Cohen: One of the great things about the movie was it was very cathartic because you could just drive around and if anything got you angry it could go right in the movie
And:
Cohen: One of the fun things to disassemble was the notion that evolution rewards the best. Something I was always proudest of was that conservatives thought we were making fun of liberals and liberals thought we were making fun of conservatives.
In the beginning, it talks about how the best people aren’t reproducing enough and that’s why we were sinking. And whoever was watching would assume that it’s people like them that should be reproducing more.
And
Suhrstedt: We literally found a theater, a little bit south of Austin in a suburb, and we had the film of the guy’s ass that we synched up on their projector. And we had probably 200 extras in there. We rolled the footage and everybody started laughing, exactly as they say in the script.
Judge: I remember saying to Tim, “What are we doing? We should just release Ass.”
But just knowing about what intelligence is and how there’s only small slices that are relatively inheirtable.
In families with lots of intelligent people, there’s also a lot of downsides. Its like Targaryens bro. Maybe you get someone really smart, maybe you get someone crazy, and if you’re really unlucky you get a very intelligent mentally disturbed person.
Even for shit that’s clearly inheritable, it’s not that uncommon for one copy of a gene to be better than two.
Like, Judge is relatively intelligent himself, and he does his research. He flat out said he wrote the movie so people would assume theyre the ones that went extinct, and a reason to think that is knowing most people don’t understand basic shit.
The movie was an attempt at getting people to understand his worldview, and I can tell you from experience it’s a very difficult conversation that almost always just pisses people off.
Which is literally the same reason Gullivers Travels was written that way…
But at this point I don’t think anyone actually read that book as a kid.
The first time I got the rough idea was in '96. I was thinking about evolution. In our modern world, pretty much everyone survives, so what would that mean in the long run if you’re talking about purely genetics?
Like yes, there’s stuff that’s based on the modern world, that’s how comedy works (it’d be weird to make a comedy that doesn’t relate to modern day grievances etc) but it really seems like you’re inserting a narrative here or willfully missing the point while claiming everyone else is misunderstanding it.
So…
You think in Gullivers Travels, all those crazy islands were true?
Or do you think like that story made stuff up to illustrate a point to the readers, that Judge also made the story easier to relate to?
Like, he could have just set in modern day.
Instead he had made it explicitly clear that he was starting with someone everyone could identify with
Like, I kind of assumed everyone read that as a kid, I’m starting to think it’s not as good of a reference as I thought
Not everything is Gulliver’s travels.
Judge makes an explicit argument and chooses to end the movie reinforcing that specific point.
What in the movie leads you to your conclusion?
And:
And
https://www.inverse.com/entertainment/idiocracy-oral-history-mike-judge
But just knowing about what intelligence is and how there’s only small slices that are relatively inheirtable.
In families with lots of intelligent people, there’s also a lot of downsides. Its like Targaryens bro. Maybe you get someone really smart, maybe you get someone crazy, and if you’re really unlucky you get a very intelligent mentally disturbed person.
Even for shit that’s clearly inheritable, it’s not that uncommon for one copy of a gene to be better than two.
Like, Judge is relatively intelligent himself, and he does his research. He flat out said he wrote the movie so people would assume theyre the ones that went extinct, and a reason to think that is knowing most people don’t understand basic shit.
The movie was an attempt at getting people to understand his worldview, and I can tell you from experience it’s a very difficult conversation that almost always just pisses people off.
Which is literally the same reason Gullivers Travels was written that way…
But at this point I don’t think anyone actually read that book as a kid.
Like yes, there’s stuff that’s based on the modern world, that’s how comedy works (it’d be weird to make a comedy that doesn’t relate to modern day grievances etc) but it really seems like you’re inserting a narrative here or willfully missing the point while claiming everyone else is misunderstanding it.