The premise of the movie is very original: Joe Bauers (Luke Wilson), a U. S. Army librarian, is accidentally hibernated for five hundred years and wakes up in an incredibly dumbed-down world, together with a prostitute (Maya Rudolph).
Chaos and absurdity arise, with Bauers experiencing virtually everything, from prison sentencing, to becoming an aide to US President Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Herbert Camacho, who realises that the protagonist is the most intelligent person in the world.
The film is amazingly funny and, even though it might come across as unfairly cruel at first, one will realise that the main aim of Mike Judge's satire is not the stupid population of 2505 America, which is viewed with pity, rather than contempt. Instead, the movie attacks present culture, its lack of respect for culture and its shameless glorification of ignorance.
The movie has been accused of being scientifically inaccurate, in the sense that a dramatic reduction of the average IQ for evolutionary reasons is improbable. Yet it seems unfair to judge it for this, as the statement "Idiocracy" ultimately makes is cultural and not strictly scientific. The Darwinian premise is merely an analogy to argue that modern world favours stupidity in a way that resembles the survival of the fittest.
Clearly, "Idiocracy" is no "Godfather", but it is definitely able to entertain the viewer for just a few minutes shy of a hour and a half. It can also spur discussion of our current political and cultural situation: where are we headed? What do we value? Is there a concrete risk of transforming into a world where even lawyers have corporate sponsorships? Hopefully not, but can we be entirely sure?
Chaos and absurdity arise, with Bauers experiencing virtually everything, from prison sentencing, to becoming an aide to US President Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Herbert Camacho, who realises that the protagonist is the most intelligent person in the world.
The film is amazingly funny and, even though it might come across as unfairly cruel at first, one will realise that the main aim of Mike Judge's satire is not the stupid population of 2505 America, which is viewed with pity, rather than contempt. Instead, the movie attacks present culture, its lack of respect for culture and its shameless glorification of ignorance.
The movie has been accused of being scientifically inaccurate, in the sense that a dramatic reduction of the average IQ for evolutionary reasons is improbable. Yet it seems unfair to judge it for this, as the statement "Idiocracy" ultimately makes is cultural and not strictly scientific. The Darwinian premise is merely an analogy to argue that modern world favours stupidity in a way that resembles the survival of the fittest.
Clearly, "Idiocracy" is no "Godfather", but it is definitely able to entertain the viewer for just a few minutes shy of a hour and a half. It can also spur discussion of our current political and cultural situation: where are we headed? What do we value? Is there a concrete risk of transforming into a world where even lawyers have corporate sponsorships? Hopefully not, but can we be entirely sure?