Who else thinks "Gattaca" is really bad?

I was reading this review of Kill Bill that was linked to in another thread, and did a double take when the reviewer called the 1997 sci-fi movie “Gattaca” (also starring Uma Thurman) “famously bad stuff”. Personally, I thought it was a thoughtful, well-written, amazingly beautiful film that might easily make it into my top 20, if I ever were to make such a list. I’m no fan of Uma Thurman, but she worked in that film.

The IMDb lists an average vote of 7.5, which is pretty darn high for a “famously bad” film. So where did the reviewer get this from? Is there a substantial niche of reviewers who panned Gattaca when it came out, thus giving it a reputation? Or does this guy just not know what he’s talking about?

I really really really dislike Gattaca. Reasons:
(a) it’s pretentious as all get out. Clearly, if we ever end up in a society in which people are judged by their genetics, all of the genetically superior people will wear swank designer clothing and walk in perfect unison

(b) the actions of the “hero” are idiotic. OK, you have a heart condition which means you might randomly die. But you really really really want to be an astronaut, so you connive your way onto an astronaut mission, putting the lives of your fellow astronauts at risk. Good move, you selfish prick

© the whole premise makes very little sense. The hero is obviously brilliant, creative, driven, and talented. If the genetic testing actually has any validity, it will show these things. His reading will be “brilliant but with a heart condition”. Why would he not get plenty of offers for jobs which are fulfilling and appropriate for someone who is brilliant with a heart condition? The whole “oh, our preschool won’t accept you because you have a heart condition, despite your IQ being 185” business makes no sense.

(And if the genetic testing doesn’t have any validity, well, then we should see that. But that doesn’t seem to be the case.)

Overall, it just gives me vibes of “oh, we, the writers and producers of this movie, are so cool and creative and smart. Allow us to lead your puny little mind along amazing paths that you never would have thought of. Our innovative and troubling view of an all-too-possible dystopian future will dazzle you!”

(Yeah, I have a bit of a knee-jerk reaction to it.)

So he’s selfish. This is somehow unrealistic?

You’re missing the point. It’s not his heart condition, primarily, that’s holding him back; it’s the fact that his mother chose to not genetically alter him prior to birth, as is generally done. This makes him automatically inferior, in the eyes of society. He cannot be trusted to be genetically superior.

That said, I think Gattaca is vastly overrated. It’s OK, but not amazing. I’ve certainly never heard it described as “famously bad” before.

I think the whole point of the movie is that genetic testing isn’t valid. Or at least, not as important as the people think. It won’t be the first time people were discriminated based on questionable standards.

Besides, presumably there would be plenty of people whose reading will be “brilliant and perfectly healthy.” When perfect genes become commonplace, anything short of perfection becomes a target of discrimination.

Well, the reviewer in question is Roger Friedman from Fox News. No doubt it went waaaay over his head.

I think Gattaca is a very good film, but I will say that the whole swimming/brother subplot was a little cheesy.

Not me. I think it’s one of the best science fiction films ever made. The swimming subplot was crucial and gave one of the best movie lines in my memory: “You wanna know how I did it, Anton? This is how I did it: I didn’t save anything for the swim back.”
Great scripting, great acting, great film.

Agree that it’s a great film. And I agree it’s hardly outrageous to hypothesize that in a society where most people are genetically perfect by design, folks whose genes are the product of good ol’ fashioned blind luck will be the victims of unfair discrimination, even if they have some special talents.

It seems to me that as long as a sci-fi film doesn’t ask us to accept something totally ridiculous, it’s potentially a good film.

While the idea of a society in which genetically altered people look down on those who aren’t is an excellent one as the basis for a plot, I did find the execution of the idea (mostly in the ways he subverts the system) to be totally ridiculous, but that is true for almost all dystopias. I couldn’t suspend my disbelief long enough to truly enjoy the movie.

Other than that, it’s well-made and well-acted, but I can’t imagine including it among the best movies of all time. An interesting failure, in my eyes. Although that’s greater praise than for most sf movies.

There is no gene for spirit.
The movie is kind of like a sci-fi version of Rudy or Babe the Gallant Pig.

I liked it because it was one of the very few science-fiction films without the mindless action sequences Hollywood feels it must force upon the genre.

I can’t imagine NOT including it, at least as one of the greatest SF movies of all time. You’re incredibly wrong about it being a failure. It succeeded beautifully.

Three little words: Ethan Hawke naked.

'nuff said.

I didn’t believe the “I’m gonna scrub my skin REEEEAL good so I don’t leave my DNA anywhere” stuff. You’re still gonna leave DNA all over the place no matter how much you scrub.

Gattaca was a movie that tried to make you think – as long as you didn’t think about it. Ultimately, it was a failure, simply because the scenario was created by someone so in love with the idea that they didn’t bother to think about what they were saying.

For me, the film began to fall apart in the scene where Vincent gets his job at Gattaca. He shows up, hands his faked genetic ID to the doctor. The doctor checks it, then tells him he’s hired. Vincent asks about an interview and the doctor says, “that was it.”

