is this movie meant to be Satire?

It seems to try to have it both ways, at times acting as a satire, but at other times as a straight portrayal. As a consequence, although it has some good things in it, ultimately it falls, not knowing what it wants to be.

Yes, but they couldn't pull it off.
The third one had more satire but was mostly crap as a movie...

Like most satire over time.... No? Yes, the movie was meant to be satire. But the world is so absurd, so relentlessly absurd, it has become true to life. Mark my words fellow movies fan. We will soon fine more in common with Mad Max than Sixteen Candles.

The film is meant to be satire of the book more or less. The director never bothered to finish reading it.

It is claimed to be, it doesn't really work as satire. Verhoeven as well his apologists have always made such claims, always after the fact, when his movies don't make their money back (even Showgirls is claimed to be a "serious satire").

It does have those comical fourth-wall 'media' breaks and laughably dehumanizing mentor characters, similar to Robocop style, but again the tone doesn't carry over into the rest of the film, which is still entertaining enough as a particularly graphic science ficton action adventure.

You will still find Verhoeven on his DVD commentaries, such as Total Recall insisting that at the end of the movie, theatre audiences were fervently debating the intellectual question of whether or not Quaid was having a dream or not.