Linux Based HD DDR used on Starship Troopers 2 204
Psinatmium writes "LinuxDevices is currently running a story about a Linux based, uncompressed high definition video DDR/Editor that I have been working on called RaveHD. The article also goes on to talk a little about how it was used at Tippett Studio in the upcoming feature "Starship Troopers 2: Hero of the Federation"."
What? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:What? (Score:3, Funny)
Straight to video (Score:2)
For more info:
http://energo-system.cyberdusk.pl/ie/index
Re:Appearently.... (Score:5, Funny)
Plus he gets to play with Udo Kier.
That's a plus.
I'm still shocked by the DDR thing.
"What? Dance Dance Revolution on Unix? Why would they play that in Starship Trooper 2?"
Re:What? (Score:3, Funny)
Two-dimensional characters played by wooden actor-props fighting CGI bug-alien-things and all done with about as much plot as Doom I: yeah, that deserves a sequel if anything does.
At least with a video game I get to control the lame-assed character with the gun.
Re:What? (Score:2, Insightful)
but they had to pretend that it had any relationship to RAH.
Re:What? (Score:2)
I'm ashamed to admit that I actually enjoy this movie and find it strangely compelling. The CGI holds up remarkably well for a 1997 release; the bugs in particular look as good as anything I've seen since. And Verhoeven is so over-the-top trashy that it's hypnotic. I just have to choke back the vomit whenever I think of what they did to my favorite sci-fi novel.
What's worst, I've decided, is that in the
DDR? (Score:2, Funny)
interesting Linux development!
Re:DDR? (Score:3, Funny)
We got to move this fast before the public realizes it crap!
Freaking hilarious (Score:5, Interesting)
Turns out that's a complete, absolute lie--it's not a feature, it's a shitty direct-to-video release that often blue-screens unknown actors in front of footage from the first film.
Not exactly something to be bragging about...
warm front? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:warm front? (Score:2)
More widespread effects... (Score:5, Funny)
Oh no, not a sequel! (Score:5, Insightful)
Best example: In one scene, a trooper asks why they are training with knives when the military has nukes.
Please, spare us a sequel to that!
Re:Oh no, not a sequel! (Score:2, Insightful)
The book's politics have dated and the film did a fantastic job of satirising them and the whole GungHo marine infantry thang you Americans have going.
Re:Oh no, not a sequel! (Score:4, Insightful)
Even worse, it wasn't even a good movie.
Re:Oh no, not a sequel! (Score:2, Interesting)
I have not read the book (yet, it's on the stack).
I absolutely love the movie. It's a biting sarcastic attack on societies that worship war and the military, very well executed. War looks like an episode of 90210 mixed with an infomercial, just like it does on Fox.
My view of the book was always that it made idols of the military, only giving the right to vote to the military, etc. So Verhoeven used the book to make a statement that says the opposite. Which I think he did rather well.
That doesn't mean I t
Re:Oh no, not a sequel! (Score:2)
The book may have idolized (sp?) the military, but the vote was granted to anyone who performed Federal service, of which only a small percentage were military. Any civil service job was sufficient, IIRC, and there is a (sarcastic) comment that one could volunteer to be a test subject for medical research if not qualified for anything else.
IMHO, the movie was lame.
Re:Oh no, not a sequel! (Score:5, Interesting)
Spare us, please, until you have read the book. Heinlein had an extremely romanticized view of honor and obligation, and imagined a military where honor and obligation superceded the ideals of glory and profit. Typical Heinlein.
Minus the hot nubile incestuous women.
Re:Oh no, not a sequel! (Score:2)
Well it was originally written for a young adult audience...
Re:Oh no, not a sequel! (Score:3, Interesting)
Please do. You may very likely reconsider what you said below. And if you have even a slightly open mind, it will challenge many of the assumptions that you may have made about the purpose of violent conflict in human societies.
My view of the book was always that it made idols of the military, only giving the right to vote to the military, etc.
The point here was that if you are not willing to give service to your nation; in its defense, or in some other way, then you should ha
Re:Oh no, not a sequel! (Score:2)
Ahhh, you see, that thinking is out of vogue now. People here prefer nuance, not Manichean worldviews; there is no "evil" - or if there is, it's really our fault. See, what'd really happen in today's world is that after the bugs smashed Buenos Aires, we'd be holding symposiums examining the effects of pseudoarachnophobia and human bigotr
Re:Oh no, not a sequel! (Score:2)
The point here was that if you are not willing to give service to your nation; in its defense, or in some other way, then you should have no say in the allocation of resources. I view paying taxes the same way. Why should someone who didn't contribute have any say in how the money is used?
