I think it’s interesting that a relatively small movie filmed sixteen years ago can still inspire a discussion that lasts for nearly a page. It shows you how much staying power this movie had.
Nobody bothers to nitpick something they feel indifferent about. How many discussions about Kevin Costner’s The Postman have there been recently?
The BOOK WAS BETTER!!!
I’d like to apologize at the beginning here if the post below seems terse – I’m dealing with carpal tunnel syndrome and this took me a long time to write.
Our current society, like probably every society ever, is already prejudiced against people with mental and physical health problems. The big differences between our society and that of Gattaca are that in the latter there’s an easy, reliable way to tell if someone has mental/physical problems or is likely to develop them, and that there are also plenty of genetically engineered people who are at very low risk of mental/physical problems.
No one thought the Ethan Hawke character was dumb because he had a high risk of heart problems. It’s been several years since I saw the movie, but I don’t remember that he was considered dumb at all. However, he was diagnosed at birth as having a high risk of neurological and mental health problems (here’s the scene on YouTube: https://youtu.be/PaYoa985poA?t=1m6s), so he was presumably considered unstable.
The “invalids” in Gattaca are able to hold menial jobs. They’re discriminated against when it comes to more prestigious work, not just because they’re considered “icky” by the elites (although this is certainly part of it), but because they’re less physically/mentally healthy. Discriminating against them may be prejudiced and unfair, but it’s a lot more rational than most real-world discrimination.
Well, if it helps then IIRC we’re given little enough information about the world of Gattaca that I think it could just as easily be set in an alternate version of earth as in the near future of our earth.
Yea, there are very few locations in the flim. Apart from the early exposition scenes, the workplace, the residence and the beach/ocean are about it. I think the film would still hold up if it was shown that he vast majority of folks were invalids or “middle class” genetically and that there were relatively few valids. Vincents desire to become one of the elite would still make sense.
I don’t want to over think the movie…
Aw, hell, yes I do! That’s why I’m here.
I don’t want to over think the movie, but it might have the “planet of hats” problem. The only bits of society we see are the parts where people that work at Gattaca go. We don’t know what Vincent’s parents’ world is like, or the world of “invalids” that live in different parts of town. Do they get discriminated against every day? We don’t know.
It might be that the “Gattaca society” we see is like Hollywood elite, or NYC “society page” people. That is, they aren’t representative of the whole of society. Maybe no one else likes them either, or at least doesn’t think about them too much. Do you worry too much you don’t get invited to Hollywood parties? Do you feel discriminated against because the only way you could get in is with the caterers? Is you life meaningless because you’ve never starred in a movie?
This fits with Hypno-Toad’s opinion about the writer not being in the in-crowd and having a “sour grapes” attitude, and his previous post as well.^
Yeah, it may be that Vincent is an unreliable narrator of sorts, all the social attitudes we see are from his perspective. Maybe the prejudices against invalids are typical of a small cadre of upper middle class strivers, but not universally shared. If we watched a movie about a black guy in 1890 determined to go to Harvard Law School and work at a white shoe law firm, we’d see a lot of social discrimination against his kind. But if the same character was going to Howard University it would be a different film.
I guess I see it like this… the genetic tests let you see someone’s ability scores, as if they were a D&D character. The genetic elites all have 16+ on each ability. But if someone has 18 intelligence but 5 constitution, there’s still plenty of jobs they’ll be able to do extremely well.
It makes a kind of sense for for snobs to not want their daughter to date someone like that, or not want to socialize with them, but companies refusing to hire someone like that is just costing them bottom line dollars.
Maybe there’s just too many "perfect’ people…
It’s not very different today. There are millions of intelligent, knowledgable people who can’t get a job because they don’t have the specific skill-set required. There are so many applicants that companies can be extremely (and perhaps short-sightedly) picky about who they hire.
So we don’t have entire industries where qualified women don’t get hired/promoted because they have the genetic defect of double-X chromosomes?
I doubt that hiring people with serious health problems instead of equally qualified but healthier candidates is quite the cost-saving measure you make it out to be. But even if it were, so what? Gattaca obviously wasn’t trying to depict a utopian society where the free market had put an end to all prejudice. It’s not a flaw in the movie that people with mental/physical health problems would face discrimination, it’s a flaw in reality.
I loved this movie.
Yes, there are flaws, as there are with any movie. I still think it was a ‘smart movie’ , much smarter than the so-called smart “Minority Report”.
I still find the idea that they use DNA testing as the de facto ID to be a bit weird, but I suppose they are using this to express several things: how quickly and cheaply they can establish genetic profiles in this society; how accepting the public is of this practice; and of course they are setting up the logistical hurdles that Vincent must overcome.
