's Half Acre (Wyoming) as first mention. Link buttes.
- an hours drive → an hour's drive or an hour drive
- the Nazi propaganda films Triumph of the Will – WP:SEAOFBLUE. Consider removing "films" from the pipe to fix.
- for the adience → for the audience
- like a Vietnam war veteran → like a Vietnam War veteran – Odd piping choice bordering on an Easter egg.
- Clancy Brown portrays Sgt. Zim – Spell out Sergeant like you've done with the rest of the ranks.
- twelve days of military training from
DaleDye – Last name only here. - not in the Infantry cast – Decapitalize. Comm after cast.
- Link heatstroke.
- On the crew's flight to Los Angeles on June 29 – Comma after the date.
- stunts for the scene apart – Either comma after apart or delete the comma in somersaults,.
- A separate nude scene was written for Richards but she refused to take part – Comma after Richards.
- The fight between Rico and Zander was mainly performed by their actors – What does this mean? Their stunt doubles? If so, clarify and link as appropriate.
- Soft push, but back of a gigantic, moving, fiberglass doesn't really need any commas, does it?
- his ribs over the 3 1⁄2 days of filming → his ribs over the three and a half days of filming
- Only one take was done, and they were told that if someone tripped to pick them up and keep moving. – Grammatically fine (if you remove the comma after done), but I had to double-take to get the meaning. Consider Only one take was done and they were told that if someone tripped, they should pick them up and keep moving.
- only slightly over schedule – Any idea by how much?
- Davison wanted to use other studios but it was – Comma after studios.
- Poledouris' → Poledouris's, per MOS:'S
- Release
- Everything looks good here.
- Reception
- Turan and Berardinelli – Who? You link Kenneth Turan later in the paragraph. Flip the link/full name usage. Same with Berardinelli.
- Berardinelli said that at its best – Comma after that.
- Starship Troopers' → Starship Troopers's, per MOS:'S and use {{'s}} after the italics.
- others, such as Jonathan Rosenbaum and Ebert, wrote – Strongly encourage endashes here.
- Post-release
- Starship Troopers' – Ut supra, passim.
- connect with
eitherboth criticsorand audiences - science-fiction adventure – Dehyphenate.
- Link neo-Nazism.
- Themes and analysis
- Period needed at the end of the photos' caption.
- director's own war experiences – I don't believe Verhoeven was a combatant, so director's own wartime experiences is better, I think.
- Mobile Infantry – Hasn't been capitalized, probably shouldn't be capitalized here either. Two instances.
- Perhaps link Aryan ideal of beauty to Aryanism or something similar.
- seduce the audience into joining [Starship Troopers'] society ... but then ask, 'What are you really joining up for?'" – Starship Troopers's, per MOS:'S and use {{'s}}; use {{'"}} for the quotation.
- Link progressive politics and gender norms.
- asking "would you like to know more?" → asking: "Would you like to know more?"
- many rights are reserved only for citizens, those who have served in the military → many rights are reserved only for citizens comprising only those who have served in the military
- Voting is presented as an act of force, of supreme authority, a right that must be taken instead of given → Voting is presented as an act of force and supreme authority, a right that must be taken instead of given
- As Rasczak tells his students, "violence → As Rasczak tells his students: "Violence
- Strzelczyk – Who? You only cite her full name in the next paragraph, so that should be switched up. Also, when she is introduced, the academic.
- Author Leighton Grist → The author Leighton Grist
- Soft suggestion to link "full-scale war" with total war.
- inhuman, and strategic – No comma.
- Writer Lloyd Farley → The writer Lloyd Farley
- Arachnids are not significantly different to, and are justified in exterminating humanity – No comma.
- Legacy
- science-fiction action – Dehyphenate.
- its critiques of right-wing militarism, the military–industrial complex, reactionary violence and American jingoism, made it seem ahead of its time – Move the comma from after jingoism to after violence.
- Link police brutality. Soft suggestion to link dehumanization.
- someone going 'Rico!'" – Use {{'"}}
- as a strong female → as a strong female character
- Sequels and remake
- Nothing to critique here.
And that's about all I got. Overall, this is a monster page full of excellent information that I thoroughly enjoyed reading. The biggest issues are comma usage and pretty obvious examples of moving parts of the page around, but both are simple fixes. Hopefully someone with more love for this movie (or the book) will be able to step in for any gaps, if there are any. I learned a lot about the movie and virtually everything on the page was either interesting to me or will be interesting to someone else. I look forward to seeing this on the main page sometime in the near future. A few fixes (mostly commas!) and I'll be happy to throw my support behind the article based on prose. You've done excellent work on this page, I'm sorry this didn't get the review it should have on its first volley here, and I hope you will bring this kind of quality work to FAC again. Cheers, ThaesOfereode (talk) 02:20, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
- Hi ThaesOfereode, thanks for your kind words, yes I think no reviews at all is probably worse than bad reviews as it just wastes time and takes time before you can try again, so I appreciate your early involvement.