Huh???

Competency isn’t a factor in hiring? How does this work? Are doctors hired in this way? The right genetic makeup is more important than attending medical school? And considering that hiring people is primarily based on how much the interviewer likes the candidate on a personal level, this entire situation is preposterous.

But that’s only the beginning. It soon clear that the lack of thought given to the background makes the entire scenario errant nonsense. For instance:

[ul]
[li]The discrimination is de facto. It’s explicitly stated that there is no law against being an “In-valid” (a term breathtaking in its awkwardness and completely tone-deaf). So why does everyone act like it is? If there is no law against being In-Valid, why don’t the In-Valids protest their condition? It’s set in the future, after all. Did all records of the civil rights movement mysteriously vanish?[/li]
[li]The Gattaca Corporation is right not to give Vincent a job. He has a heart condition. Not just a potential heart condition; something that will show up if checked (see the scene on the treadmill). Space exploration is stressful and that last place you want someone to get a heart attack is a few thousand miles from Earth. Why is it wrong to protect Vincent from that? Ultimately, not wanting Vincent to be working there is perfectly reasonable. This is by far the most blatant example of how little thought was put into the scenario.[/li]
[li]Everyone spends time and effort supporting a system they don’t believe in. The most obvious csee is the doctor, who knows Vincent is an In-Valid, but keeps his secret. So why does he go along with the system? More importantly, why doesn’t he tell Vincent he knows? And the end make it clear that no one is particularly upset that Vincent fooled the system; they just shrug it off. But if it’s not that important to them, why do they accept it? (Consider what would happen in the segregated south if a Black man was discovered to be passing for white.) [/li]
[li]The constant genetic testing is pointless and expensive. Why does anyone bother? It would make sense under the system to check when hiring someone, but every day? Every time someone enters the building? It takes time and costs money to make genetic tests; why bother? Because the guy who was OK yesterday might change his genes today? Spot checks, maybe, but checking every person every single day? How many people are you tying up to do all this testing? How much money do you tie up in equipment to do the testing? How often are you going to find anything from it? And, finally, what does it matter if you do, since there is no explicit ban on In-Valids? [/li]
[li]Genetics can only do so much. Everyone seems surprised that the head of Gattaca could commit murder. But there is no “murder” gene. Similarly, there is no gene that makes you a better worker. All you can test for is physical traits. And Vincent fails on that count due to his bad heart.[/li]
[li]Why go through all that rigmarole to make yourself a Valid? Vincent has to keep track of every piece of stray skin, bring sacks of urine and blood and spend hours trying to “prove” he was Valid. Why do it? Couldn’t someone hack into the database and change Vincent’s records? Better yet, pay someone who works in the records department to make the change (you can bet there would be people who’d do it). Viola – no need to go to all that trouble. No need to worry. Oh, yeah, that heart condition.[/li]
[li]There are many little things that just don’t work. For instance, there are records that have everyone’s genetic profile. Yet they leave out important facts like someone is paralyzed in a car accident. Why? How was that little detail missed? [/li][/ul]

Ultimately, the movie’s attempt at seriousness is undermined because no one bothered to think out the implications of the situation they were portraying. They ask you to think, but assume you won’t think about what they’ve shown. In all too many scenes, they go for a visceral reaction, not caring if it makes no logical sense.

This is an important issue, and there’s no doubt that a good film could be made dealing with the situation. It’s just too bad Gattaca punted the assignment by throwing logic out the window. It was on the level of Space 1999 due to the lack of thought put into it.

Gattaca was a movie that tried to make you think – as long as you didn’t think about it. Ultimately, it was a failure, simply because the scenario was created by someone so in love with the idea that they didn’t bother to think about what they were saying.

For me, the film began to fall apart in the scene where Vincent gets his job at Gattaca. He shows up, hands his faked genetic ID to the doctor. The doctor checks it, then tells him he’s hired. Vincent asks about an interview and the doctor says, “that was it.”

Huh???

Competency isn’t a factor in hiring? How does this work? Are doctors hired in this way? The right genetic makeup is more important than attending medical school? And considering that hiring people is primarily based on how much the interviewer likes the candidate on a personal level, this entire situation is preposterous.