I agree with you, if you're saying that paying taxes is giving service to your nation.
But if you think as I, that it's axiomatic that you must be ready, willing, and able to soundly defeat aggressors and then be willi
Re:Oh no, not a sequel! (Score:2, Funny)
"My view of the book"
"I'll still read it and then I'll judge."
You see no contradiction here?
Re:Oh no, not a sequel! (Score:2)
No. My view of the book is based on what I read about it (in discussions like these, mostly...). I didn't say it was a bad book, did I? I do have an idea what it's about, though.
Re:Oh no, not a sequel! (Score:5, Interesting)
A defining aspect of Fascism is the close cooperation between government and business that it engenders. The extreme example us Hitler supplying slave laborers to German industry, but it's also seen in Hitler's crackdown on the unions (ironically the day labor's traditional celebration, May Day, in 1934), and big business support of Nazism in the early thirties, through contacts of Goring and von Papen.
Heinlein, in the Starship Troopers novel, makes it clear that there's no real coordination between business and government: the main character, Juan Rico, comes from a wealthy, big-business owning family, which family, Juan's father makes clear has long prided itself on staying out of politics and the military. (Although after Juan Rico has joined the military and after losing his wife in an enemy attack, Juan's father will eventually join up too.)
If you must see the book as reflective of the times in which it was written, a better analogy is to America's fight against Japan in the Second World War. During the war, U.S. propaganda depicted the Japanese as an "insect-like" society with a rigid hierarchical system, with soldiers, like the Bug worker and soldier classes, who couldn't or wouldn't surrender. (and in fact, few Japanese soldiers did surrender -- and even Japanese civilians on Okinawa preferred suicide to surrender.)
The Mobile Infantry's landings and relatively brief firefights on various planets as they move steadily closer to Klendathu, the Bugs' home planet, is strongly reminiscent of the Marines' and Army's island and atoll-hopping campaign against the Japanese in that War.
Finally, the apathy shown about the military by Juan Rico's family reflects U.S. feeling about its all-volunteer army between the wars, an army that w, in the interwar years, considered essentially the preserve of people who couldn't succeed in the civilian world. (Read James Jones's From Here to Eternity for a good portrait of the U.S. Army immediately prior to WWII.)
The change in the Ricos', father and son, opinions is in accordance with the change in opinion in America as a result of the widespread American military servce required by the Second World War. With their service, americans had indeed earned their citizenship, had realized what "refresh[ing] the tree of liberty with the blood... of patriots" really is all about.
Heinlein, while respectful of the military, was consistently suspicious of government, so it's very difficult for me to see any Fascism in his works.
Re:Oh no, not a sequel! (Score:3, Informative)
Three additional points:
- Heinlein is very consistently libertarian throughout most of his works, and there isn't really anything in this book that contradicts that.
- He also made it very clear (elsewhere) that he considered the draft immoral, and while he thought military service was morally proper, he was strongly against it being forced upon anybody.
- I
Re:Oh no, not a sequel! (Score:2, Insightful)
The trouble is the book is more commented on than read. There's a lot in there that I do disagree with - but I think it's worth disagreeing with what's there not what you would like to be there.
It's also worth noting that in the book soldiers could refuse a medic
Re:Oh no, not a sequel! (Score:3, Interesting)
The movie, my lad, was ironic. Verhoeven lived with fascism when he was young, and could see it all too clearly in the book. Hence the brilliant satire that is Starship Troopers.
But hey - I won't be seeing it unless Paul H. is at the helm. Only the Master Of Excess could top the original.
Re: Oh no, not a sequel! (Score:2, Funny)
> Hence the brilliant satire that is Starship Troopers.
Satire, maybe... brilliant, no.
You can't make suckage go away by labeling it "satire" any more than you can by labeling it "prequel".
"How come Homer and Krusty look like clones?" (Score:2, Interesting)
The idea was that Bart had no respect at all for his father, yet he idolized someone who was exactly the same except dressed as a clown. Nothing will make kids respect their parents, yet they'll worship any schmuck on TV.
