Go figure that after mentioning this book in another thread, I get to mention it again in this one. Except this time the book is getting made into a movie.

Whose going to play Mike?

Genre TV producer Tim Minear (Angel, Wonderfalls) told SCI FI Wire that he has been hired to write a screenplay adaptation of Robert A. Heinlein's 1966 SF novel The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress. The novel deals with a 2076 rebellion on a former penal colony on the moon and has been read as an allegory about libertarianism and its costs.

http://www.scifi.com/scifiwire/art-main.html?2004-01/20/13.00.film

How very interesting. Comments?

After "Starship Troopers" I don't expect much.

I liked Starship Troopers. Not the first time that I saw it though, after the second or third time I liked it. I have no idea why.

It was a good movie. It was a horrible adaptation of the book. The latter is what we're looking for, right?

Yeah. I mean, I don't expect any movie to be better than the book; it's just impossible. I would just like a nice adaptation of the book.

Unlike what they're doing to A Sound of Thunder by Ray Bradbury. They have absolutely ripped that book apart.

The book would make a boring movie, in my opinion. Most of the book is about making plans, describing Luna society, and giving sweeping generalizations of what the conspirators are doing. Fine for a book; not so fine for a movie. They would have to inject more action into the movie- which means it would be less of an adaptation.

Oddly enough I just happen to be reading Starship Troopers right now (Well not RIGHT now, right now I'm typing, I sort of mean for the past few days, and a few yet to come). As little as I cared for the movie, I've got to say the book is worse.

Ok, maybe the book isn't THAT bad, I mean it's well written and kind of compelling, I just find Heinlin's political and social views to be utterly disgusting, they make me sick to my stomach. I mean Joseph Heller joked in Catch-22 about conservatives with ideas like making the votes of "Decent folk" count more, but Heinlen acctualy has the gaul to try and bring that message across with a straight face.

I think you're experiencing a gross misunderstanding of his political views. He's keen on making his points subtly. This means that, often enough, what’s being promoted in the book is in fact opposite to his own sympathies.

To give you a hint: he would avidly renounce the types of institutions in his book.

He would? Thats whats hard to say. Apparently heinlein was close mouthed about a lot of things. I havnt been able to find a book on heinlein by someone who liked him, yet (i havnt tried amazon, I'm trying not to think of the second hand books section of amazon, noooo, i dont want to go there at alll, help, help...)
The otehr side is ably put by:
http://www.enter.net/~torve/contents.htm
Alexei Panshins website. Read everything on it, you must. He takes Heinlein to task and heinlein comes of worst. There is also somewher ei think a link to Brian Aldiss opinion of starship troopers, I think, which was that it wasnt worth wasting breath on, due to its simplicity, poor characters and naked one sidedness.

And i hope they manage to avoid making it an american way of life is best fest, but that will depend on whos doing it. How do you think theyll handle the 1/6th G?
And Inquisitor, how do you think Farnhams freehold matches up with Heinleins views?

ITs a great book(at least I thought it was when I read it in high school, propably time to read it again), but I have serious doubts about a movie. If it follows the starship troopers mold of cutting out all the political/philsophical stuff, and just turning it into a space wars movie, it will have to be even more divorced from the book than starship troopers was.