Idiocracy

Happy holidays, dear reader (singular... i mean, who am i kidding, right?). With the solstice over, i now have a small array of movies and games given to me seemingly specifically for the purpose of invoking my ire once more. I even got a pair of theater tickets (i just need to trick some unsuspecting female into going to the theater with me - i have until 2011, by expiration date). As such, i'll be spending the next few posts going through this list of movies, hopefully within the month, and spewing my opinion on them here for all to see. As i'm also learning how to draw now, maybe i'll even include a few drawings for accompanyment. But we'll see - i have other reasons to learn how to draw (i had to cut down on my pay porn sites due to the economic downturn).

While there appears to be some decent looking movies in the pile, there are also things like Mortal Combat (yeah...) so there's lots of room for great anger and great enjoyment to be had by all. But enough background, let's get to the first movie...

Idiocracy: a movie about stupidity... or was it just a stupid movie? Brought to you by a fellow physicist (Mike Judge - King of the Hill and Office Space guy) Idiocracy's plot is as simple as the characters it portrays. Thanks to rampant commercialism and "a lack of natural predators", the future is composed entirely of people slightly less intelligent than they are today (though, miraculously, technology seemed to have advanced as well). The result of which is fox news is pretty much unchanged and the main character (who's travelled to the future via a plot-device) is the smartest person in the world - but not by a whole hell of a lot. It's sort of like that episode of the simpsons where Homer becomes "smart", but dragged out for about 90 minutes.

The movie is listed as a comedy and originally i expected the humour to be derived largely from the more "intellectual" side of the spectrum. Ironically, however, the comedy is instead derived largely from the dumbed-down, simplistic form of entertainment the film openly derides. So, basically, when you ARE laughing, you're laughing at yourself, laughing at yourself, laughing at... well, you get the idea.

The main characters are supposed to be of average intelligence by today's standards and i guess they sort of are: It takes the main male character half a day to figure out what has happened to him and it takes the main female character significantly longer than that for the same realization to dawn on her. Hooray for sexism!

The problem arises is that because they are so average, they kind of don't really appeal to anyone. Not to say they're unlikeable, but you just don't identify with them enough to care when they're put in trouble. Will Joe make it out alive from the futuristic legal system of the US? Probably, but who cares?

Having an "average" hero is not BAD per-se, but it's not good, either. People typically view themselves as extremes and hence don't "click" well with so-called "averages". You, my dear reader, no doubtfully view yourself as just as fun and quirky as Homer Simpson, just as intelligent as Greggory House (of House MD) and with the driving abilities rivalling that of Mario Andretti! Hell, you probably think yourself as strong and agile as your favourite superhero... if only in comparison to the pathetic "average" of society. Unfortunately, you're wrong: You're boring, unintelligent, out of shape and (chances are) not a very good driver, either.

No, i'm not trying to insult you. I, too, view myself as all of those wonderful things (except, i actually am). But the fact remains: you don't view yourself as "average". Just like guidance counsellors told you many years ago (and you foolishly believed), you're special - just like everyone else.

Anyways, getting back from my long journey to "what the hell is he talking about" land: Idiocracy is an oddly non-offensive "sardonic" look at what the future holds: The people who live in the future are portrayed sympathetically as well-meaning "high school" type personalities (because stupidity ends after high school!) and aren't nearly as dangerous as real-life morons (libertarianism, anyone?). It's really quite odd because the portrayal of stupid people in the movie's present is far more scathing, though only slightly more accurate.

The other thing that's kind of odd, despite the current poor health problems of north americans in general (and poor, ignorant north americans specifically), there are a surprisingly large number of relatively fit people in the future. Even "Average Joe" main character is pretty far from "average joe north american" when it comes to relative health. Now, not everyone in the movie is fit, but considering the *ahem* "plot", you'd think they would've at least TRIED to make it a little more accurate. It's not like they're trying to not offend stupid, fat people.

As far as the good traits of the movie are concerned, there really isn't that much. There are a few visual puns that are worth a laugh or two, but the entire "everyone's a knuckle dragging hillbilly" gets old quite fast. Really, there isn't that much to enjoy... i suspect i just wasn't drunk enough to be watching it in the first place.

The film ends with the "message" that simply reading a few books can cure stupidity the same way aspirin cures a headache. The male lead marries the female lead, thus ending the statutory love story required in all movies by law, and everyone (in the future) learns just a little and the world becomes a better place as a result. I give this movie two stars out of a possible 5 (cause 2 is a smaller number than 5): there are worse movies, but there are also much, much better ones, too.