I very much liked the retro (? 1920’s?) look; I thought it made the film look less anachronistic. A spaceman movie with no spacesuits- I can see the pitchman in the elevator! I always supposed that the final rocket scene was merely the shuttle taking the mission astronauts to their fancy exploration vessel built in orbit.
Aside from the ‘one man’s journey’ view and the anti-discrimination view, I think there are other views. I think it was already mentioned up-thread that this is a nice demonstration of the difference between those who really WANT something, and those that have it handed to them. Also, how there can be unintended consequences to well intentioned acts of individuals and societies. You could argue that this problem would “go away” as fewer and fewer invalids are born, and current invalids age out of the population. But there is still some heterogeneity in valids, at least at the time of the movie, so you could just ramp up the discrimination. I don’t know what happens when everyone has “perfect” genes. Maybe everyone succumbs to a weird plague due to lack of genetic diversity?
I don’t care for sci-fi too much but have an interest in the future of genetic engineering so I finally got around to watching it. It’s clever what they did with the title. And I was impressed with Jude Law.
Then it was science fiction, and now its on the cusp of becoming science fact. I should however note that what is becoming science fact, is DNA manipulation or blue printing. Facebook said that the Chinese are doing it, so it must be true, regardless of some treaty or convention, and not the actual society that Gattaca portrays. For that we just use the tried and true means of discrimination.
Declan
This is why I generally avoid Science Fiction, it all focuses on one or two advances (scientific or social) and leaves the rest of everything as it was at the time of writing.
Bad science fiction sometimes does that, I agree. It’s a common enough complaint about sci-fi (along with the other complaint that sci-fi’s “job” is somehow to predict future technology - “How come no sci-fi authors thought up the iphone? Huh?”).
But I’m not sure that is the problem with this movie. The idea is OK - What if in the future people’s careers are dictated by genetic screening!? It’s a fun premise and it could have made for a really dark film but they decided instead to make a parable movie - to tell a message that everyone already knows, and they tripped over their own feet several times while trying to tell the message. Wouldn’t this future dystopia based on genetic screening be truly horrible?!! And the answer they give is, no, actually. The hero gets to screw the girl and become an astronaut due to his moxy, and the assistance of other people who also know that genetics isn’t everything. Because, as everyone knows, genetics isn’t everything (Ripley: did IQs just drop sharply while i was away!?).
Another film with a similar parable problem is that pre-cog movie. What if in the future people can be arrested before they commit a crime because of pregognition, but sometimes the precogs are wrong!? Wouldn’t that just be aweful! (No, that would never work, people wouldn’t stand for it, and you violated physics - (Ripley: did IQs just drop sharply while i was away!?).
Well, a part of this is that the nature of a movie precludes a broad approach to any subject. The writer has to ID the characters, ID the problem, and get on with the story of how the character defeats the problem in a relatively short time. They did touch on genetic manipulation with the younger brother being made superior in vitro and later with the reference to the 12-fingered pianist. But if the film was made nowadays, it might be more about human genetic modification than simply being classified by DNA.
Handheld touchscreen computers have been around in science fiction since at least the 1960s. Samsung tried to cite 2001: A Space Odyssey, made in 1968 as prior art in an iPad patent dispute.
It’s a parable on rising above your station in life. The genetic screening is a metaphor for societal class structures in general.
It also raises the question as to why they don’t just release the suspect after the window closes for committing the crime? It’s not like they actually murdered anyone.
That’s why I thought Minority Report would have been better if crimes were predicted via technology (like Person of Interest) rather than by magic powers.
A jumpsuit is usually cheaper, more rugged, more comfortable and allows more freedom of movement than a tailored business suit.
That was the implication at the end when he failed the final test and the doctor waved him through.
I always assumed that the business suits were for the ride up to some space station, not for the big trip out.
Agreed. His parents had him by accident, having sex in the back of a car.
I really love this movie and think it is looking more prescient all the time. And I do share the sense of ambivalence in that I’m really not sure I myself wouldn’t want to take the doctors up on the offer of having a child that’s “still you, just the best of you”. After all, this is going to start (or maybe already has?) with preventing obviously horrific genetic disorders. Then why not screen out juvenile diabetes? But if you’re doing that, why not prevent nearsightedness? Etc.
FWIW, NASA named Gattaca the most realistic SF film ever (*2012 *was on the other end of the list). And Scientific American published an interesting piece in 2013 talking about how close we are getting to the technology in the movie (and no doubt we are a little closer yet now in 2016).
The science aside, I thought they did a great job with a relatively low budget in presenting a gorgeous futuristic aesthetic, with the help of futuristic architecture like the Marin County Civic Center. Great performances abound, as well–in particular, Jude Law (an underrated actor who has also done fine work in great films like Closer, Contagion, 360, Side Effects, and A.I.: Artificial Intelligence) and Gore Vidal of all people.