Alfred Stuart Urrutia (
Wed, 26 Jan 2000 16:44:50 -0800

Chien Ting Chin wrote:

> Hmm... IMHO, the book is annoying and shallow, the movie got rid of the
> annoying stuffs and as a result become hollow (rather than shallow). But
> at least the movie was campy and fun. Hmm put it this way, I don't mind
> anyone using scifi as a vehicle to preach his/er philosophy, but there's
> got to be story, drama and entertainment to sugar-coat it. If the story
> is lousy or in this case, non-existent, why not just write a philosophy
> book?

You must hate history class, then. No one around to make sure that world
events have the proper amount of sugar-coating attached. The story was, to
me, simple - the world and the war through the eyes of one naive guy who
quickly learns how much he doesn't know about life. I take it you hated the
move "Dazed and Confused". There, too, was a movie about nothing - about 24
hours in the life of a bunch of high schoolers in 1976 Texas. I loved that

> I can understand why the Heinlein estate didn't want anything to do with
> the movie, since the movie dumped virtually everything Heinlein wanted to
> say in the novel. But you know, I think trying to make a movie out of the
> book was the original mistake.

That was not the plan. The plan was, let's make a movie called "Bug Hunt"
about grunts taking on aliens, ala "Starship Troopers". The more they said
"you know, like Starship Troopers" in meetings the more they thought that
maybe they should see if they could cannibalize that book. So that the
lowest common denominator audience would have something to relate to, i.e.
"Hey, I know that book! Cool, they're making it into a movie." The book
would have made a much better movie. If they ditched Denise Richards, too.

> Hmm I won't call it a "great" backstory, I wouldn't even call it a story.
> But it's interesting you say it's a "facist" version. I didn't sense
> anywhere in the book that Heinlein disapprove of this future. In fact, it
> seems to me that Heinlein was using the book to illustrate his idea of a
> practical utopia.

His feelings I have no knowledge of. I've heard that he didn't care one way
or the other, he simply put forth a possible future Earth (facist led) and
went from there. No bias. Rare, nowadays, in this land of "movie about X" =
"movie *condones* X". Stupid bastards.

> Actually the military and political atmosphere in MSG is pretty much
> opposite from that of ST. I am dying to read the interview(s) of Tomino
> (hopefully translated into Chinese or English) that shoul shed light on
> how Tomino think about Heinlein. Here is how I look upon it:
> Heinlein Tomino
> - Mobile Suit - Mobile Suit
> - aliens (bugs) - seperatists (Zeon)
> - interstellar war - Earth sphere war
> - hero is a grunt - heroes are kids
> who doesn't ask who ask too many
> questions questions
> - pro authority - anti-establishment
> - there's a war - there's a war
> because aliens because the powerfuls
> are yucky and oppress the powerless
> they shot first
> - wars bring out - wars mess people up
> the best in MEN
> - clear-cut - ambiguous
> - bombs - Newtypes
> - genetic and - enhanced-types
> chemical are screwed up
> manipulation of
> soldiers is good
> - soldiers make - soldiers make
> the best political the worst political
> decisions decisions
> Anyway, don't take it too seriously or personally. Just want to hear what
> you folks think.

Well, I *think* you should try to be less biased in your comparison. Right
now it doesn't sound like a comparison, it screams "MSG is my favorite and
it's so much better than ST, which I hate, and here's why." Sometimes a
"story" is just the telling of a sequence of events. No larger "message", no
comfortable conclusion.


"Isn't that a bit racialist?"

- Ali G., on most anything

Alfred Urrutia - Digital Domain - 310.314.2800 x2100 - -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

- Gundam Mailing List Archives are available at

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu Jan 27 2000 - 10:06:24 JST