- I have done most of the notes above minus the following which I've provided some explanations for, so let me know if my answers suffice or you need more clarity.
- mobile infantryman – Is this somehow different than a regular infantryman? Not as far as I'm aware, it's just the in-universe term for them
- but not before Dizzy is mortally wounded and Rico mercy kills the mutilated Rasczak. – How is Dizzy wounded? Surely, if Rico kills Rasczak (as a mercy), he is mortally wounded too, no? Consider Dizzy and Rasczak are mortally wounded and, after Dizzy succumbs to her wounds, Rico mercy kills a mutilated Rasczak. instead. - So I have changed this around a bit to "but not before Dizzy is fatally impaled by an Arachnid and Rico mercy kills the mutilated Rasczak." That might just sound the same tbh. In the context of the film I don't believe the implication is that Racszak is mortally wounded, he's heavily disfigured and basically incapacitated with no legs in the middle of a battle so Rico follows his earlier advice and puts him out of his misery before the bugs can get to him since there's no option to extract him at that point and he's almost literally dead weight. Dizzy on the other hand is impaled through the torso and dies on the shuttle while professing her love for Rico.
- The group returns to the fleet assembled in orbit above P, where Dizzy is eulogized. – But Rasczak isn't? Odd. - Rico gives the eulogy so I think it's just more personal, plus they have her body so they can hold a funeral while Racszak is still on Planet P. To this day!
- an intelligent Arachnid strategically directing the others – If this is a hive-mind, consider saying so and linking as appropriate. - Unless this is established in later films I don't believe it's a hive mind, there's no discussion for how the bugs communicate, they screech for example, but the Brain Bug is just like a human commander but smarter as far as I'm aware from the in-film context.
- only slightly over schedule – Any idea by how much? - Sadly, no
- Thanks again ThaesOfereode. Oh, remembered, I linked "xenophobic" but not "war film" since it would fall into the seaofblue trap. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 20:24, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
- Reading through your replies, all of them seem defensible to me. All other critiques were addressed adequately in the article (or I fixed myself after realizing what I had wrote was a little ambiguous or I should have caught it on the first volley). Support on prose. Best of luck with other reviews! ThaesOfereode (talk) 00:27, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks so much ThaesOfereode! Darkwarriorblake (talk) 08:21, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Reading through your replies, all of them seem defensible to me. All other critiques were addressed adequately in the article (or I fixed myself after realizing what I had wrote was a little ambiguous or I should have caught it on the first volley). Support on prose. Best of luck with other reviews! ThaesOfereode (talk) 00:27, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
FM
[edit]- I missed this the first time around, but also a favourite of mine. Marking my spot for now, but in the meantime, I see a bunch of seemingly unnecessary duplinks that can be highlighted with this script:[2] FunkMonk (talk) 08:48, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Hi FunkMonk, are you waiting for Bneu to complete his review before starting yours or just been busy? Thanks Darkwarriorblake (talk) 18:52, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- I had limited time until now, will try to start today. FunkMonk (talk) 04:37, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Hi FunkMonk, are you waiting for Bneu to complete his review before starting yours or just been busy? Thanks Darkwarriorblake (talk) 18:52, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- "and the Brain Bug consumes Zander's brain, absorbing his knowledge" Perhaps I just don't remember, but when is this implied?
- "firing of many of its studios executives." Studio? Studio's?
- "decided to produce test footage to demonstrate their intended visual style and tone" Who made the effects for this? You mention many other details about it, and later you state two different companies did the effects for the movie itself, so could be good to be specific.
- "Preliminary designs were madefor the capsules" Made for?
- "removal of the Bounce and "the Drop"" Why is only the latter in quotation marks? You do use quotation marks for the former earlier. Check for consistency throughout, seems to jump around.
- "who visually embodied the caucasian, blonde, blue-eyed" The sources used don't seem to say "Caucasian", but "Aryan", the two terms are not synonyms (the former is much less specific), so it should use something like "Aryan race" instead.
- "Brown based his performance on archetypical drill instructors from older American films such as The D.I. (1957) and Full Metal Jacket (1987)" Sounds a bit odd calling a film released ten years earlier as "older", what does the source say?
- "military training from Dye from April 17, 1996" the from from is repetitive, "under Dye/led by Dye" or similar?
- Done all these FunkMonk. Re: the Brain Bug, it's in the scene on...Planet P I believe, they find that general hiding in the cupboard, they talk about how the brain of that one soldier was eaten and the general is freaking out because he knows all kinds of vital information. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 13:01, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- "SPI would lead to production problems" Using/choosing SPI would?
- "Realizing the wide variety of effects for the spaceship scenes required the efforts of SPI, Industrial Light & Magic (ILM), and Boss Film Studios." This seems to be disjointed from the earlier text that said only SPI was used, but now you mention more companies. If this was due to SPI's problems, that should be mentioned explicitly.
