I am not trying to talk anyone into liking Paul Verhoeven's movies--I didn't like SHOWGIRLS and only tolerated HOLLOW MAN. All I am saying is that I just do not think that the contempt you see is really there. I think you're misinterpreting something else as contempt. Dislike his movies all you want, doesn't matter to me.

About STARSHIP TROOPERS: What happened was that Phil Tippett and Jon Davison wanted to do a giant bug movie with the critters up against an army. When they talked to Ed Neumeier about this, he pointed out that Heinlein's novel was basically just that, so they bought the rights. They had to change the book in many ways--it's actually about 2/3 set in a classroom--and didn't agree with his idea that the only people who should be allowed to vote are those who have served in the army. (Buried in the book somewhere is an afterthought along the lines of "or other form of government service.") So they de-emphasized that and even endeavored to criticize it. They left out the "jump suits" for two reasons: you couldn't see the actors' faces, and to do them would have doubled the effects budget. Since I consider fidelity to source not necessarily a virtue at all, it didn't bother me that they didn't stick to Heinlein's book--and he, too, was someone I knew, and he hugged Beverly once, too. He's one of my favorite writers, though I admit I haven't read many of his novels after THE MOON IS A HARSH MISTRESS. The intent in the movie was satire >of itself<, an unusual approach, but it really is what they were up to. In an interview, when I cautiously suggested that the various relationships reminded me of Archie Andrews and his Pals 'n' Gals, Neumeier laughed--because that was exactly what he was going for. He added, "And Jughead ends up a Storm Trooper."
STARSHIP TROOPERS and TOTAL RECALL are very smart movies, but they're not smart in obvious or familiar ways.