Obviously over time Krusty developed his own personality, history and so on, and turned into more than an obscure joke.
Re:"How come Homer and Krusty look like clones?" (Score:2)
Re:"How come Homer and Krusty look like clones?" (Score:2)
Hey, who's dumber, the person who answers the question, or the person who continues to ask it?
Re:Oh no, not a sequel! (Score:2)
No kidding? Really? I would never have guessed.
Satire's one thing. The problem is, the movie was incompetent satire, not "brilliant". Others have done it much better [infinityplus.co.uk].
Re:Oh no, not a sequel! (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm commenting on this topic late, so no one will ever read this except maybe you. But it is gratifying to know that at least one other person can look at the movie and say "Taken at face value, it sucks. Oh, it's satire, you say? Well as satire, it *also* sucks."
It has been noted many times that a work of satire cannot be too close to the thing it is satirizing, or it will simple *become* that thing. As far as I am concerned, Exhibit A would be this movie.
In fact, the last time I saw it, I remember thinking "I honestly cannot remember a movie that was more of a sneering insult from the director to his audience."
- Alaska Jack
Re:Oh no, not a sequel! (Score:3, Insightful)
I think that the movie was ironic, in a very subtle and interesting way.
However, I have first hand evidence that many people perceived Starship Troopers as a nice action flick with some patriotic background. Clearly I found this disturbing. It seems so obvious to me that the movie was a satire of the "Shoot first, ask questions later" doctrine that many Americans see
Re:Oh no, not a sequel! (Score:2)
Clearly talented, he does have a streaky track record. Consistently as he uses trashy, gratuitous sex and violence to criticize it and the audience that likes, he also likes it himself. Revels in it even. He knows it appeals. It muddies a lot of attempts to define him.
I do take his stuff as satire, the problem is, in his latter films, the straight man is audience member who doesn't get it. Starship Troopers is a bludgeoning sledgehammer if you've ever had con
Re:Oh no, not a sequel! (Score:2)
Clearly the US is not only country with this kind of tendency. But they do have bigger toys, which is why I'm more afraid of them.
Anyway, I still think that Starship Troopers is kind of US-centric. Movies like Gattaca or The Cube are truely 'generic', but this one isn't.
Re:Oh no, not a sequel! (Score:2)
I saw this movie first as a video because I wanted something that didn't make me have to think. I was on a very demanding contract away from home. Friends had said "Its just a superficial feel good movie". Geesus! What I got was a movie that sucked the audience into an obviously Nazi world as a Nazi supporter would feel. I found it absolutely creepy that intelligent people I knew didn't see it for what it was. On the other hand, it didn't resemble the original at all.
Re:Oh no, not a sequel! (Score:2)
Alternatively: for everyone who hadn't read the novel (which would probably be majority of the audience, no matter what continent) it was just a nice action flick, and those that had read the Heinlein's original, satire.
Re:Oh no, not a sequel! (Score:4, Informative)
Notice he made Rico a blond blue eyed WASP, instead of the Fillipino he was supposed to be. He made the soldiers out to be pretty much idiots, rather than highly trained specialists.
The only thing that came thru in this movie about the director is that he hates the military and spared no opportunity to ridicule it and its members.
"upcomming feature "Starship Troopers 2" (Score:2)
Re:Oh no, not a sequel! (Score:4, Insightful)
RAH was exploring the nature of the "franchise" (who gets to vote). Previous societies gave the franchise to the nobility, wealthy landholders, all males, dues paying party members, everyone over age 18, etc. RAH's premise was that only those who cared enough about society to volunteer for miltary service should be allowed to vote. It's a radical idea and interesting to ponder its implications, but it is NOT fascism. The society itself was quasi-libertarian.
Re:Oh no, not a sequel! (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Oh no, not a sequel! (Score:5, Insightful)
The book was entertaining, but not convincing. For more convincing Heinlein, I suggest "Stranger in a strange land" or "The Moon is a harsh mistress" (They should film THAT one! Throwing rocks from the moon to Earth would be, well spectacular!) or "The number of the beast".
All three books more convincing about the social and technical issues Heinlein cares to write about, and all three far more entertaining.
