History Headscratchers / Idiocracy

28th Apr '17 2:05:01 AM TheMysteriousH
Is there an issue? Send a Message

Added DiffLines:


[[folder:Reading]]

* If reading (among other intelligent things) is for "f*gs", then where are they? Are there no gay people in the future? Do they even know what they're referring to?

[[/folder]]
27th Dec '16 2:30:25 PM Dovey
Is there an issue? Send a Message

Added DiffLines:

*** The pop-culture belief that the western world is plagued by people making frivolous lawsuits has been thoroughly debunked by organisations such as the Consumer Attorneys of California and the movie Hot Coffee by Susan Saladoff. This belief was actually crafted and propagated by many, many companies who all benefited from stigmatising anyone who would want to seek reasonable legal action against them. This is a commonplace practice.
9th Sep '16 10:08:05 AM GothicNarcissus
Is there an issue? Send a Message


** I think the movie left a few things only implied because, well, we don't live in 2505 and should be able to grasp them: 1) The people in the future not only are less intelligent and educated, but less competent in ''anythng'', ingluding physical labour. 2) Technological and, especially, medical progress skyrocketed between the late 19th Century and our present day; before that, life was much less easier for everyone. 3) Before out world became all comfortable and non-threatening, humans had to be either intelligent or at least competent in something to survive; it's not like 2505-like people would breed less in the past, it's just they probably wouldn't ''survive'' to breeding age in a more hostile, less techno-easy world. Basically, technological and medical progress erased any threat to the survival of people too dumb to live, so they could thrieve. Also, consider that less educated (or intelligent) parent are less likely to place value on educating their children (or taking care of them at all), resulting into a cultural downward spiral. Of course, that's a stereotype and a generalisation, but the movie clearly plays stereotypes for laugh and a tong-in-cheek social commentary.

to:

** I think the movie left a few things only implied because, well, we don't live in 2505 and should be able to grasp them: 1) The people in the future not only are less intelligent and educated, but less competent in ''anythng'', ingluding physical labour. 2) Technological and, especially, medical progress skyrocketed between the late 19th Century and our present day; before that, life was much less easier for everyone. 3) Before out world became all comfortable and non-threatening, humans had to be either intelligent or at least competent in something to survive; it's not like 2505-like people would breed less in the past, it's just they probably wouldn't ''survive'' to breeding age in a more hostile, less techno-easy world. Basically, technological and medical progress erased any threat to the survival of people too dumb to live, so they could thrieve. Also, consider that less educated (or intelligent) parent are less likely to place value on educating their children (or taking care of them at all), resulting into a cultural downward spiral. Of course, that's a stereotype and a generalisation, but the movie clearly plays stereotypes for laugh and a tong-in-cheek tongue-in-cheek social commentary.
9th Sep '16 10:07:00 AM GothicNarcissus
Is there an issue? Send a Message


** I think the movie left a few things only implied because, well, we don't live in 2505 and should be able to grasp them: 1) The people in the future not only are less intelligent andeducated, but less competent in ''anythng'', ingluding physical labour. 2) Technological and, especially, medical progress skyrocketed between the late 19th Century and our present day; before that, life was much less easier for everyone. 3) Before out world became all comfortable and non-threatening, humans had to be either intelligent or at least competent in something to survive; it's not like 2505-like people would breed less in the past, it's just they probably wouldn't ''survive'' to breeding age in a more hostile, less techno-easy world. Basically, technological and medical progress erased any threat to the survival of people too dumb to live, so they could thrieve. Also, consider that less educated (or intelligent) parent are less likely to place value on educating their children (or taking care of them at all), resulting into a cultural downward spiral. Of course, that's a stereotype and a generalisation, but the movie clearly plays stereotypes for laugh and a tong-in-cheek social commentary.

to:

** I think the movie left a few things only implied because, well, we don't live in 2505 and should be able to grasp them: 1) The people in the future not only are less intelligent andeducated, and educated, but less competent in ''anythng'', ingluding physical labour. 2) Technological and, especially, medical progress skyrocketed between the late 19th Century and our present day; before that, life was much less easier for everyone. 3) Before out world became all comfortable and non-threatening, humans had to be either intelligent or at least competent in something to survive; it's not like 2505-like people would breed less in the past, it's just they probably wouldn't ''survive'' to breeding age in a more hostile, less techno-easy world. Basically, technological and medical progress erased any threat to the survival of people too dumb to live, so they could thrieve. Also, consider that less educated (or intelligent) parent are less likely to place value on educating their children (or taking care of them at all), resulting into a cultural downward spiral. Of course, that's a stereotype and a generalisation, but the movie clearly plays stereotypes for laugh and a tong-in-cheek social commentary.
9th Sep '16 10:06:25 AM GothicNarcissus
Is there an issue? Send a Message

Added DiffLines:

