Paul Verhoeven
Good to hear someone else likes Starship Troopers. I went to see it three times during its theatrical run; the second two times, I was the only one in the theater!
Your Ken/Barbie comparison is right on. It was the first time I saw Denise Richards on the screen, and I could have sworn she was computer-generated. Alas, since then we’ve learned she’s all too real…
The commentary Verhoeven does on the disc with the screenwriter (can’t recall his name at the moment) is a hoot, with the two of them disagreeing on point after point. As I recall, Verhoeven vehemently insists it’s not a politically oriented story! Which is even funnier. It strikes me as a wonderful parody of a fascist epic—and, as you say, JP, of the world since 1997.
Did I just write “the second two times?” Ray, meet English. English, meet Ray. Try to get to know each other.
Yes! a post on Verhoeven. I’m in, he’s one of a faves.
No director brings a certain taste for sleazyness with technical skill and visual bravado than Verhoeven does. The man knows how to stage Violence, and a sensibility that surpasses the confinements of the scripts he’s directed. Robocop was fking awesome, still is. Satire and pissing on conventions are what he does best, and I appreciate him as an Auteur.
Robocop, Total Recall, Basic Instinct, Starship Troopers. Those four films could never be made like the way he made them, and contain elements that pushed the envelope for the time. They hold up because no matter what year they where made, they never felt dated. The opposite actually. His Dutch output is another side of him that was more character driven (by budget and story) and less special effects.
Showgirls is underrated, but it’s a terrible movie. It’s a great satire of people who only do what they want to get the american dream, and that uglyness and the nudity turned off people at the time of it’s release. Since then it’s been a camp classic, and that was always the intention.
No director shoots sex and violence like Verhoeven does, he’s so extreme that the joy of watching such crazyness is increased in any of his films. Basic Instinct is absolutely hilarious, and ridiculous, but it’s also a good thriller.
All his movies are entertaining, and he’s quite a character. Ray his commentary on Starship Troopers is a hoot, screenwriter was Ed Neumier. Oh god, why do I know that? I’m so geeky.
Verhoeven would be one of my great guilty pleasures if there was much guilt involved.
As I said in the RoboCop thread, he’s one of the few directors besides Hitchcock to carve a highly distinctive career squarely in the heart of the mainstream Hollywood industry after building a substantial body of European work. Most non-American directors either go to Hollywood much earlier (Ridley Scott, Adrian Lyne, Christopher Nolan) or find themselves stifled creatively once they arrive (Emir Kusturica, George Sluizer, John Woo). There’s obviously a huge difference between his big-budget American sci-fi films and his (necessarily) smaller-scale Dutch films, but they’re all recognisably the work of the same director.
It seems to me that he works best in collaboration with a sympathetic screenwriter – I certainly find his films with Gerard Soeteman and Ed Neumeier to be much more effective than his more highly-touted work with Joe Eszterhas, largely because I don’t think Verhoeven’s sensibility chimes especially well with Eszterhas’s high-testosterone approach. I’d actually defend Showgirls to a surprising extent, as I can see what Verhoeven was trying to do, but the script is atrocious, as is Elizabeth Berkley (unless she was deliberately trying to create an utterly unsympathetic character). On the other hand, I thought Gina Gershon absolutely nailed her part.
As for Starship Troopers, it’s one of the all-time great anti-American satires, and is all the more hilarious for being produced in Hollywood and given a huge budget. There are two parallel satirical strands: the galumphingly obvious mockery of totalitarian propaganda, and the much subtler (and funnier) deconstruction of just about everything conservative America holds dear – which clearly went way over the heads of the people paying for it. I haven’t seen it in years, but I suspect it stands up rather well, especially in the light of the War on Terror. (In fact, when someone asked Verhoeven if he wasn’t tempted to make a cinematic response to 9/11, he said that as far as he was concerned he’d already done it).
Hollow Man was probably the biggest disappointment of Verhoeven’s American career, largely because it was nowhere near extreme enough – after a few tantalising flirtations with the grubbier aspects of invisibility, it turned into a pretty bog-standard slasher film.
I do keep meaning to revisit the Dutch films – I’ve seen all of them (aside from Black Book, which I really must catch up with), but many many years ago. I have a very soft spot for The Fourth Man, largely because it was my first Verhoeven – in fact, I remember the review that persuaded me to see it: Anne Billson in Time Out concluded “I haven’t laughed so much since The Devils”, and that could have been written with me in mind!
