the message went completely over the heads of the people it needed to reach
You had a series of very cynical and deliberately manipulative media coverage of the film which tried to spin it as anything but a climate change movie. And then you had a bunch of “man on the street” pieces intended to make viewers appear stupid.
But the core theory of media influenced economic change is rooted in the idea that a movie can shift people from their profit motives. No oil executive is going to watch a slapstick comedy and decide to shift his business’s core financial model because of a few jokes. No bank executives are going to divest from carbon emitting industries because some Hollywood starlets made fun of them. No senior member of political leadership is going to change how mining permits and environmental regulations are written because Adam McKay posted big numbers at the box office.
The Network didn’t change how Americans consumed their news media. Soylent Green didn’t cause Americans to reconsider our policies on factory farming. Jarhead didn’t cause any military personal to exit Iraq or Afghanistan. The only movie that seems to have really moved the dial on public policy is Idiocracy, the inspiration behind Elon Musk and Peter Thiel’s quest to get more IT people to fuck.
The only movie that seems to have really moved the dial on public policy is Idiocracy, the inspiration behind Elon Musk and Peter Thiel’s quest to get more IT people to fuck.
And even then I have to remind people that saying “Idiocracy is a documentary!” that they’re being too optimistic.
We are NOT in a fully-automated sex-positive polygamous future with leadership that acknowledges society’s problems and places its best and brightest towards a solution, one where free speech is so alive you can even name your restaurant “Buttfuckers” and no one’s even slightly offended, one where even the least educated people in our society can get good quality high-paying jobs in everything from the arts to medical, one where sex work is no longer demonized and is considered so valid a profession that you can get your ass rimmed at Starbucks while waiting for your coffee.
And I don’t understand why people think we have it anywhere near that good.
We are NOT in a fully-automated sex-positive polygamous future with leadership that acknowledges society’s problems and places its best and brightest towards a solution
In fairness, neither were they. A bunch of the “automated” aspects of society were simply systems nobody knew how to operate that were left on autopilot. The administrators rose through the ranks by being Yes-Men and insisting broken systems were operating as intended. Spraying your crops with gatorade is only an “automation” in the most literal sense. It isn’t how a “fully-automated” society is intended to operate.
Further, the whole jail system plus subsequent courtroom drama illustrated the dogmatic resistance to change and zero-tolerance for risks inherent in any change, resulting in a highly sclerotic society. It was only able to change when faced with a sudden catastrophic food crisis.
one where free speech is so alive you can even name your restaurant “Buttfuckers” and no one’s even slightly offended, one where even the least educated people in our society can get good quality high-paying jobs in everything from the arts to medical, one where sex work is no longer demonized and is considered so valid a profession that you can get your ass rimmed at Starbucks while waiting for your coffee.
Hyper-commoditization and exploitation of labor isn’t liberation, its slavery. What you’re describing is a cultural shift, not a relaxation of bigotry (which - again, referencing the courtroom scene - was in full abundance) or absence of elitism (characters regularly derided one another’s intelligence while deferring to the violence of authority figures) or a flattening of incomes (the intro scenes of the future were full of poverty, kept in check by a murderous police force).
And I don’t understand why people think we have it anywhere near that good.
The show was a cartoonish reflection of modern day. It wasn’t intended to suggest we have it better or worse, but to parody how things were in the present.
Even the depiction of the present illustrated huge social failures - institutional corruption, political inertia, misappropriation of resources, the false choice between careerism and hedonism - that metastasized over the intervening era into comically exaggerated state.
But people fixate on the first five minutes. And they really fixate on the idea of eugenics implicit in those first five minutes. This is precisely because the same set of smug, elitist, know-nothing oligarchs reflected in the movie are consuming it and taking away the most backwards and regressive messages.
There was definitely commentary on the media in the movie, and society at large, and corporations, and politicians. But the core message of the movie was not just their willingness to let disaster happen in exchange for wealth and power, but also their willingness to lie and manipulate the population for their own selfish gain.
You had a series of very cynical and deliberately manipulative media coverage of the film which tried to spin it as anything but a climate change movie. And then you had a bunch of “man on the street” pieces intended to make viewers appear stupid.
But the core theory of media influenced economic change is rooted in the idea that a movie can shift people from their profit motives. No oil executive is going to watch a slapstick comedy and decide to shift his business’s core financial model because of a few jokes. No bank executives are going to divest from carbon emitting industries because some Hollywood starlets made fun of them. No senior member of political leadership is going to change how mining permits and environmental regulations are written because Adam McKay posted big numbers at the box office.
The Network didn’t change how Americans consumed their news media. Soylent Green didn’t cause Americans to reconsider our policies on factory farming. Jarhead didn’t cause any military personal to exit Iraq or Afghanistan. The only movie that seems to have really moved the dial on public policy is Idiocracy, the inspiration behind Elon Musk and Peter Thiel’s quest to get more IT people to fuck.
And even then I have to remind people that saying “Idiocracy is a documentary!” that they’re being too optimistic.
We are NOT in a fully-automated sex-positive polygamous future with leadership that acknowledges society’s problems and places its best and brightest towards a solution, one where free speech is so alive you can even name your restaurant “Buttfuckers” and no one’s even slightly offended, one where even the least educated people in our society can get good quality high-paying jobs in everything from the arts to medical, one where sex work is no longer demonized and is considered so valid a profession that you can get your ass rimmed at Starbucks while waiting for your coffee.
And I don’t understand why people think we have it anywhere near that good.
In fairness, neither were they. A bunch of the “automated” aspects of society were simply systems nobody knew how to operate that were left on autopilot. The administrators rose through the ranks by being Yes-Men and insisting broken systems were operating as intended. Spraying your crops with gatorade is only an “automation” in the most literal sense. It isn’t how a “fully-automated” society is intended to operate.
Further, the whole jail system plus subsequent courtroom drama illustrated the dogmatic resistance to change and zero-tolerance for risks inherent in any change, resulting in a highly sclerotic society. It was only able to change when faced with a sudden catastrophic food crisis.
Hyper-commoditization and exploitation of labor isn’t liberation, its slavery. What you’re describing is a cultural shift, not a relaxation of bigotry (which - again, referencing the courtroom scene - was in full abundance) or absence of elitism (characters regularly derided one another’s intelligence while deferring to the violence of authority figures) or a flattening of incomes (the intro scenes of the future were full of poverty, kept in check by a murderous police force).
The show was a cartoonish reflection of modern day. It wasn’t intended to suggest we have it better or worse, but to parody how things were in the present.
Even the depiction of the present illustrated huge social failures - institutional corruption, political inertia, misappropriation of resources, the false choice between careerism and hedonism - that metastasized over the intervening era into comically exaggerated state.
But people fixate on the first five minutes. And they really fixate on the idea of eugenics implicit in those first five minutes. This is precisely because the same set of smug, elitist, know-nothing oligarchs reflected in the movie are consuming it and taking away the most backwards and regressive messages.
We haven’t gotten dumb enough. The buttfuckers restaurants are still right around the corner.
Once AI lets us get too dumb to read we’ll be closer than ever.
My brother-in-law explicitly thought that the movie was commentary on “the liberal media.”
There was definitely commentary on the media in the movie, and society at large, and corporations, and politicians. But the core message of the movie was not just their willingness to let disaster happen in exchange for wealth and power, but also their willingness to lie and manipulate the population for their own selfish gain.