The sole reason that the power armor was not included was because of budget. Not because it might have been a rip-off of Robocop. Not because it destroyed the supposed satire. Pure money problems. Sony decreed a budget of $95 million and put a hard cap on that, what with a no-name cast and a director whose last film was an absolute disaster. CGI tests were done to see if the suits could have worked with such a (relatively) low budget, but it proved to be completely unfeasible. Remember, this was 1997 and the cost of rendering hundreds of CG humanoid figures fighting thousands of CG bugs would have been astronomical and taken far too much time.
I really feel that the quality of a satire depends upon the ability of the audience to understand what it is. I love this book, and I saw the movie on opening weekend in a theatre packed full of teenage and college guys. It was a loud, raucous event and easily some of the most fun I have ever had in a movie. Nothing in the trailer, advertising, or pre-release press indicated that this was a satire. Everything emphasized balls-out action. None of the critics reviewing the film seemed to take notice of satire and no one I have spoken with that has seen the film has come away with that. Is everyone just an idiot in the face of Paul Verhoeven’s genius?
I don’t deny that this film contains some tiny elements of satire, as do some of Verhoeven’s other American films. The film clips are obviously a play on the “Why We Fight” propaganda films of World War II, and they are hilarious. But this doesn’t come across as the main thrust of the movie, instead just delivering on what the commercials and pre-release interviews promised us: mindless action. Verhoeven also decides to toss in reference several other violent films: The song that Ace plays on his violin at the party is also featured in The Wild Bunch and the battle in the compound is almost an exact remake of the climatic battle from Zulu.
As for the whole DVD commentary track, the key for the people taking part is to usually put the film in the best possible light. I would take anything said with a grain of salt. Does Roger Christian really think that Battlefield Earth is a beautiful, artistic film? Did Michael Lehmann have loads of fun going over budget and being pushed around by Bruce Willis on Hudson Hawk? Please!
It also looks like that a sequel is being readied that will be directed by special effects wizard Phil Tippet. Why do I get the feeling that it’s not going to be a Dogma film about man’s inhumanity to man.