OK. I admit it. Maybe I like cheap trashy movies (and having worked my way through just about every 1970s s/exploitation and grindhouse horror/thriller, that may well be the case), but I loved this movie. I had read all the rubbish reviews online, on amazon and imdb.com, yet still I bought it. Why? Because I was convinced it still had something to offer a diehard fan of the original movie, like me. The complaints I saw most frequently seemed to centre on how low-budget it looked. Well, funny that, eh.
Let's face it, if this film wasnt called Starship Troopers 2 and was titled Space Bug or something equally B-movie-esque, it would be happily accepted as exactly what it is: a cheap, visually inventive sci-fi schlock fest in the mould of Inseminoid or something similar. I can only imagine that people who give this film lousy reviews either a) expected far too much for a straight-to-video sequel to an admittedly kick-ass original, or b) arent big fans of cheesy splatter horror.
Kudos to Tippett for keeping the arch-fascist subtexts... the final montage of death and glory propaganda (juxtaposed with the most incompetent recruiting officer imagineable in the last scene), and the Mobile Infantry opening, are strangely uplifting in a worrying kind of way. That's probably Neumeier's point: how easy it is for propaganda to seduce people (as easy as it is for a pretty young blonde thing to seduce any male in her path).
Good rousing orchestral soundtrack, and a good use of CGI. The bugs look as good as they did in the movie. Other reviewers have complained about the tight framing and relentless close-ups, which actually aren't any different to what we're used to seeing on TV shows. Don't you get it, people? It doesn't look big, epic and cinematic because it wasn't made for the cinema! (Who slags off a TV cop show because it doesn't look like Dirty Harry?) Instead, it feels claustrophobic, creepy, perfectly in keeping with its setting. Tippett has stretched whatever minimal budget he had to produce something that is far better than the majority of reviews would suggest. Sure, there's nothing really that hugely artistic going on, the sets are dark, gritty and retro-industrial in style, but the execution isnt overshadowed by its ambition. Tippett realised his budgeting constraints and set out to make something that didnt try (and fail) to replicate the widescreen epic sweep of the original, and instead went for the human drama aspect, played out against darkly claustrophobic sets. The handheld/steadycam shots actually work within the context of the battle scenes. Black Hawk Down it aint, but it works on its own terms. If this is Tippett's first shot as a feature director, then I've seen far worse debuts.
Decent script by Ed Neumier, some good humour; not always brilliantly acted, although Capt. Dax, the General, and the cigar-chomping female Sargeant make up for their ham colleagues (plus, the chick who plays the Sargeant is one red hot momma - wasn't she also the Captain in the original movie?) Good gore for those who like that kind of thing, not too much to put off people who are upset by rubbery prosthetics and strawberry syrup (though those who are would have a real hard time watching the original movie, I'd guess.) Nice psychological subtexts as well. The new bug is quite interesting, though the sexual overtones have been over-emphasized by some reviewers (and there's more actual nudity in the first movie, by the way).
Good selection of extras on the DVD as well with featurettes, stills, etc. Watching the featurettes give you the impression that this was a labour of love for Tippett, who has dedicated his life to movie animation (and has been a big influence on my own visual work as well). Everyone involved in it seems to have loved the experience of working on the movie, which was shot in less than a month.
Yeah, I'll watch this again, because I really enjoyed it. It certainly did a damn sight more for me than the pitiful Hostel 2.