Really? I’m suddenly supposed to feel shame for enjoying a comedy that follows a worst-case scenario of our society because an opening scene takes a stab at the breeding habits of intellectuals and their counterpart?

Doesn’t Gawker have entire blogs devoted to the elitism that is intellectualism? What do they consider their political hit-pieces?

Regardless it wasn’t a rich-poor fight, it was a good-decision bad-decision fight, they fact that this reader couldn’t see past it and made it about economics tells me the writer is not as smart as they think they are.

Now this writer would come back at me with “bad decisions don’t make you poor, there are plenty of rich people who make unwise decisions.”

Correct, and they have the wealth to offset those bad decisions. But again, why is this about money?

It’s obvious there are many rich, but stupid people in the future of idiocracy. How did they get their money if they were so stupid and this theory that poverty=stupidity is so pervasive in the film?

Advertisement

Here’s the truth of that scene, a couple who plans, budgets, goes to college and believes in long-term processed and well-conceived plans are the way to get ahead are out bred by people looking for instant gratification.

But really, at the end of the day, it’s a comedy and a stupidly funny one at that. ‘This was not the satire you were looking for’

If we want to discuss eugenics, why is it that only white people can save the universe in Star Wars?