Robert A. Heinlein wrote a book about the army of the future. It became a movie, which everyone says it is crap, which I can’t agree: it had explosions, it has nice CGIs and it had Dina Meyer, although she died in the middle of the movie. Anyway, I like the movie, so why not read the book?
And, as any book adaptation to the silver screen, some bits are completely lost: half of the book is about the training days, and the whole book is about Rico’s point-of-view of the war and the military life. In a way, the first half of the book looks a lot like things Skippy can’t do, while the rest looks a lot more about Heinlein views of the political affairs. And that’s something I really hate on fiction books. Like when Victor Hugo decided that he should tell how great Napoleon was, losing just one battle because his commanders didn’t saw a hole in the battle field, right in the middle of “Les Miserables”. The point is not “author putting his point of view in a fiction book”, but “author putting his point of view in a fiction book when such PoV doesn’t change shit in the history”. In the case of Heinlein, he filled the book with discussions about how the military would be better voters, how the politics finally worked (in his universe) when the military where above the civilians and such, hidden in discussions in “History and Moral Philosophy” classes (which the narrator has to go twice in the book). Remove such pieces and you lose nothing about the story itself.
All in all, the book is very easy to read, although some situations are hard to believe, even in the future.