Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Starship Troopers (film)/archive1

Starship Troopers (film)

 * Nominator(s): Darkwarriorblake (talk) 16:45, 12 July 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. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 16:45, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Drive-by comments

 * 10,000+ words!! Really?
 * Clearly, he believes the reader Would Like To Know More RoySmith (talk) 13:21, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
 * "In December 1991 ... Davison realized it bore many similarities to the 1959 science fiction novel, Starship Troopers, by Robert A. Heinlein. The novel had ... remained an enduringly popular work for over four decades." Do the math. :-) Gog the Mild (talk) 17:00, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
 * It's 9700 words, most of my comprehensive articles on older films range around this as comprehensiveness is part of the requirement, but as I say on each review, the Thematic Analysis section is something I have to include, not want to, and I have to provide an acceptable level of coverage for it. That section is 1300 words in this case and, plus the 400 words in the lead, text relating to a big and influential science fiction film adapted from a controversial book, with an arduous production, and which generated controversy itself is actually about 8000, though, per WP:SIZE, I can go up to 15,000 words if the scope of the subject warrants it. I have gone through prior to this and copy edited it and removed some information which I found interesting but I took an objective approach towards so I do believe I've reached a fair equilibrium.
 * I think by 1991 it would've been in 4 separate decades, 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s, but I've removed it anyway as I don't think the specificty is important. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 17:20, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
 * If I may ask, why do you not want to include the "Thematic analysis" section? TompaDompa (talk) 17:39, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I've replied on your talk page Tompa as I don't want to go too far into the weeds here. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 18:06, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I would have just said something like "whose popularity spanned four decades" RoySmith (talk) 23:04, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Done Darkwarriorblake (talk) 16:43, 15 July 2024 (UTC)