- "and severely injuring Rachel Campos, a crew member's girlfriend" I wondered if that crewmember was one of the dead ones, turns out it was, could be mentioned ("a dead crew member's").
- Could we get years for all the retrospective critical opinions as you do for the first one listed?
- While the article mentions that the film is recognised more today as a warning against fascism, it appears that the opposite is also true, and that some people, at least online, are actually identifying with those values as presented in the film (thereby also misunderstanding it)? Any sources on this?
- Done except for the last one. Did you have a particular example in mind? There are several sections in the article noting it's fascist themes are taken literally but I'm not aware of any major examples of people identifying with it? I tried googling but without success so I'm not 100% what I need to search for. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 19:48, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support - looking good to me. Added one comment above. FunkMonk (talk) 15:03, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks so much FunkMonk, I've incorporated your references as well. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 19:10, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
Review by Bneu2013
[edit]I also missed this my first time around, and will have my first comments later today. Bneu2013 (talk) 09:04, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Infobox and lead
- Link "action film" in first sentence for consistency with other film FAs.
- Update - didn't see the other comment above. However, all of your other film FAs link both. Personally I don't think linking both violates SEAOFBLUE. Bneu2013 (talk) 00:25, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
- "Earth world government" sounds kind of redundant, although I realize it's not. Maybe "a world government based on Earth that is engaged in interstellar war..." would work better.
- I would suggest linking "computer-generated" instead of "(CGI)" unless this is a common practice and/or there is consensus for the current form.
- Link first use of "fascism" in lead.
- Plot
Citizenship is exclusively earned through federal service,
- does anything other than military service constitute "federal service"?
- "social scientists" is kind of vague, although I'd say leave as is if this is all that the sources infer.
Humans, who are now spacefaring, conduct colonization missions throughout the galaxy, bringing them into conflict with a race of highly-evolved insectoid creatures dubbed "Arachnids" or, derisively, "bugs".
- humans have been "spacefaring" since the 1950s; I think what you mean is capable of interstellar travel.
- I don't think "high-school" needs to be hyphenated. I've never seen it hyphenated in the U.S., and since this is an American film, we should use American English conventions, per MOS:S.
- Since it is specified that Planet P is Arachnid-controlled, you might consider clarifying the same for Tango Urilla.
- Is it ever explained what the Brain Bug is afraid of?
- Cast
Military infantry characters include Katrina (Blake Lindsley), Djana'd (Tami-Adrian George),[8][9] Eric Bruskotter as Breckinridge, Matt Levin as Kitten Smith, and Anthony Ruivivar as Shujumi.
- is there a reason for the inconsistent use of parentheses in this sentence? I would recommend using the same convention for each actor and character in this sentence.
- Thanks for your comments Bneu2013, I have actioned all the above minus your queries:
- No, I believe military service is the only way to earn citizenship. There's some implication that Rico's family is rich and can kind of buy their way into certain things under the table, but officially only military service gives you important rights like voting and breeding.
- "Social scientists" is how Rasczak refers to them, I assume the inference is socialists. There is an article, Social science which I arrived at after searching "social scientist" so I could maybe add that link. It's not expressly detailed in the film what they did wrong but given the film is a satire of fascism, I believe it means socialism failed.
- The Brain Bug is just afraid because it's been caught, it's like any prisoner of war, I guess the twist is it's smart enough to be afraid when the humans treat them like large cockroaches. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 23:12, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for your comments Bneu2013, I have actioned all the above minus your queries:
- Thanks for reminding me. I'm extremely busy right now, but I will have additional comments tomorrow. Bneu2013 (talk) 03:22, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Production
- Change "Ed Neumeier" to "Edward Neumeier", for consistency and the fact that this appears to be the name he most commonly goes by. Also, since it is linked in the previous paragraph, linking here could be perceived as overlink, but since it is a different section you could probably leave as is. I might get a second opinion on this before changing.
- Wording of
Since RoboCop, Neumeier and his co-writer Michael Miner struggled to develop new story ideas
is kind of repetitive, since previous sentence starts withSince the release of RoboCop (1987),
.
- It sounds like Neumeier was more effective at developing new ideas on his own than with Davison, Tippett, Miner, etc. You might want to clarify this.
- Change "Neumeier's treatment" to "His treatment".
- Remove comma after "head of production,"
- Is a date available for when the rights to Starship Troopers were purchased? I'm guessing it was in late 1992 or shortly thereafter.
Progress was slow as TriStar regularly replaced executives, including Medavoy, and high cost or risk projects were more closely scrutinized.
- I'm guessing this film was considered a high cost and risky project, considering the following paragraph. It wouldn't hurt to specify that here, however, but no need to go into detail here, since that is what the second paragraph is for.