The film was entertaining IMHO, and did not even TRY to convince anybody. Such films have their entertaining merit.
peace
"/Dread"
Re:Oh no, not a sequel! (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Oh no, not a sequel! (Score:2)
I couldn't even get through Stranger in a Strange Land. Did anyone in this topic just read the games.slashdot.org topic about Mary Sues in RP games? Yeah, uh, let's see here Heinlein, there's a famous lawyer who's rich and, oh yeah, he's surrounded by three super-attractive women all the time and, yup, he's famous and, hey look, a boy raised on Mars by an alien race just falls in his freakin' lap. Talk about Mary Sue.
Job is excellent in comparison.
Re:Oh no, not a sequel! (Score:2)
You'll never hear me argue otherwise, and I'm first in line to challenge people who disapprove of e.g. Jackson's changes in LotR. But the only things that Starship Troopers the movie shares with Starship Troopers the book are the title, some character names, and the general theme of war. Given that, why bother getting the rights to the book? Some people understandably interpret that action as a nefarious plot to trick Heinlein fans into theaters.
Re:Oh no, not a sequel! (Score:2, Informative)
The film is a wonderful piece of work; the poor acting, ridiculous `futuristic' attitudes, the cliched technologies and sciences are all there, so you think this is just another trashy sci-fi movie. But then you meet the recruiting agent with one arm and no legs... and the propoganda television... and the execution of the prisoner... and what they do to the brain.
If you don't think of this film as an anti-jingoist attack
Re:Oh no, not a sequel! (Score:3, Funny)
-B
Re:Oh no, not a sequel! (Score:2)
Re:Oh no, not a sequel! (Score:2)
Me too.. (Score:2, Insightful)
The "spread out" thing (which is drilled into you in the infantry) is so often not represnented in military dramas.. makes for boring shots I guess.
That said, the movie was a hateful piece of shit that had almost nothing to do with the book. The book was fantastic and rasied a lot of really good points
Re:Oh no, not a sequel! (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Oh no, not a sequel! (Score:2)
Re:Oh no, not a sequel! (Score:2)
Re:Oh no, not a sequel! (Score:2)
The movie was a relatively entertaining way to piss away a couple of hours of ones life while drinkin a couple of beers and eating too many salty potato/corn based snackfoods.
The book - well... its a
Re:Oh no, not a sequel! (Score:2)
I could have sworn that the hand gets knifed in the book as well; there's just more explanation about it.
Well, now I have an excuse to go re-read.
i'm so confused (Score:5, Funny)
What does Dance Dance Revolution have to do with Starship Troopers 2?
Re:i'm so confused (Score:3, Informative)
Re:i'm so confused (Score:2)
Re:i'm so confused (Score:2)
Re: i'm so confused (Score:5, Funny)
> What does Dance Dance Revolution have to do with Starship Troopers 2?
They decided that 2 hours of DDR webcam would be more interesting than the first movie, so that's what they're going to release as the sequel.
Re: i'm so confused (Score:2)
What about 2 hours of a one-legged man on a dance machine [kontraband.com] then?
Does this mean it is good? (Score:4, Informative)
P.S - I quite enjoyed the original movie, but mostly because of Paul Verhoeven's style. Without him the sequel wont have the same feel.
The most versatile OS in the world (Score:5, Funny)
For the Love of God (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:For the Love of God (Score:3, Insightful)
I'd have to say you completely missed the mark regarding Heinlein's political message. Heinlein was a libertarian [theadvocates.org], and as such, an advocate for personal liberty in equal share with personal responsibility. He was an advocate of less government control in all things. As pertains to Starship Troopers, after you read the book (you have read the book, right?) recall how each cap trooper is responsible for one thing, themselves. Personal honor and a dedication to fellow soldiers is what drives them and kee
Re:For the Love of God (Score:2)
I think the fatal flaw in Heinlein's vision is tha
Um, you mean the "movie" (Score:5, Informative)
That's so bad that it's being given away with the animated series DVD [chud.com]? The one that blue screens a bunch of nobodies in front of footage from Starship Troopers?
"from time to time some poor guy the director might have picked up on the street waves a plastic-thingie shaped like a bug's limb from the side of the screen. (A friend of mine actually started calling it "Eddy" as it became his favorite character)."
"The plot: Well... there actually is one. ...features some slimy parasites that control humans by entering them through their mouth. (That's the only new cgi, by the way!)"