While I must admit I still haven’t see his earlier films, Robocop, Starship Troopers and especially Total Recall are some of my all-time faves. Verhoeven certainly seems to have been the right man at the right time, and from his commentaries on the subsequent DVDs he was having a great time as well. Ray the commentary on Starship Troopers is with Neumeier again, and the part where Verhoeven screams at the top of his lungs out of nowhere makes me jump out of my skin every time. I can never remember exactly when he does it (he tends to ramble), so I’m usually taken by surprise.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1715325/
Who knows?
The 4th Man is one of the best films of the 80s
Starship Troopers is very shallow and dumb as a political satire. I can’t believe how people talk about this film as some sort of masterpiece. Same thing goes for Total Recall.
For anyone who’s interested what Paul Verhoeven’s new film is about, it’s called De Stille Kracht (the Silent Power) based on a book by Dutch writer Louis Couperus (sometimes referred to as the Dutch Proust) from 1900. It’s about the clash between the Dutch and Indonesians on the Indonesian island Java. The silent power refers to the magic/superstition of the locals which is what’s, according to the locals what’s really ruling the island, and not the Indonesians nor the Dutch.
As for Starship Troopers, I’m not a big fan of the film, but it’s kind of funny how even the New York Times didn’t see the satire elements in the film (inspired by Riefenstahl’s Olympia) and called it a fascist film. I generally also prefer Verhoeven’s early Dutch films like Soldier of Orange, Turkish Delight and the Fourth Man and the only reason Verhoeven went to the States is probably because he already broke all taboos here (violence-wise and sexually) and there were plenty of them left in the US. He’s also always been interested in the fascism he belives strongly present in American culture.
I’ve always liked the idea of Verhoeven has the Douglas Sirk of the 1980s and 1990s but I understand why that might be a stretch.
His new film sounds very intriguing. I thought The Black Book was a remarkable return to form but I prefer his Dutch films – especially The 4th Man. Soldiers of Orange is one of the great war films. Spetters is also great.
Watched ‘The Fourth Man’ recently. Outstanding. Verhoeven is so in tune with his pulp sensibilities. I don’t think the comparison to Sirk is too farfetched at all; they both have an ironic sense of humor in regard to the material they tackle. Total Recall is terribly underrated. And his most recent film, ‘Black Book’, is so old-fashioned in the way it plays with the spy-thriller plot (I mean that as a compliment).
No living director handles sexuality and violence in such a fun way while still remaining intelligent.
There is a Robocop dissent? What the fuck is wrong with people? All of these Blackwater / private prison fiascos only goes to show how spot on the movie was.
Verhoeven is great. He knows exactly what he’s doing. He purposely puts together tasteless, over the top satires that always consist of a great deal of imagination and clever humor. I’ve always been a big fan of his work as well as John Carpenter’s.
“I thought The Black Book was a remarkable return to form”
yep, quite surprising really.
i like his Dutch films but Katie TIppel is hard to swallow ;-0
Yeah, I don’t know what’s up with ‘the dissent,’ but I love the first Robocop.
Verhoeven in general … yeah, I agree with Roger that he definitely knows what he’s doing – he’s proven that well enough. And he has that wonderful extremely over-the-top violence which is always a plus (‘cause it’s usually done right). Total Recall was good (as I’ve whined before, it isn’t really a Dickian film, but that doesn’t matter, the film stands pretty good on its own [like The Shining) and I like Soldier of Orange.
I’m on the fence though about Starship Troopers. I mean, I see what Verhoeven was going for (it’s really just an upgrade from what he’s always been going for), but god, I can’t place what it is that doesn’t work for me … maybe it’s the flow that’s off or maybe its self-awareness is just too bombastic and loses focus – I’ll have to watch it again. I did like it better than Black Book (though that wasn’t TERRIBLE, not quite) and a helluva lot more than Hollow Man … Showgirls I’ll have to see again, but initially it struck me the same as Starship Troopers … just too much “much” that Verhoeven can’t seem to contain it properly.
Whatever one may think of his sensibility, he certainly has the talent and the experience to continue making great films.