By 1994, Tristar remained reluctant to move Starship Troopers into pre-production
- was this because of the (then-expected) high budget or some other reason? Did Verhoeven's unrealized projects and the mixed reviews of Basic Instinct also play a factor here?
- Done all these Bneu2013 apart from the last one. The source doesn't really specify, it's easy to assume it's for the same reasons as the previous paragraph given it's only a year later but as the source isn't specific I'd just be making an educated guess. As for the rights purchase, again I believe the sources suggest 1992, as per the opening of it's paragraph "By late 1992" and the Sammon source says in the fall of 1992 they approached the studio with the Outpost 7 treatment, then later on says by early 1993 he'd been working on the starship troopers script for 3-4 months, but it depends how you interpet "early". For me that'd be the first 3 months of the year so it would seem the rights were bought in Fall/December 1992, but it's not specific. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 15:45, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Sounds good. I'll try to finish my review today.
- Done all these Bneu2013 apart from the last one. The source doesn't really specify, it's easy to assume it's for the same reasons as the previous paragraph given it's only a year later but as the source isn't specific I'd just be making an educated guess. As for the rights purchase, again I believe the sources suggest 1992, as per the opening of it's paragraph "By late 1992" and the Sammon source says in the fall of 1992 they approached the studio with the Outpost 7 treatment, then later on says by early 1993 he'd been working on the starship troopers script for 3-4 months, but it depends how you interpet "early". For me that'd be the first 3 months of the year so it would seem the rights were bought in Fall/December 1992, but it's not specific. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 15:45, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Production (cntd.)
He identified elements he considered essential, including the high school opening, boot camp, battles, and the underlying philosophy and sociopolitics, and compensated for the novel's second act by expanding on concepts such as the teenage romance, based on his own experiences of pursuing women with no interest in him.
- run-on sentence, suggest splitting in two. Preceding sentence is also borderline run-on.
- Consider elaborating on what the "Bounce" is; it's not clear if this is for personal mobility or something used by vehicles.
- Link "romantic triangles" to love triangle".
- Does "Neo-dogs" need to be capitalized?
Neumeier completed his third and final draft by early 1995
- no direct mention of the second draft, but I'm guessing the changes described in the previous paragraphs were part of it? When was it finished?
- I'm guessing it was Neumeier who said
The characters of Starship Troopers were "fascists who don't know they're fascists"
?
Many key crew members were hired in 1996, including Verhoeven's long-time cinematographer Jost Vacano,[58][59] as well as Vic Armstrong (second unit director and stunt coordinator), Mark Goldblatt (editor), John Richardson (special effects supervisor), Basil Poledouris (music composer), Stacey McIntosh (construction coordinator), Karen Higgins (construction foreman), Gregg Goldstone (first assistant director), Kenneth Silverstein (second assistant director), John Blake (makeup artist), Kathy Blondell (hair stylist), William Petrotta (prop master), Robert Galotti (weapons coordinator),[60] production manager Robert Latham Brown, production coordinator Daren Hicks, and assistant production coordinators Janet Campolito and Lisa Hackler.
- inconsistent use of parentheses for descriptors; I prefer not using them. Ditto the succeeding sentence.
The location was remote, about 45 mi (72 km) or an hour's drive from the Astaire Building or hotels for the cast and crew. It offered other logistical challenges as it was generally undeveloped land, requiring the production to build roads for the trucks carrying necessary gear into the canyons for filming.
- a previous sentence says the Astaire Building is in California. Wyoming is not 45 miles from California.
- Change "which could portray Tango Urilla" to "which was chosen to portray Tango Urilla" or something similar.
- Apostrophe in "TriStars".
but
herealized that many of the contemporary stars...
- Link "screen testing" to "screen test"
- Part of
she thought she could convey the character's "heart" and vulnerability at being overlooked by Rico because her toughness makes her seem like just another guy
sounds like it could be a quote.
- Comma after "harsh conditions".
- Did Rupkalvis have a background in the military that made her qualified to help with the training?
but
shechose to anyway, later remarking
The crew returned two weeks later to find that miles of electrical cables, some equipment, and even cars had sunk into the mud.
Alternatively,The crew returned two weeks later to find miles of electrical cables, some equipment, and even cars
hadsunken into the mud.
The conditions also caused respiratory and exhaustion issues among the crew, and many were treated for heatstroke after wearing heavy costumes in the 115 °F (46 °C) heat, including Busey, resulting in production pausing for a week—costing $1.5 million a day—while he recovered.
- run-on sentence.
- Suggest adding "television personality" in front of "Rachel Campos".
The exam results scene and the prom were both filmed at Kaiser Permanente
- I'm guessing this was at Kaiser Permanente's headquarters or another one of their office buildings. Suggest elaborating, since most people probably aren't going to know where this is located.
Additional scenes were filmed during this period, including the FedNet propaganda sequences
- were these considered pick-up shots?
