Austin360 blogs > Austin Movie Blog > Archives > 2006 > September > 01
Friday, September 1, 2006
‘Idiocracy’ — not half bad
Three things to establish right up front:
1) I love Mike Judge. “Beavis and Butt-head” and “King of the Hill” are among my favorite things on this earth, and I’m pretty fond of “Office Space.”
2) “Idiocracy” will not rank with those works.
3) Still, there is absolutely no reason (and I just held myself back from writing that in all caps) that Fox should have hidden this little movie away like it was Suri Cruise.
I checked out “Idiocracy” this morning at the early, early show at Barton Creek Square (the movie did not screen in advance for critics, so we were not able to review for today’s Life & Movies section in the Statesman). There were about 10 people in the theater, which I found pretty impressive for 10:05 a.m. on a weekday. And many of those people laughed out loud during the movie.
“Idiocracy” is uneven, but it is very, very funny in places. You’re probably familiar with the premise: Luke Wilson plays an average guy who becomes the subject of a government hibernation experiment. He wakes up 500 years in the future and discovers that he is the smartest man in a dumbed-down world.
Like Peter Gibbons in “Office Space,” Wilson’s character, Joe, is trapped in a world ruled by the inept where nothing makes sense or works right. The problems go a little deeper than TPS sheets, though. At a hospital, for example, the lobby is strewn with trash and filled with slot machines. Patients line up to be diagnosed by a machine attended by a guy who mixes up which sensors go in your mouth and which ones go … somewhere else. And all of this costs billions of dollars.
The way that “Office Space” tapped in to our universal loathing of workplace nonsense, “Idiocracy” touches the raw nerve of how much, well, idiocy we have to deal with on a daily basis. Judge imagines a society where every interaction is like your absolute worst experiences with bad service or shabby manners (everything is loud, vulgar and sexualized in the future — we’re a nation of K-Feds).
Wilson’s character is a bit underdeveloped but he projects a sweet, everyman quality as the rest of the cast revels in playing dumb. The movie represents a new pinnacle in achievement for blank stares. Dax Shepard, who was such a nice surprise in “Zathura,” is a hoot as Joe’s dim lawyer, and Terry Crews is funny as the president, who punctuates his speeches with machine-gun fire.
But — and you knew this was coming — there are problems. The occasional voiceover narration seems tacked on to try to smooth some narrative problems. It’s annoying and not at all helpful. Maya Rudolph’s character — a hooker who’s frozen along with Joe and also wakes up in the future — is borderline disastrous. She’s written as a stereotype and she adds nothing to the plot. The plot doesn’t meander as much as “Office Space’s,” but the pacing could have been punched up.
The main thing that bothered me, though, is that you can tell the movie is unloved. While I liked “Idiocracy’s” inventive vision of the future, the film looks cheap and rushed, especially some special effects. I have a feeling that Judge could have done a lot more with a bigger budget.
I keep coming back to the question of why the studio isn’t even trying to promote the movie. Even a little money spent on marketing could have made it a niche hit.
If you’re a Judge fan, “Idiocracy” is worth checking out. It won’t wow you, but it won’t break your heart, either, and you’ll get some good laughs. I hope there’s at least a little bit of vindication out there for Judge and this movie.
Reviews are in for Austin’s Capote movie
Variety and The Hollywood Reporter weigh in with early reviews of “Infamous,” the Truman Capote biopic filmed partly in Austin that was racing the production of last year’s “Capote” and lost.
Variety’s is decidedly mixed, the gist being: “Regardless of the liberties taken, there was an integrity and character complexity to (‘Capote’) that’s missing from this glossier biopic. … ‘Infamous’ doesn’t measure up to its predecessor and seems unlikely to echo the attention it received.”
Yet it singles out Sandra Bullock’s portrayal of writer Harper Lee for praise: “Sandra Bullock’s understated performance as Capote’s friend Lee is a high point here — wrapped in a cardigan and puffing on cigarettes, she creates a bracingly sturdy character of this plain-speaking, unfussy woman amid a cardboard gallery of flashy sophisticates.”
Read it all here.
The Hollywood Reporter is sunnier, summing up its take with: “Bottom line: A second look at Truman Capote’s journey to write ‘In Cold Blood’ that against all odds is as good as “Capote.”
See that one here.
Permalink | |