^^S.Troopers is kind of like an overblown, supercharged version of Robocop in many ways, so i get your point.
Total Recall was amazing in teh early 90’s but it hasn’t aged as well as his other films imo, mostly due to the fact that it’s now obvious that it was shot on a soundstage and it feels claustrophobic in a bad way as a result.
i guess the problem also is that his style lacks the novelty value it had in the80’s and 90’s too. deliberately OTT, ironic, tongue-in-cheek driven action is more common now than it was then. sure he always had the satirical edge, but in terms of offering visceral impact, he has more competition.
Total Recall has so much promise – and it’s definitely one of the better Arnie films – but I can’t watch the film now without thinking what it would have been like if it was directed – as originally planned – by Cronenberg and starring William Hurt …
“RoboCop” is an amazing film and so often people dismiss it as a dumb action flick. Well, Paul Verhoeven took what could have been a dead-end project and turned it into a highly intelligent satirical masterpiece.
(Possible “spoilers” ahead: first experience the film, then come back!)
For starters, “RoboCop” takes an outsider’s look (Paul Verhoeven is Dutch) at Reagan’s America (1980s) and sees a nation increasingly dominated by corporations: the film is set in the near future and preditcs the mass privatisation of the hospitals, police force, even the military.
The director uses his main character, Alex Murphy/RoboCop, as a means of expressing the dehumanising effect corporations have upon the individual. Following his murder at the hands of a notorious underworld gang, Murphy loses his human identity and becomes RoboCop, a “product” of Omni Consumer Products. There is a subtle yet brilliant moment where RoboCop is being assaulted by ED-209, and Murphy’s right eye is visible through a crack in his protective eyeshield—thus demonstrating Murphy’s “rehumanisation” that began with a visit to his former home and culminates with RoboCop’s final word in the film.
Not only does Paul Verhoeven use “RoboCop” as a parody of American capitalism gone awry, the film also places it titular law enforcer as a sort of “Modern American Jesus”. Obviously, RoboCop/Murphy is a messianic figure. Mr. Verhoeven uses many pieces of extremely clever symbolism to express Robo’s Christ-like status:
—Alex Murphy is the 33rd police officer killed in the film (31 are mentioned in a news report, the 32nd dies in hospital, Murphy takes the place of the 32nd and becomes victim 33, the age Jesus was when he was executed).
—The first bullet from Clarence’s gun to pierce Murphy goes through the police officer’s hand, representing the “nailing in” of Christ to the cross.
—Murphy is resurrected as RoboCop, and shortly after he is switched on, a young lady working in the lab places a crown on RoboCop’s head: Christ the King.
—As RoboCop is being fired upon by the SWAT style team in the underground carpark, fragments from the concrete wall behind him land like hail around his feet, representing the stoning of Jesus.
—Watch very closely as RoboCop treads his way through the shallow water in the steel mill as he pursues Clarence, and you shall see it appears as if RoboCop is walking on water (due to the high lifts on his feet, the water does not reach his ankles, as it would with a regular person, so it really does look as if Robo is stepping on the water’s surface).
-Also note how the head of Omni Consumer Products does not have his name mentioned during the entire film, he’s simply The Old Man (as in “The Old Man Upstairs”). In other words, he is The Creator, and RoboCop is the Messiah-“Nice shooting son, what’s your name?”
As the director himself describes it, RoboCop represents the American Christian Fundamentalist approach to justice—obey the Ten Commandments, “thou shalt not kill”, but when all else fails, capital punishment is the only option—“I’m not arresting you anymore.”
Also, let’s not forget the sensational score from Basil Poledouris (above)—one of the most memorable compositions in the history of cinema. “RoboCop” really is an astonishing film, and I dare say no sci-fi movie during the past 25 years has managed to top it, maybe not even equal it.
Maybe most people’s vision on the original “Robocop”, which I consider to be an excellent film, was affected by the two absurd sequels. Verhoeven has a violent and straightforward sense of humour that you can either love or hate. “Starship Troopers” has that same comedic tone. “Total Recall” hasn’t aged so well because the satyric factor there isn’t as refined in the two aforementioned films.