- I read somewhere that this film was initially given an NC-17 rating. Since you mention this for Robocop and Total Recall, I would suggest a sentence or two about this in the first post-production paragraph.
but Verhoeven wanted the music to offer a realistic background for the character's experiences.
- Change to "characters'", since this appears to refer to all of the film's characters.
- Hey Bneu2013, I have done the above apart from the following:
Neumeier completed his third and final draft by early 1995
- no direct mention of the second draft, but I'm guessing the changes described in the previous paragraphs were part of it? When was it finished?
- The second draft is mentioned ("His contributions to Neumeier's second draft included...") although the sources for the 4th paragraph under writing aren't specific about what is in the 2nd or 3rd drafts. Though I wouldn't expect someone to be going THAT wild in their final draft, you'd expect that to be the clean and refine what you did in your last draft phase. But that's just me guessing. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 21:08, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- If you can't find anything, then leave as is. Although it would be nice if you could find a date for when the second draft was finished, since we have this for 1 and 3. Bneu2013 (talk) 22:14, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- The second draft is mentioned ("His contributions to Neumeier's second draft included...") although the sources for the 4th paragraph under writing aren't specific about what is in the 2nd or 3rd drafts. Though I wouldn't expect someone to be going THAT wild in their final draft, you'd expect that to be the clean and refine what you did in your last draft phase. But that's just me guessing. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 21:08, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
Additional scenes were filmed during this period, including the FedNet propaganda sequences
- were these considered pick-up shots?
- Reading the description of pick-ups, I don't believe so, but I may be wrong. It describes pick ups as additional filming to correct existing scenes, while the Fed Net filming was original content they did not have time to film during the main photography Darkwarriorblake (talk) 21:08, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- Multiple sources I've read state that pick-up shots are scenes filmed after principal photography has ended, meaning these could be considered such by that definition. But unless any reliable sources refer to these shots as such, describing them as such would constitute original research. However, I'd recommend wording them to explicitly state that they were less important scenes that were not part of principal photography. Bneu2013 (talk) 22:13, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
Many key crew members were hired in 1996, including Verhoeven's long-time cinematographer Jost Vacano,[58][59] as well as Vic Armstrong (second unit director and stunt coordinator), Mark Goldblatt (editor), John Richardson (special effects supervisor), Basil Poledouris (music composer), Stacey McIntosh (construction coordinator), Karen Higgins (construction foreman), Gregg Goldstone (first assistant director), Kenneth Silverstein (second assistant director), John Blake (makeup artist), Kathy Blondell (hair stylist), William Petrotta (prop master), Robert Galotti (weapons coordinator),[60] production manager Robert Latham Brown, production coordinator Daren Hicks, and assistant production coordinators Janet Campolito and Lisa Hackler.
- inconsistent use of parentheses for descriptors; I prefer not using them. Ditto the succeeding sentence.
- I get where you're coming from, I have switched them all to parentheses (for now) just because I am concerned of creating a SEAOFBLUE issue with things like second unit director and stunt director Vic Armstrong. Let me know your thoughts. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 21:08, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- That should work. Bneu2013 (talk) 22:07, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- Part of
she thought she could convey the character's "heart" and vulnerability at being overlooked by Rico because her toughness makes her seem like just another guy
sounds like it could be a quote.
- No it's not a quote, it's about two paragraphs of content I've boiled down to the main point Darkwarriorblake (talk) 21:08, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- I read somewhere that this film was initially given an NC-17 rating. Since you mention this for Robocop and Total Recall, I would suggest a sentence or two about this in the first post-production paragraph.