But that’s only the beginning. It soon clear that the lack of thought given to the background makes the entire scenario errant nonsense. For instance:

[ul]
[li]The discrimination is de facto. It’s explicitly stated that there is no law against being an “In-valid” (a term breathtaking in its awkwardness and completely tone-deaf). So why does everyone act like it is? If there is no law against being In-Valid, why don’t the In-Valids protest their condition? It’s set in the future, after all. Did all records of the civil rights movement mysteriously vanish?[/li]
[li]The Gattaca Corporation is right not to give Vincent a job. He has a heart condition. Not just a potential heart condition; something that will show up if checked (see the scene on the treadmill). Space exploration is stressful and that last place you want someone to get a heart attack is a few thousand miles from Earth. Why is it wrong to protect Vincent from that? Ultimately, not wanting Vincent to be working there is perfectly reasonable. This is by far the most blatant example of how little thought was put into the scenario.[/li]
[li]Everyone spends time and effort supporting a system they don’t believe in. The most obvious csee is the doctor, who knows Vincent is an In-Valid, but keeps his secret. So why does he go along with the system? More importantly, why doesn’t he tell Vincent he knows? And the end make it clear that no one is particularly upset that Vincent fooled the system; they just shrug it off. But if it’s not that important to them, why do they accept it? (Consider what would happen in the segregated south if a Black man was discovered to be passing for white.) [/li]
[li]The constant genetic testing is pointless and expensive. Why does anyone bother? It would make sense under the system to check when hiring someone, but every day? Every time someone enters the building? It takes time and costs money to make genetic tests; why bother? Because the guy who was OK yesterday might change his genes today? Spot checks, maybe, but checking every person every single day? How many people are you tying up to do all this testing? How much money do you tie up in equipment to do the testing? How often are you going to find anything from it? And, finally, what does it matter if you do, since there is no explicit ban on In-Valids? [/li]
[li]Genetics can only do so much. Everyone seems surprised that the head of Gattaca could commit murder. But there is no “murder” gene. Similarly, there is no gene that makes you a better worker. All you can test for is physical traits. And Vincent fails on that count due to his bad heart.[/li]
[li]Why go through all that rigmarole to make yourself a Valid? Vincent has to keep track of every piece of stray skin, bring sacks of urine and blood and spend hours trying to “prove” he was Valid. Why do it? Couldn’t someone hack into the database and change Vincent’s records? Better yet, pay someone who works in the records department to make the change (you can bet there would be people who’d do it). Viola – no need to go to all that trouble. No need to worry. Oh, yeah, that heart condition.[/li]
[li]There are many little things that just don’t work. For instance, there are records that have everyone’s genetic profile. Yet they leave out important facts like someone is paralyzed in a car accident. Why? How was that little detail missed? [/li][/ul]

Ultimately, the movie’s attempt at seriousness is undermined because no one bothered to think out the implications of the situation they were portraying. They ask you to think, but assume you won’t think about what they’ve shown. In all too many scenes, they go for a visceral reaction, not caring if it makes no logical sense.

This is an important issue, and there’s no doubt that a good film could be made dealing with the situation. It’s just too bad Gattaca punted the assignment by throwing logic out the window. It was on the level of Space 1999 due to the lack of thought put into it.

You have some good points. I only saw it once, in theaters, but I think I can address some of these.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by RealityChuck *
[ul]
[li]The discrimination is de facto. It’s explicitly stated that there is no law against being an “In-valid” (a term breathtaking in its awkwardness and completely tone-deaf). So why does everyone act like it is? If there is no law against being In-Valid, why don’t the In-Valids protest their condition? It’s set in the future, after all. Did all records of the civil rights movement mysteriously vanish?[/ul][/li][/quote]
See, I thought this was what was so clever about the situation. With the civil rights movement, there was no justifiable reason to discriminate against blacks. Genetic discrimination is different because now there is a valid reason for it, as you claim in your next point. It’s not as clear-cut as whether it’s okay or not okay, though. And just because someone disagrees with you on this point doesn’t mean they didn’t put any thought into it.

[quote]
[ul][li]Everyone spends time and effort supporting a system they don’t believe in. The most obvious csee is the doctor, who knows Vincent is an In-Valid, but keeps his secret. So why does he go along with the system? More importantly, why doesn’t he tell Vincent he knows?[/ul][/li][/quote]
I seem to remember that the doctor only found out about Vincent at the very end. And he let him go despite that, because he was his friend, and he had seen over the previous years what Vincent could do. I think that at that moment the doctor questioned the system, so it wasn’t like he was going along with something he disagreed with the whole time. Am I wrong, and the doctor actually found out earlier?

[quote]
[ul][li]Genetics can only do so much. Everyone seems surprised that the head of Gattaca could commit murder. But there is no “murder” gene. Similarly, there is no gene that makes you a better worker.[/ul][/li][/quote]
Are these really so implausible? There may not be a murder gene, but genetics could make people less likely to be violent, couldn’t it?

They did explain this, though not in great detail. He was out of the country when it happened. Maybe he was in some backwater place.

Not at all. But the movie sure doesn’t seem to think he’s selfish… “there is no gene for the human spirit”, not, “a random movie about a guy who ends up doing something selfish”.

I don’t think the movie ever took the position that the hero was without flaw or blemish.

I was just amused by the astronauts boarding the spaceship to Saturn while wearing jackets and ties, evidently in anticipation of a formal cocktail party on Titan.

Which begs the question…how did Vincent swim back?? Especially since he had to carry his brother as well.

I see that nobody’s mentioned the film’s greatest asset – Tony “Monk” Shalhoub as the black market gene dealer.