I think it might be a little bit of an overstatement to call it highly intelligent. Don’t get me wrong, it’s a fine film (you may be right on with that “no sci-fi movie during the past 25 years has managed to top it” statement) and I’ve listened to the director’s commentary as well, but let’s not go mad. Sure, there’s meaning behind a lot of Robocop and it’s highly referential, but that doesn’t really make it ‘highly intelligent’ – more like, ‘highly aware.’ But that’s semantics really, the main point is that it’s a great film.
I feel like we’ve had this discussion before … am I crazy or just absent-minded? Both is also an option, but not quite as informative.
—“Total Recall” hasn’t aged so well because the satyric factor there isn’t as refined in the two aforementioned films—
. . . and Schwarzenegger seems more or less oblivious to the satircal element.
Well, I’ll add this to my list of directors then, I had forgotten about it, thanks to whoever bumped it.
Personally, Verhoeven’s best works lie in Holland but his early Hollywood career was stimulating to say the least unlike other examples. Showgirls and Hollow Man are obviously bad to the core and not in a charming way.
Verhoeven Ranked (from what I’ve seen)
1. Turk’s Fruit
2. Soldier of Orange
3. The 4th Man
4. Robocop
5. Black Book
6. Total Recall
7. Basic Instinct
8. Showgirls (way down)
9. Hollow Man (way down)
i heard he’s about to make a period film about the time of Dutch colonization in Indonesia, and he’s gonna shoot the exterior parts in East Java. Cant wait for this one.
Mark, even film snobs like Robocop. It was one of the most analysed films of the 80’s. i’ve lost count of the amount of papers i read about it 10 years while doing my undergraduate degree. and while i generally cringe at the overzealous efforts of American academics to ‘intellectualise’ popular films, this one actually proved itself worthy, as it arguably captures the zeitgeist unlike any other mainstream film of its era. But like Deckard, i’d hesitate to refer it as ‘hightly intelligent’. clever? definitely.
Anyway, i think the Frankenstein metaphor was more appropriate than the Christ metaphor, which i always felt was kind of lame really. Verhoeven was fond of both.
-even film snobs like Robocop-
That should so be the title of this thread.
“I’ve always liked the idea of Verhoeven has the Douglas Sirk of the 1980s and 1990s but I understand why that might be a stretch.”
IMITATION OF LIFE / SHOWGIRLS double feature. Nuff said.
“…it’s now obvious that it was shot on a soundstage and it feels claustrophobic in a bad way as a result.”
HATED this aesthetic aspect of the movie for at least a decade. Now I think it absolutely works.
“. . . and Schwarzenegger seems more or less oblivious to the satircal element.”
but I sure bet, for someone who spent YEARS trying to find the right director for the script, that Der Schwarz was aware of what a finely calculated political move it would be to switch from playing bad-guys to good guys in a movie in which he gets to play both in the same body. All on the road to governor. Reminds me of a Philip K. Dick novel I once read…
Eh, I dunno, Joks. Even film snobs like “RoboCop”? Certainly not many that I’ve encountered…normally quite the opposite.
Highly intelligent…clever…aware.
This thing:
By the way, does anyone else recall the scene where Robo is set upon by a horde of journalists at the hostage negotiation? There is this GORGEOUS blonde lass who looks JUST like Meg Ryan…who WAS that lady?
Verhoeven is interesting… to me, he falls into the category of “directors who should have stayed in their home countries”. You generally make better work when you’re on the home turf and don’t have the studio system on your back.
Just look at Soldier of Orange.
I partially agree with Brady. Nevertheless, I doubt “Robocop”, for instance, would ever have been made outside the US. It would have been quite a different film (probably much worse, judging from the sequels) if it hadn’t been directed by Verhoeven.
___ _____
In light of the Robocop dissent I think it was best to create a topic dedicated to Verhoeven in general. I’m not a Verhoeven fan, but I think he represents an important niche of cinema in that he is able to produce films as biting satire of Hollywood, yet they are openly accepted by mainstream audiences as mere examples of the action genre, so I suppose he also represents the most ironic figure in Hollywood. I haven’t seen his Dutch films, but I think Starship Troopers remains a success in that it not only subverts Hollywood action norms (like the Ken/Barbie perfect romantic leads), but also creates a deft political satire that is even more relevant today than it was back in 1997. I feel it best to let someone else take over here since I’ve only seen the majority of Verhoeven’s American output and I’ve read his Dutch films (such as the Fourth Man and Soldier of Orange) were him at his best.