- So I don't believe this was given an NC-17 rating, the times had changed a bit since the days of RoboCop and Total Recall. The only mention I can find at all is a 4 second decapitation scene was removed to avoid receiving an NC-17 rating but that this was pre-emptive and it's from a listicle article so not super reliable. I've googled for NC-17, deleted scenes, censorship, etc, relating to the film but not had any results. I can add mention of the scene's removal though. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 21:11, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- So if I understand correctly, what you're saying is it wasn't actually submitted to the MPAA and given an NC-17 rating; they just cut a scene out of suspicion that it would likely get it an NC-17 rating. This was not the case with RoboCop and Total Recall, if I understand. This article actually does seem to imply that it was given an NC-17 rating, although I don't get the impression the authors know that for certain. As such, I would recommend mentioning this, but wording it something like "x scene was removed to avoid an NC-17 rating". On a related note, I do remember two decapitation scenes towards the end of the film, but I'm not sure which version I saw. Was that by any chance a different version than the theatrical with the cut scene? Note that I haven't gotten to the post release section, and am aware this may be discussed there. Bneu2013 (talk) 22:06, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- I would've been too young to see this in cinemas, I think, I can only assume the decapitation refers to the Planet P battle while Rasczak is still alive because one of the flying bugs does outright decapitate someone and it only lasts a few seconds, but I can't find any real discussion about it, even in the books I've got, outside of forum and reddit posts. There's this comparison between the theatrical and Workprint (not a reliable source) which does not show any differences in terms of violent content, but you can see how much they had to change regarding Carmen because the test audiences hated her guts. They basically cut her whole Zander romance.Darkwarriorblake (talk) 22:19, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- Since it does not appear the film was ever given an NC-17 rating, I guess my recommendation stands. Also multiple clips of the scene you are referring to are available on YouTube, and are consistent with what I remember seeing. I doubt these, and what I first saw years ago, are any different than what was shown in the theaters in 1997. So I guess just word it as "scene... was trimmed to avoid an NC-17 rating". Note that I would recommend "trimmed" as opposed to removed, as it is unclear whether or not this was a complete removal of a decapitation scene or a trimming of a decapitation that made it into the final cut (there are indeed two in the scene in question). Bneu2013 (talk) 20:08, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- I would've been too young to see this in cinemas, I think, I can only assume the decapitation refers to the Planet P battle while Rasczak is still alive because one of the flying bugs does outright decapitate someone and it only lasts a few seconds, but I can't find any real discussion about it, even in the books I've got, outside of forum and reddit posts. There's this comparison between the theatrical and Workprint (not a reliable source) which does not show any differences in terms of violent content, but you can see how much they had to change regarding Carmen because the test audiences hated her guts. They basically cut her whole Zander romance.Darkwarriorblake (talk) 22:19, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- So if I understand correctly, what you're saying is it wasn't actually submitted to the MPAA and given an NC-17 rating; they just cut a scene out of suspicion that it would likely get it an NC-17 rating. This was not the case with RoboCop and Total Recall, if I understand. This article actually does seem to imply that it was given an NC-17 rating, although I don't get the impression the authors know that for certain. As such, I would recommend mentioning this, but wording it something like "x scene was removed to avoid an NC-17 rating". On a related note, I do remember two decapitation scenes towards the end of the film, but I'm not sure which version I saw. Was that by any chance a different version than the theatrical with the cut scene? Note that I haven't gotten to the post release section, and am aware this may be discussed there. Bneu2013 (talk) 22:06, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
@Darkwarriorblake: - thought I might go ahead and let you know I've responded to a few of your replies since my last comments. I'm also working on the release section, and will have comments shortly. Bneu2013 (talk) 22:16, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you, I'll be looking at these tomorrow now, bed time! Darkwarriorblake (talk) 22:19, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- Release
- Not a requirement, but I recommend flipping refs 122 and 21 into their sequential order. Ditto anywhere else.
Alan Marshall stated that no one involved in Starship Troopers was happy about delaying an anticipated blockbuster to after the peak theatrical season.
- was this widely expected to be a blockbuster?
The first trailer for Starship Troopers was released in November 1996,
- is a more precise date available, and was this first shown with any specific movie(s) like the second one?
grossing approximately $22.1 million from 2,971 theaters, an average of $7,424 per theater.
- was this just on the opening day, or weekend?
with a total box office gross of about $54.8 million, making it the 33rd highest-grossing film of the year.
- based on the following paragraph, this ranking appears to be just for the United States.
- Was this film considered a box office bomb?
- Reception
- Again, not a requirement, but I suggest ordering refs 138, 137, and 139 and 140, 139, and 142, respectively.
While Berardinelli and Maslin praised the tension, scale, and impressive visuals of the action sequences, in which Verhoeven revels in the contrast between his characters' earnestness and the violent and gorey imagery,[138][140][143] others—such as Jonathan Rosenbaum and Ebert—wrote that the scenes grew tiresome because the alien creatures had no personality, lacking any culture or discernible language, which rendered them idelogically "boring ciphers" inhabiting uninteresting planets.
- run-on sentence.
- Responses to above
- So I've done all the above bar:
Alan Marshall stated that no one involved in Starship Troopers was happy about delaying an anticipated blockbuster to after the peak theatrical season.
- was this widely expected to be a blockbuster?
- According to the LA times and the book yes, although they refer to it as "hit", and in the post production section it discusses how the studio was already looking at a sequel. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 19:26, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
- Was this film considered a box office bomb?