Stargate already did that one. Well, so did Alien, et al. More here. [imdb.com]
ST2:HoF Not Well Received (Score:2)
From what I've read [imdb.com], I'm not sure anyone would want his/her favorite hardware/software to be associated with this film. An excerpt:
tv movie (Score:2)
Re:tv movie (Score:2)
Pft.. "General" "Open Source" licence. (Score:2)
It's not open source.
Re:Pft.. "General" "Open Source" licence. (Score:2)
There are some interesting variations like "free source" and so on, as well.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Yes, but... (Score:2)
And even more scary... (Score:2)
Kjella
Sick Feeling (Score:3, Interesting)
IMHO, this is a large setback for 'Linux Based HD DDR'. It's like a new printing press having its first major publishing run be the inaugural issue of 'Fat & Horny Magazine'.
I know we all need to work toward using open software wherever we can, but good lord, have some taste!
FX (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:FX (Score:2)
Courtesy of IMDB.com (Score:5, Informative)
I'm tired now of wasting my time writing a review on this truly ridiculous joke on celluloid. Worth a rent? No. Worth buying? For the love of god, NO! Worth seeing? Not at all. If you should somehow get hold of a copy in spite of my warnings, burn it while performing ritual dances or get stoned, watch it and laugh until you're out of breath. Rating: 1.5/10 (incl. 0.5 bonus points for Eddy)
Says enough?
Yikes
It's not a Feature (Score:2)
A Feature is the main film at a screening, excluding the cartoons, the newsreels, the short subjects, etc. This one's never going to see the inside of a theater: according to Corona Coming attractions, it's direct to video:
Moviehole has more brand new images from the upcoming direct-to-video sequel STARSHIP TROOPERS 2: HERO OF THE FEDERATION. Directed by FX master Phil Tippett, the sequel features a new cast of futuristic soldiers who pick up the battle against the bugs, this time on a remote outpost st
Best Quote Ever! (Score:2)
The weird part is, the more I watch that movie, the more I like.
Re:Best Quote Ever! (Score:2)
Pa-leeze! There is one thing and only one thing to like in that abomonation of a movie: the shower scene. The rest isn't fit to be flushed down my toilet.
Phil Tippett and Ed Neuemeir / Starship Troopers2 (Score:2)
I enjoyed the book... (Score:2)
What the? (Score:3, Informative)
Oh wait.. this is slahdot.. carry on.
here are my hopes: (Score:2)
- that it's a remake, and not a sequel.
- it's sexy supporting actresses disrobe
- proper battle suits, damn it.
- and maybe try and stick to the scifi theme, while they're at it.
Slightly offtopic.. but the score for #1... (Score:2)
open source? (Score:2)
I think it is tacky to include the words open source in your license when it isn't.
See the The Open Source Definition [opensource.org]
Too bad OSI failed to get Op [slashdot.org]
No matter what they do to the sequel (Score:2)
Never mind the fact that Denise Richards had been speared through the shoulder about 5 minutes before.
Re:Starship Troopers *2*!?!?! (Score:3, Insightful)
> Something's broken in Hollywood, that's for sure.
No, broken will be the inevitable sequel. *No* movie makes that kind of money without a sequel. The way I see it, we have about a year and a half before "THE PASSION 2: DAWN OF THE DEAD."
Re: Starship Troopers *2*!?!?! (Score:3, Funny)
> No, broken will be the inevitable sequel. *No* movie makes that kind of money without a sequel. The way I see it, we have about a year and a half before "THE PASSION 2: DAWN OF THE DEAD."
More likely Jesus II: Walking Tall [imdb.com]
Re:Starship Troopers *2*!?!?! (Score:2)
I'm only buying the Trilogy DVD set, after they release... "POTC 3: The Return of Judas"
Re:Starship Troopers *2*!?!?! (Score:2)
Re: hyped hdtv (Score:2, Funny)
> guess what ? you can't polish a turd
Actually you can, but it's still a turd when you're done.
Re: hyped hdtv (Score:2, Funny)
I guess that means you've used Windows XP...
Re:As long as the movie (Score:2)
Nonetheless, a NSFW warning would be nice.
Re:You've all missed it.... (Score:2)
There's even less reason to use slack now that there's gentoo. things like slapt-get are mere imitations of the quality tools.
Furthermore, would you want your distro to be associated with the shit-bomb that is ST, let alone ST2? No. So maybe this does speak with apt recognition for what slackware is