** I think the movie left a few things only implied because, well, we don't live in 2505 and should be able to grasp them: 1) The people in the future not only are less intelligent andeducated, but less competent in ''anythng'', ingluding physical labour. 2) Technological and, especially, medical progress skyrocketed between the late 19th Century and our present day; before that, life was much less easier for everyone. 3) Before out world became all comfortable and non-threatening, humans had to be either intelligent or at least competent in something to survive; it's not like 2505-like people would breed less in the past, it's just they probably wouldn't ''survive'' to breeding age in a more hostile, less techno-easy world. Basically, technological and medical progress erased any threat to the survival of people too dumb to live, so they could thrieve. Also, consider that less educated (or intelligent) parent are less likely to place value on educating their children (or taking care of them at all), resulting into a cultural downward spiral. Of course, that's a stereotype and a generalisation, but the movie clearly plays stereotypes for laugh and a tong-in-cheek social commentary.
5th Aug '16 6:29:11 AM egloskerry
Is there an issue? Send a Message


** Natural selection hasn't changed since before Stone Age, but throughout most of humanity's history it was heavily nerfed by artificial self-selection. Screwing out of wedlock was forbidden and people didn't choose who they marry, their parents did and valued the potential candidate's ability to survive in the modern world and be a good spouse more than they did their ability to survive in jungle and sexual attractiveness. Nowadays only a natural selection is at work, so humanity reverts to its natural state: just one step above the animals. What really bugs me is the lack of violent gangs in the movie, you'd think such a future would just crawl with them. Besides, in addition to contraception point above, now is the first time in history abortion has become so available. Who knows, how many potential ensteins didn't make it to this world.

to:

** Natural selection hasn't changed since before Stone Age, but throughout most of humanity's history it was heavily nerfed by artificial self-selection. Screwing out of wedlock was forbidden and people didn't choose who they marry, their parents did and valued the potential candidate's ability to survive in the modern world and be a good spouse more than they did their ability to survive in jungle and sexual attractiveness. Nowadays only a natural selection is at work, so humanity reverts to its natural state: just one step above the animals. What really bugs me is the lack of violent gangs in the movie, you'd think such a future would just crawl with them. Besides, in addition to contraception point above, now is the first time in history abortion has become so available. Who knows, how many potential ensteins Einsteins didn't make it to this world.



** He and Collins were obviously great friends, and prostitution is not exactly a life sentance, so perhaps Collins helped him build/find another capsule to get to the future. It would explain why his opened up a little later than the other two, after all (Perhaps it was offset by a few years, but not to the exact day?)

to:

** He and Collins were obviously great friends, and prostitution is not exactly a life sentance, sentence, so perhaps Collins helped him build/find another capsule to get to the future. It would explain why his opened up a little later than the other two, after all (Perhaps it was offset by a few years, but not to the exact day?)



** Who says that's why he's in the future? He probably just converted his sentence into agreement to be part of another experiment, or somesuch. It'd be a whole lot of trouble to get hybernated and all just to [[spoiler:find one of your whores and get a few hundred bucks back]].

to:

** Who says that's why he's in the future? He probably just converted his sentence into agreement to be part of another experiment, or somesuch. It'd be a whole lot of trouble to get hybernated go into hibernation and all just to [[spoiler:find one of your whores and get a few hundred bucks back]].
29th Mar '16 12:02:16 PM Akaihiryuu
Is there an issue? Send a Message



to:

** Beef Supreme was played by the brother of the actor who played Joe, so some of that may have been a casting gag.
29th Mar '16 12:01:22 PM Akaihiryuu
Is there an issue? Send a Message



to:

** Simple. The last smart people built up a huge automation infrastructure while they were still around. That infrastructure is still mostly running. But noone left knows how to fix anything, so when something breaks, it breaks for good unless it can be fixed by the system. The entire system is starting to break down by the point of the movie. See the first season Next Generation episode: "When the Bough Breaks" for another example of an advanced society that forgot how the stuff they built worked and became dependent on the machines that already existed. In that case, the machines still worked fine (the problem was something else entirely), but it's still an example.
1st Jan '16 5:00:16 AM erforce
Is there an issue? Send a Message


** Except that Mike Judge isn't above sacrificing realism for the sake of making a point. The irrigation [[strike: sub]]plot is a perfect example; it's impossible to bounce back from decades of salting the Earth with sports drinks in a matter of days, but the movie goes ahead and does it so that we can see Joe save the world. Never mind that the same effect could have been achieved using a pot of clean dirt (they weren't spraying Brawndo on ''everything,'' after all, just the land they were trying to grow things in) and a seed. Similar problems exist with OfficeSpace, but that's another IJBM entirely. In fact, I'll be right back...

to:

** Except that Mike Judge isn't above sacrificing realism for the sake of making a point. The irrigation [[strike: sub]]plot is a perfect example; it's impossible to bounce back from decades of salting the Earth with sports drinks in a matter of days, but the movie goes ahead and does it so that we can see Joe save the world. Never mind that the same effect could have been achieved using a pot of clean dirt (they weren't spraying Brawndo on ''everything,'' after all, just the land they were trying to grow things in) and a seed. Similar problems exist with OfficeSpace, ''Film/OfficeSpace'', but that's another IJBM entirely. In fact, I'll be right back...
29th Jun '15 7:29:01 PM ManInGray
Is there an issue? Send a Message

Added DiffLines:

** Maybe they were tunneling or mining equipment.
This list shows the last 10 events of 79. Show all.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=Headscratchers.Idiocracy