- I have had a look around and not found many sources saying so and I'm not sure I'd trust them, for instance, Screen Rant calls it a bomb but also compares it's US gross only (about $50 million) to it's $100 million budget. Starship Troopers might have not met expectations but it did make more than its budget, even if that may mean it lost money on marketing or whatever, it'd be hard to say since the distribution costs were shared between Tristar and Touchstone. The only 3 other sources I've found that use the term "box office bomb" are Collider, which mentions it briefly in a listicle and includes a quote from a "user" so I'm not sure how reliable that is, MovieWeb, which unequivocably calls it a box office bomb but doesn't mention any figures so I don't know if it's doing the same as Screen Rant, and The Washington Blade which is a speciality newspaper, I can't say I've heard of it before so I'm not 100% on its reliability, and it doesn't call Starship Troopers a bomb, just a flop. Cutthroat Island is usually something I would describe as an easy bomb, $100 milly budget, $11 milly box office. They also went on to develop multiple sequels to Starship Troopers which isn't usually what happens with a flop. So I'm open to your opinion on this, I'm not sure the sourcing I can find is strong enough to make a bold claim like it being a bomb, it definitely didn't do gangbusters but I'm not sure it'd be considered a bomb.Darkwarriorblake (talk) 19:26, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
- If the sources don't describe it as a bomb, then leave as is. Since it sounds like a film is considered a bomb if it's theatrical revenues do not exceed its production cost, then this film would not meet that definition. Bneu2013 (talk) 03:36, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
- Post-release
- Cut comma after
compact disc (CD) in 1997
- Themes and analysis
including patriotism, authoritarianism, militarism, colonialism, and xenophobia
- shouldn't these be linked?
- Change comma after "Nazi coat of arms" to a semicolon.
a right that must be taken instead of given.
- what does "taken" mean here? I'm guessing it doesn't mean "taken away", although someone could mistake it for this.
- Legacy
- Suggest changing
The Atlantic and The Verge (2020)
to "The Atlantic and The Verge in 2020".
- Remove comma after "2020 retrospective".
- Suggest
Starship Troopers is now considered a cult classic.
Not sure this was true initially.
Starship Troopers has continued to generate interest in the decades since its release because of elements which came to reflect future events such as the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, and the subsequent actions of the U.S. government and president George W. Bush to convince the American people to surrender certain liberties to enable a war and defeat their enemies.
- comma after "events, MOS:DATECOMMA after "2001", and link "George W. Bush. Also suggest changing war to "the subsequent War on Terror".
- Sequels and remake
- Consider adding a sentence at the end of the sequels paragraph summarizing the reception and relative success of the sequels compared to the original.
- Was the proposed reboot in the early 2010s a film or television series?
@Darkwarriorblake: - I've finished my review. I should be able to support once all of my remaining comments are addressed and I see no other remaining issues. Bneu2013 (talk) 04:39, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
- Bneu2013 Hi, I've done most of these. Xenophobia and GW Bush are already linked earlier in the article. I did look when writing up the article, and I've had another look just now, for information about the sequels. The difficulty is that because they are all straight to video there's no real financials to review, and the most recent two films don't even have enough reviews on Rotten Tomatoes to generate a percentage score. Box Office Mojo doesn't cover the franchise at all, and The Numbers DOES but only has figures for Starship Troopers, not for all the sequels and the figures are so low they can't possibly be accurate. There's no real discussion as far as I can find about the films post Starship Troopers. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 21:18, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
- Ok, all I have left to do now should be to just skim over the article to make sure there are no remaining issues. Bneu2013 (talk) 09:51, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
- Friendly pingminder for Bneu2013, have you had any more thoughts or been busy? Darkwarriorblake (talk) 19:35, 24 September 2024 (UTC)
- I've been extremely busy. Unfortunate I'm not as active as I once was. But I've finished my review, and don't see any remaining issues, and am ready to support. Bneu2013 (talk) 01:22, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
- Friendly pingminder for Bneu2013, have you had any more thoughts or been busy? Darkwarriorblake (talk) 19:35, 24 September 2024 (UTC)
- Ok, all I have left to do now should be to just skim over the article to make sure there are no remaining issues. Bneu2013 (talk) 09:51, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
Support pending completion of source review. Bneu2013 (talk) 01:23, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for your thorough review Bneu2013 Darkwarriorblake (talk) 08:43, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
Source and image review
[edit]Images seem all well-placed. Regarding File:Starship Troopers 1997 film - Klendathu Drop.ogg, is the track of outstanding significance to the film as a whole, instead of just being part of the film? File:Emblem of Italian Blackshirts.svg and File:Heer - decal for helmet 1942.svg need a licence for the symbol. ALT text is OK. Source-wise: What makes #29, #220 and #168 a reliable source? #216 is a bare URL. Some URLs like https://www.denofgeek.com/games/starship-troopers-strategy-game-release-date/, https://www.avclub.com/content/node/24776, https://www.avclub.com/article/a-decade-of-underrated-movies-1486, https://theasc.com/articles/needs-pics-starship-maneuvers, https://theasc.com/articles/pest-control-on-starship-troopers, https://ascmag.com/articles/starship-troopers-interstellar-exterminators, https://www.cbr.com/starship-troopers-unknown/, https://deadspin.com/the-grisly-goofy-starship-troopers-played-dumb-to-make-1741600229 and https://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/tabletop/11532-8-Avalon-Hill-Board-Games-That-Deserve-New-Life.5 should be marked as broken. There are a fair amount of reviewers being cited like Den of Geek, SyFy (not sure here) and Deadspin that don't seem to be that prominent, which makes me wonder about their qualification as "high-quality reliable sources" - there is probably more but that source list is so long that I might have missed some. The books and stuff are reliable sources, however. Formatting seems consistent too. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:44, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
- The Klendathu Drop track is the basis for the entire rest of the score, so that one piece provides context of tone and theme for the entire film, and it is also discussed in the body text.
- So I have added public domain tag to the Heer one but the Blackshirt one appears to be a vector image based on the original logo, but it obviously wasn't vector based and clean back then, so I believe the creator owns the copyright. I believe the original design should fall in the public domain and what the editor has created is unique but derivative of the original design. The editor has added their own free-use tag with attribution, so I'm honestly unclear if I am allowed to add a public domain tag to it for the design basis. I've asked for help on the mediawiki village pump but had no luck so far.
- The CBR, ASC, and Deadspin links all work for me, dunno if there was a temporary issue when you tried. I've marked the other ones and ran the bot to try and tag any dead links.
- Fixed the bare URL
- SyFy is what used to be the Sci-Fi Channel, it's been around for 32 years, and Tim Grierson is currently a senior critic for Screen Daily so I believe it's a reliable source. Deadspin is by the same people behind The A.V. Club and, I believe, Kotaku, so I don't believe there should be any concerns relating to it and Tom Breihan is the senior editor of Stereogum. It's another long-lived news source. On a previous FA nomination (I can go find it but please don't make me), it was agreed that Den of Geek is fine when written by site staff only, not contributors. Ryan Lambie was deputy editor of the site, and Matthew Byrd is their games editor with the article he authored being focused on that speciality theme (board game in this case). It does also have a staff and hierarchy page.
- If those answers are satisfactory, I could just use some feedback regarding the Blackshirts emblem based on my above comments. Thanks Jo-Jo Eumerus Darkwarriorblake (talk) 19:59, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
- The issue with the images is that it's not clear by which right the uploader holds the copyright. Is this a coats of arms like situation where one distinguishes between blazon and emblazon (sp?)? Regarding the sources, I sometimes feel like I have been overly lenient when reviewing certain kinds of sources. I'll ask Ealdgyth's input. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:55, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
- Did you have any luck Jo-Jo Eumerus Darkwarriorblake (talk) 22:25, 23 September 2024 (UTC)
- No, doesn't seem like. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 06:57, 24 September 2024 (UTC)
- What would you like to do then Jo-Jo Eumerus? I can understand your viewpoint but I don't think you're being lenient in this situation, I have learned from previous nominations to be pretty strict on my sourcing even if it means sacrificing interesting information so I do believe the references are solid. I do take some personal pride in elevating these articles so I do try to avoid shortcuts as I want them to stand as reliable. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 10:36, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
- We'll see how the coordinators handle this. I know it's buck-passing but I don't feel certain enough on these sources to say yes or no explicitly. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 06:56, 29 September 2024 (UTC)
- What would you like to do then Jo-Jo Eumerus? I can understand your viewpoint but I don't think you're being lenient in this situation, I have learned from previous nominations to be pretty strict on my sourcing even if it means sacrificing interesting information so I do believe the references are solid. I do take some personal pride in elevating these articles so I do try to avoid shortcuts as I want them to stand as reliable. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 10:36, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
- No, doesn't seem like. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 06:57, 24 September 2024 (UTC)
- Did you have any luck Jo-Jo Eumerus Darkwarriorblake (talk) 22:25, 23 September 2024 (UTC)
Support from Draken Bowser
[edit]I'm doing my part! Very interesting, I have been wondering how the differences between the book and the film came to be. I think the article reads well and there are only two sections which break the flow. With "Box office" it's expected, but the other one is the second paragraph below "Pre-production" listing various crew members. Since more than a dozen of these are never mentioned again it makes me wonder whether they are all due for a mention. With no other concerns for me across these 16 pages I'm happy to pledge right away. Draken Bowser (talk) 18:32, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you Draken Bowser, Bneu mentioned something similar above so I have removed crew members who don't have an article and moved them to the Special Effects sub-article. This trims the section down considerably. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 19:40, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
Support from Paleface Jack
[edit]I have decided to emerge from my little abode to offer my support on this current nomination. As per usual, the writing and sourcing here is very strong as mentioned above by other reviewers. I do not see any errors or nitpicks to point out. I did alittle looking around and found an additional source though it is not necessary that contains some interviews with Verhoeven called Paul Verhoeven: Interviews editied by Margaret Barton-Fumo. Again, it is not needed but might be useful if you ever need another source to back up what you already have. Cheers!--Paleface Jack (talk) 02:42, 27 September 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks Paleface Jack, found the book and implemented it where I could Darkwarriorblake (talk) 22:41, 27 September 2024 (UTC)
- Looks good. Paleface Jack (talk) 00:28, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
- Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 20:00, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.